After a post-pandemic crisis, military recruiters are on a winning streak again. All the services beat their enlistment goals for the 2024 recruiting year which ended Sept. 30, and they've posted strong numbers so far for this year.

What’s behind the turnaround? The Secretary of Defense says it’s simple.

"We’ve already seen a huge surge under President Trump of Americans who want to join," said Pete Hegseth .

And President Trump agrees.

"It’s all happened since Nov. 5," he said at the annual White House Easter Egg Roll.

They say the recruiting successes are being driven by enthusiasm for the president and by Hegseth's focus on tougher standards and on purging the military of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

But it’s hard to know how much truth there is to those claims, said Katherine Kuzminski, who studies military personnel and civil military relations at the Center for New American Security.

"We don't know," she said. "There is no data that says, you know, did the outcome of the election spur you to join the military?"

Neither the Pentagon nor the Army responded to requests for data to back up the claims that President Trump is behind the jump.

What we do know is that the numbers are up, but — despite what the president says — that increase began well before the election.

Beth Asch at the Rand Corporation has been analyzing military manpower issues for four decades. She notes that in 2022, the Army missed its recruiting goal by about 25%, or 15,000 soldiers. The following year, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force all fell short. It was the first time in Air Force history it didn’t make its targets.

"People were calling this a recruiting crisis," Asch said.

The roots of the recruiting drop were varied and complicated. Longer term trends include an increase in college attendance, which competes for people in the military's prime recruiting age, and a growing divide between the civilian and military world as fewer families include somebody who served.

In addition, a rise in obesity, health, and mental health issues left fewer than a quarter of enlistment-age Americans eligible for military service without some form of waiver. Also, the pandemic led many young people to put off career decisions and prevented recruiters from working in-person with potential enlistees.

"What we can see in the data is that American youth at the age of 18 or so were delaying a lot of adult decision making," Kuzminski said.

But by the end of fiscal 2024 on Sept. 30, all the services said they met their recruiting missions. And in the most recent data, released in February, they reported strong results. Hegseth said December was the Army's best recruiting month in 12 years and January the best in 15 years.

These successes came after aggressive moves by the military that began well before Trump's election.

"The services really made an effort to modernize structures and processes to the recruiting enterprise," Kuzminski said. "We saw, especially in the Army, a real professionalization of the way that we approach managing recruiters themselves."

For instance, the Army created a new career specialty in recruiting that requires substantial training.

"The chief of recruiting in the Army was elevated from a two-star position to a three-star position that now reports directly to the Secretary of the Army," she said. “And we also see more engagement with potential recruits online, and not only relying on the storefront model that has been the more historic model of recruiting and instead meeting individual American youth more where they're at."

The military also boosted spending on advertising and marketing. And in perhaps the biggest change, in 2022 the Army created the Future Soldier Preparatory Course.

It tutors potential enlistees who need to increase their scores on aptitude tests and helps those who don’t quite meet the weight standards trim down.

Last year, the Army got nearly one quarter of its recruits via that program. The Navy started a similar prep program in 2023.

One thing that stands out about the Army's recruitment growth is that it's disproportionately driven by women. In the 2024 recruiting year, about 10,000 women enlisted, an 18% increase from the year before.

"That's a pretty significant jump, whereas for male recruitment, we saw only an eight percent increase between fiscal year 2023 and fiscal year 2024," Kuzminski said.

There’s no way to know yet how the new Administration might affect that trend, she said.

Just as there’s no data to show how many recruits may have enlisted because of Trump, we also don't know how many people have been turned off by things like Hegseth’s opposition to DEI and women in combat roles.

"We don't have a survey among individuals who didn't join, why they didn't join, and whether or not the election outcome had something to do with that," she said.

It's possible Trump’s election may have affected decisions about joining, but maybe more indirectly, Kuzminski said.

"The data shows election outcomes have more of an impact on influencers, and by that I mean parents, teachers, principals, coaches, clergy members, than it might on, say, an 18-year-old who's considering military service," she said.

Trump, meanwhile, has entirely banned one group of troops and potential recruits — transgender people — in a move that’s still playing out in the courts. If the ban is upheld, it would bar several thousand existing troops from serving and others from signing up.

The Pentagon has said at least 4,200 transgender people are in the service, and activists say there are thousands more.

Asch, the Rand Corporation analyst, said that while recruiting has improved, a higher than normal percentage of enlistees lately haven’t met some key quality standards. For example, a Department of Defense standard stipulates that at least 90% of each service branch's recruits hold high school diplomas and at least 60% score above average on the aptitude test.

"Not all the services are meeting or are on track right now to be meeting those quality marks," Ashe said. "And those quality marks matter because they're related to readiness."

Those who have graduated from high school, for example, are more likely to complete their service obligation, Asch said, while recruits with higher aptitude are more trainable, follow instructions, and do better with hands-on military tasks.

"The fact that they're still missing the mark suggests that recruiting is still a challenge right now," she said.

This story was produced by , a public media collaboration that reports on American military life and veterans.

A new biotechnology plant is set to boost North Carolina's economy by more than $3 billion.

Medical manufacturing company Genentech plans to invest $700 million to build the new facility in Holly Springs. The project is set to create more than 400 jobs, with an average salary of $119,833.

"These are meaningful, good paying jobs that will help hundreds of North Carolinians build their career and support their family," Governor Josh Stein said in a press conference Monday.

Workers at the facility will develop the next generation of obesity medications, according to CEO Ashley Magargee.

"We are thrilled to see the incentives, as well as a very strong government support, for scientific innovation that North Carolina is providing us," Magargee said at the press conference. "This will be our first Eastern seaboard manufacturing facility and it'll be our first new manufacturing facility globally in nearly two decades."

One of those incentives is a state reimbursement. Over the next 12 years, North Carolina's Job Development Investment Grant (JDIG) program will provide Genentech up to $9,846,750. Governor Stein said the funds will generate a 230% return on investment for the state.

"It is only paid when Genentech meets its investment and hiring targets," Stein said at the press conference. "Biotechnology is one of North Carolina's signature industries. Every day, companies, research institutions that call North Carolina home push the boundaries of science and bring new medicines and new hope to people all around the world."

Stein's office said the project should still result in positive net tax revenue for the state treasury. It estimated that for every dollar of potential cost, the state will receive more than three dollars in revenue.

The Genentech facility is set to be 700,000 square feet. It's unclear when the project will be completed.

The N.C. House recently passed a bill to allow the state treasurer to invest a portion of state pension funds in cryptocurrency and other digital assets.

First-term Rep. Mike Schietzelt, R-Wake, made the case for the bill on the House floor, amid concerns from state employees and others who worry that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are too risky. Schietzelt is an attorney and Marine Corps veteran who won a competitive district previously held by Democrats last year.

Schietzelt about the advantages of cryptocurrency investments and the risk concerns raised by opponents. Schietzelt also discussed his "open enrollment" proposal to let families choose any school in their district, and why new abortion restrictions are unlikely this year.

This conversation has been lightly edited for brevity and clarity.

One of the arguments we heard against the bill is that cryptocurrency is too risky to allow future treasurers — who might not be quite as skilled at investing as our current treasurer Brad Briner — to go and make these decisions on their own. Is there a risk element to consider in what we allow future treasurers to do?

"I understand the concerns about volatility, but if you look at what cryptocurrency — Bitcoin in particular — has done, it has gone up and had a higher ceiling, and then it's had a floor, and then it's gone up again, and the ceiling has been higher, and then it's dropped again and the floor has been lower. The trend line is up.

"We need to allow sophisticated investors, like Treasurer Briner, and like the advisory board that he's trying to put together ... and give these experts an opportunity to weigh in and decide, is this really in the best interest of the people of North Carolina?"

What changed in this bill from when you first filed it, to the bill that passed the House, to address some of those concerns that were out there?

"The biggest thing that changed, in terms of the criticism that it received, was we lowered the cap from 10% of these funds to 5% that the treasurer could invest (in digital assets). State employees had some concerns about it. We wanted to work with them to say we're not trying to gamble with anybody's money. We're just trying to put the state in a healthier position longer term."

Why include NFTs (non-fungible tokens) in this bill as part of the digital assets that could conceivably be part of the pension fund investments?

"It goes back to not artificially limiting what these experts can do right now. Of the cryptocurrencies that are out there, Bitcoin is the asset that most people are interested in, and I think it's probably the best investment. You're creating a little bit of agility within the treasurer's office to be able to move from one asset to another asset, if the use case is there. But again, there are significant guardrails in the bill.

"If the treasurer were to step out and invest in a Bored Ape NFT, I think people would rightly be concerned. Our treasurer is Brad Briner, not Justin Bieber (who lost money in NFTs). I trust him and the people that he is is going to put into these advisory board positions to do what is in the best interest of North Carolinians."

Another would create an open enrollment process for public schools, allowing families to choose pretty much any school within their school district. What would be the advantage to taking this approach statewide?

"You don't want to create limitations on people based on their zip code. If there's another school that can serve their needs better within the same public school district, they ought to be able to explore that option. We want to make sure that if one public school is doing something very well and some student somewhere else wants to take advantage of that, that they have the opportunity to do that."

Are there any issues you seek to avoid that your colleagues from deep-red counties are passionate about, but you feel like may not be as representative of the suburban Wake County district that you're representing?

"One of the issues that constantly comes up, and it was in every mailer last year that was sent out against me, was the abortion issue. Folks are very concerned that Republicans are going to continue to roll that back.

"I don't think there's any appetite right now for continuing to move the line on this issue. We've set it where we've set it (with the 2023 12-week ban). It's supported by polling, and I think that that's where it needs to stay."

State and local officials gathered on Friday in Raleigh to celebrate the renaming of a local post office after a civil rights leader, and a member of the only all-Black female World War II unit.

Millie Dunn Veasey was a staff sergeant with the 6888th Central Postal Directory Battalion — nicknamed the Six Triple Eight. They deployed to Europe towards the end of World War II to tackle a burgeoning crisis: a backlog of some 17 million pieces of undelivered mail. She and others in the unit processed up to 195,000 pieces of mail daily. Filmmaker and actor Tyler Perry based on the troop's experience.

Earlier this year, former President Biden signed a bill into law to rename the Brentwood Road Post Office after Veasey. Congresswoman Deborah Ross, the bill's sponsor, was among the guest speakers at Friday morning's event held at Veasey’s home church, St. Ambrose Episcopal Church in Raleigh.

She said it was more than just a post office renaming.

“It's a moment to recommit ourselves to preserving and protecting our heroes and our full history for future generations,” said Ross. “In the days, years and generations to come residents of Wake County will always remember and honor the extraordinary life and legacy of Millie Dunn Veasey.”

Later, Ross presented a flag to Veasey's family that was flown at the Capitol in her honor.

Jocelyn Mallette, the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Military Veteran Affairs, also attended the event.

“I’m extremely grateful to stand here to recognize and pay homage to the trailblazing life of Millie Dunn Veasey,” she said. “Because of women like Staff Sergeant Veasey and all the courageous women of the 6888th, I'm able to lead the North Carolina Department of Military Veterans Affairs as the first woman and first Black woman to hold this position.”

Mallette is also a member of Veasey’s home church, St. Ambrose. She said she feels connected to Veasey.

“Sometimes I may even sit in the same pew that Mrs. Veasey sat on some Sunday mornings,” said Mallette. “I went to visit her grave, and I felt different when I went, a bit stronger, a bit braver and a bit more empowered. But I can only hope that as she watches over me, and that I make her proud, and that she knows the impact that she has had on my life and the generations to come.”

Veasey died in 2018 at the age of 100, and was buried with distinct honor at the Raleigh VA National Cemetery.

During Friday’s ceremony, Eugenia Pleasant, the great niece of Veasey, gave remarks as well. She said her Aunt Veasey initially never spoke about her military experience.

“It was only later in years that she started to share her military experiences with us,” said Pleasant. “I know by now, that her time with the Six Triple Eight Battalion in Europe was the foundation for everything that she achieved in life. ”

A plaque was unveiled at Friday's ceremony to honor Veasey. It will be placed on the Brentwood Road Post Office in Raleigh.

Chemours may need to reimburse southeastern North Carolina utilities for hundreds of millions of dollars in filtration technology, under legislation the N.C. House of Representatives passed nearly unanimously Wednesday.

House Bill 569 was a very late addition to Wednesday's House calendar, not appearing until shortly before 7 p.m.

"No longer will the ratepayers be responsible for doing something that a polluter caused. It will be the polluter that's responsible," Rep. Ted Davis, a Wilmington Republican, said minutes later on the House floor.

This marks the third time Davis has introduced an effort to force Chemours to pay for the industrial-scale filters utilities in Wilmington and surrounding areas have installed since learning about high levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in 2017.

For decades, Chemours and predecessor DuPont had discharged GenX and other chemicals into the Cape Fear River from the Fayetteville Works plant near the Cumberland-Bladen county line. Downstream utilities draw their drinking water from the river, and the compounds evade standard water treatment technology.

In the years since, Brunswick County has spent $158.7 million to build a and the Wilmington-area Cape Fear Public Utility Authority has spent $82.8 million building and maintaining eight .

Both utilities face ongoing costs because their filters need to be swapped out regularly as contaminants build up on them.

"I just thank goodness that the bill did pass. It's taken me five years to do that, but I think and hope that the ratepayers for the public utilities in New Hanover, Brunswick and Cumberland would be very pleased that this bill did pass the House," Davis said while leaving the floor Wednesday.

Davis' bill would let utilities receive payback for any cost incurred since 2017. That's the year the Wilmington StarNews first reported on a N.C. State study that in the Cape Fear River, as well as its source.

The bill said reimbursements could be passed along to utility customers as refunds, bill credits or reimbursements in future rates.

"I think the fact that it's passed through the House is a big deal. It's hard to even fathom a win these days because we keep coming against such strong opposition, but this was really great news," Dana Sargent, the executive director of Wilmington-based environmental nonprofit Cape Fear River Watch, told NC Newsroom.

Limiting the bill's scope

Davis has made several tweaks to boost the bill's chances, including by limiting how much power it would give the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality.

This year's version hinges DEQ's ability to order payments from a PFAS manufacturer entirely on federal regulations.

DEQ could only direct a company to pay if it is found to be causing PFAS levels higher than maximum contaminant levels established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Last year, former DEQ Secretary and then-EPA Administrator Michael Regan visited Fayetteville for five individual PFAS and a mixture of three of those plus one additional chemical.

That list included HFPO-DA, a compound that is part of . The at Fayetteville Works and was found in Wilmington-area drinking water.

The EPA's regulations remain on course to be in place by 2029, but 19 industry trade groups including the American Chemistry Council and U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin a letter in February asking him to ensure drinking water standards are "set at workable levels."

Another set of changes came Wednesday evening, just before the bill went to a vote. Rep. Brenden Jones, a Columbus County Republican, introduced an amendment further narrowing the language to clarify that it only applies to Chemours.

Jones' amendment said a PFAS manufacturer could only be directed to provide reimbursement for filtration technology if it directly discharged the chemicals into source water and if it had entered a consent order to limit contamination.

The amendment also said public utilities must have spent at least $50 million to address PFAS contamination to be eligible for reimbursement.

Chemours finalized a consent order with the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality and Cape Fear River Watch in 2019. Under that agreement, Chemours was required to take actions like installing a thermal oxidizer to prevent PFAS emissions and sample nearby private wells for contamination, providing replacement drinking water where high levels were detected.

The chemical company has continued to oppose the legislation.

During an April committee meeting, Jeff Fritz, a Chemours lobbyist, said the bill would force the company to pay to remove chemicals that are coming from other upstream sources. Fritz claimed Chemours' actions since its discharges were made public in 2017 have resulted in a sharp decrease in PFAS coming from Fayetteville Works.

Only public utilities would be eligible to recoup their PFAS removal expenses under the legislation. In the Wilmington area, for example, private utility Aqua North Carolina serves about 5,000 accounts and Carolina Water Service has about 3,800 customers, WHQR .

Sargent of Cape Fear River Watch acknowledged the bill's narrow focus means advocates want to see more action taken to address PFAS in North Carolina, including for customers of those smaller private utilities.

"The weakening of it was unfortunate, but it is still a step in the right direction and unfortunately these days every step in the right direction is a win," Sargent said.

Third time's the charm?

In an abnormal step, Speaker of the House Destin Hall moved the bill to the full House without it being heard in the chamber's Rules Committee. Typically, every bill must clear that committee before reaching the House floor.

House Bill 569 had been approved by the House Agriculture and Environment Committee and the Davis-chaired House Judiciary 1 Committee. But it had not been discussed in Rules.

The House voted for it by a margin of 104 to 3, with five Republicans on the matter including Hall and Bladen County Representative William Brisson.

After Wednesday evening's session, Hall said he believes Davis' third effort at the polluter pays legislation passed where previous attempts have failed because it clearly only addresses Chemours' contamination.

"The bill today was really narrowly tailored to deal with a situation in Southeastern North Carolina and in particular New Hanover County and those around it," said Hall, a Republican from Lenoir.

Hall also made a point of crediting Davis for his passion about the legislation.

"He worked it hard for a long time, and he got it across the finish line in the House," Hall said.

The bill will now be sent to the Senate. Both Davis and Hall said they haven't discussed the legislation with their counterparts there.

Davis, though, said he hopes the Southeastern North Carolina delegation that includes powerful Republican lawmakers like Senate Majority Leader Michael Lee of Wilmington and Senate Rules Chairman Bill Rabon of Brunswick County will be supportive.

"I'll be glad to speak to any of them that want to speak to me about it, but I would hope that they will have enough common sense to realize that they need to protect the people where they represent that are ratepayers to these utilities," Davis said.

Friday is the deadline for hundreds of researchers at the Environmental Protection Agency to apply for new, internal positions announced last week, according to three sources who work at the agency's Office of Research and Development.

That’s the wing of the EPA that provides scientific analysis for policymakers on the risks of air pollution, chemicals, and other environmental risks. This office is effectively being dissolved.

Researchers will be moved to program offices, like the Office of Water or the Office of the Administrator. It's unclear exactly how many new positions are available, but it is clear that it's less than the amount of researchers currently working at EPA.

One source estimates there are about 500-600 new jobs to apply for within program offices, but over 1,500 people who work in the current research office. This person works at the EPA's large regional campus at Research Triangle Park and spoke under the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution.

"Everybody’s been calling it the Hunger Games. All of us are potentially trying to compete for these roles," the researcher said.

In an emailed statement, EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou said "this is a reorganization, not a reduction in force. No staff are being let go with this announcement."

Researchers have the option to apply for new positions within program offices, take a deferred resignation program, or wait and potentially risk being let go in a future announcement. People who take the deferred resignation program will be paid through September.

, the EPA said "this phase of reorganization will save taxpayers more than $300 million annually by fiscal year 2026." That would trim roughly 3% from EPA’s 2024 budget of over  dollars. 

"When finalized, EPA expects to have employment levels near those seen when President Ronald Reagan occupied the White House," the press release said.

The agency currently has a workforce of . Staffing during the Reagan administration fluctuated between about 11,000 - 14,000 employees. 

Experts raise concerns about moving researchers to program offices. In a previous interview with ��ҹ����, Chris Frey said there's a risk of losing independent science. Frey has previously held several managerial positions at EPA, including assistant administrator for the Office of Research and Development.

"The reason why EPA has a separate Office of Research and Development, as opposed to doing research in the Office of Water, is because we need independent, credible science that's developed according to well-established scientific processes and with scientific integrity," said Frey. "Sometimes it means the science that comes out of (the research office) is not exactly what the program offices want to hear.

"There has to be that latitude. If the policy predetermines the science, then it's not science anymore."

EPA's campus at Research Triangle Park is the largest facility ever built by the agency.

Some of the most sensitive medical treatment North Carolina minors undergo could soon be subject to parental permission and monitoring.

Today, minors can independently access care for mental health conditions, drug and alcohol abuse, and sexually transmitted diseases.

, the so-called "Parents' Medical Bill of Rights" would eliminate those carveouts. It would require parents to sign off on those treatments and allow them to review any associated medical records.

This week, Republicans in the House passed the bill, winning over some Democrats in the final vote Tuesday.

"If your child were struggling physically, emotionally, mentally, wouldn't you want to be there? Wouldn't you want to know? Wouldn't you want to help?" Rep. Jennifer Balkcom, R-Henderson, said during Tuesday's debate.

Balkcom is one of the bill's primary sponsors.

Rep. Deb Butler, D-New Hanover, said that some parents are "abusive, absent or deeply opposed to the care their child might need."

"This bill tells those young people if your parents cannot or will not help you, you are on your own. And that's not just cruel — it's dangerous," Butler said.

North Carolina law defines those under 18 years old as minors.

The bill's title is borrowed from recent fights over education and how children learn about gender identity, sex and sexuality.

In North Carolina, the Parents' Bill of Rights gave parents more say-so over public school curriculum and in-school mental health counseling. It also required teachers notify parents if a student changes their name or pronouns.

Rep. Dean Arp, R-Union, said during this week's debate that separating kids from parents is part of the "liberal agenda."

But Rep. Julie von Haefen, D-Wake, said she prefers kids get advice on sensitive subjects from medical professionals, not places like TikTok.

"This bill puts a chilling effect on minors seeking out treatment," von Haefen said. "Not every kid has a trusted parent that they can talk to."

The bill does allow exceptions in the case of certain crimes and emergencies. Another exception allows teens 16 and older to be tested and treated for short-term sexually transmitted infections, such as chlamydia and gonorrhea.

Minors could still get pregnancy tests and prenatal care without alerting their parents, though abortions would remain off-limits without parental consent.

House Bill 519 passed the House on Wednesday in a 68-41 vote, with support from all of the chamber's Republicans and four Democrats.

The Democrats were Carla D. Cunningham, of Mecklenburg County; Abe Jones, of Wake County; Garland E. Pierce, of Scotland County; and Amos L. Quick III, of Guilford County.

The bill has been sent to the Senate.

A bill to make major changes to North Carolina's math requirements for high school graduation is moving forward in the General Assembly. The House passed Wednesday, just in time to make the final deadline for bills to crossover from one chamber to the other to remain in play this legislative session. The bill has been sent to the Senate for consideration.

The bill would make the following changes to graduation requirements:

• It would no longer require all high school students to take a course known as Math 3.
  
• It would change the designation of computer science courses from an elective to a required math course. Computer science is already set to become a required course for graduation beginning next school year, but it currently does not count as a math class.
  
• It would add a requirement for all high school students to pass a U.S. history test based on questions on the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' naturalization exam.

Currently, students are required to take Math 1, Math 2, Math 3, and at least one additional math course to graduate. Under this bill, a student could take Math 1, Math 2, computer science, and one additional math course and be eligible to graduate.

Supporters of the bill say it would allow students who struggle with math to take more time to cover the material in lower math courses. Critics say the bill would lower the state's academic standards.

Arguments for the math changes

Representative David Willis, R-Union, sponsored the bill. He has argued the proposal would better serve students who are not on an advanced math track and don't plan to pursue a STEM-related career.

"Today we have 70% of the students who are taking Math 1 in high school are not grade proficient. In other words, they're failing Math 1," Willis said during the bill's floor debate. "They're getting to college, whether it's the community college system or the UNC system, and many of them are having to take remedial math."

The statistic Willis cited does not include advanced students who take Math 1 in middle school.

Under the bill, students who begin Math 1 in high school could take their lower math courses as a year-long class to have more time to master the material.

"Our goal is to give the kids what they actually need and meet them where they're at and stop pretending to put a Band-Aid on a system where we're graduating students who aren't math ready for college," Willis said during an earlier discussion of the bill.

The bill would allow those students to still take Math 3 if they choose to for their final math requirement, or to choose another math course, such as statistics or accounting. The bill also changes the UNC System's admissions requirements to match the proposed state requirements.

Arguments against the math changes

Representative Julie von Haefen, D-Wake, has argued the bill would lower the state's expectations for students and possibly limit their college opportunities.

She raised concerns that most universities require students to pass four math classes in high school to qualify for admissions, and that they typically do not accept computer science as a math course.

"By removing Math 3 and requiring computer science, we are in misalignment with all other universities in the Southeast and are requiring the University of North Carolina system to lower their standards," von Haefen said.

She proposed an amendment to the bill to not accept computer science as a fulfillment of the math requirement. Willis responded that the UNC System is in support of the bill, and von Haefen's amendment failed on the House floor.

Von Haefen also raised concerns that schools might have difficulty staffing math classes if they are split into additional year-long courses, and also argued that Math 3 is an important class for college preparation.

"In conversations with math teachers myself, I've learned that much of the material in Math 3 is what's tested on the ACT and SAT, which many students still take to boost their college applications," von Haefen said.

"We are limiting our students' options for post-graduation by changing this, which … puts North Carolina students at the lowest standards in the entire Southeast for graduation," von Haefen said. "We are not setting our kids up for success."

There's been another breach involving student and teacher data stored on PowerSchool software, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Mo Green said at a Wednesday evening press conference.

"It is completely unfortunate that the perpetrators are preying on innocent children and dedicated public servants," Green said. "We are working closely with law enforcement to try to do everything we can do to be sure that the responsible parties are held accountable for their actions."

School districts use PowerSchool to track student enrollment, attendance, and other data. In January, the company said it suffered a "global breach" that involved decades worth of data from hundreds of school districts in the U.S., Canada, and other countries. The breach exposed Social Security numbers of about 312,000 North Carolina teachers some 900 K-12 students.

At the time, PowerSchool assured educators that all the affected data had been destroyed. But this week, Green said, "threat actors" reached out to affected school systems to demand ransom for the data.

"The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction has not and certainly will not engage with these threat actors," Green said. "We are prohibited by law from doing so, as well."

Vanessa Wrenn, DPI's Chief Information Officer, said about 20 local education agencies received ransom emails. She said those messages "showed some evidence of having the same data that was breached in January. We are working with those schools, and we have also set up a way for schools who receive any other notification to reach out to us as well."

However, Wrenn and Green said it's not clear if the same attackers are responsible for both incidents.

, PowerSchool paid the hackers to view a video that purportedly showed the data being destroyed. It's not known how much PowerSchool paid for the video or if there was any secondary verification of the destruction.

"As is always the case with these situations, there was a risk that the bad actors would not delete the data they stole, despite assurances and evidence that were provided to us,"

Green said the state is ready to end its relationship with PowerSchool when its contract ends this summer. North Carolina schools will transition to a platform known as Infinite Campus, beginning July 1.

Hundreds of bills likely won't advance at the North Carolina legislature following a Thursday deadline to pass either the House or Senate in order to be eligible for consideration.

Many of those were proposals by Democrats that were unlikely to ever get a hearing in the GOP-controlled General Assembly, but Republican proposals got shelved as well.

Those include bill to further restrict abortion access, bring back the death penalty using the electric chair, and restore some zoning powers to local governments.

While those bills aren't eligible for votes now under the legislature's rules, House and Senate leaders note that there are procedural workarounds for ideas that find favor later in the session. Those policies could be added to other bills, for example.

"Nothing's ever dead around here," House Speaker Destin Hall told reporters after Wednesday's marathon session. Senate leader Phil Berger had a similar view. "You know, there are so many ways to skin a cat," he said.

Democrats are unhappy that few of their proposals – including some that had bipartisan support – made the crossover deadline.

"705 bills were filed by Democrats as primary sponsors," Senate Minority Leader Sydney Batch said. "Ten moved in the house. Zero moved in the Senate. I think it speaks for itself."

Here's a look at some of the Republican bills that didn't make the cut:

Abortion restrictions: A small group of House Republicans filed , with the exception of instances where the mother’s life is in danger. It never got a single hearing, as many Republicans are content to leave the 12-week abortion ban approved in 2023 unchanged.

Electric chair and firing squads: A House bill that aimed to re-start executions in North Carolina, which have been on hold for decades, didn’t make it to a floor vote. It would have given death row inmates the option to choose the electric chair or a firing squad.

Down-zoning powers for local governments: Legislation passed last December prompted outcry from local leaders because it took away the power to down-zone property – a zoning change that would reduce the density of development allowed at a particular location. Bills to restore those local zoning powers didn’t make it to a vote in either chamber.

Slowpoke drivers: A House bill to require slower drivers to move out of the left lane if they're "impeding traffic” got a favorable vote in the Transportation Committee before it stalled out in the Rules Committee. The bill would also increase the minimum speed requirements to 10 miles an hour below the posted speed limit. Another bill to reduce the waiting period for learner's permit holders from nine months to six months got parked in another committee.

Distracted driving: A and electronic devices didn’t get a hearing. The "Hands Free NC" legislation has also failed in previous sessions. "I do think that there's a lot of support for that sort of legislation, I just don't know that we've been able to develop the kind of consensus that we need in order to be able to move forward with it," Berger said.

Transgender bathroom access: A Senate proposal to require people to use bathrooms and other facilities that match their gender at birth (similar to the repealed 2016 House Bill 2) never got a hearing. Berger said this week that it has "no runway" to move forward ahead of the crossover deadline.

Balloon ban: The Senate deflated hopes of , a practice that environmentalists say leads to litter and harms animals.

Update May 6: The House voted 68-41 to pass House Bill 519.

Republican lawmakers in the state House of Representatives have introduced a bill seeking to limit confidentiality between minors and their health providers — and to grant parents greater access to their children’s medical records and decision-making.

Lead bill sponsor Rep. Jennifer Balkcom, R-Hendersonville, introduced at the House Rules Committee on May 5, where it passed. Supporters say the bill, also known as the Parents’ Medical Bill of Rights, will help parents make informed decisions about their children’s health care and restore parental authority.

Over two dozen Republican lawmakers are co-sponsoring the bill, including three co-chairs of the House Health Committee: Reps. Larry Potts, R-Lexington, Donny Lambeth, R-Winston-Salem, and Donna White, R-Clayton.

Under the current state law, minors can independently consent to some medical care — for diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy, substance use and mental health.

The bill would roll back the law to only allow minors to consent for treatment related to pregnancy, excluding abortion. Parental consent would be required for any other medical care or treatment, except in some limited scenarios outlined in the bill, such as in an emergency or if a medical provider believes a child could be experiencing parental abuse or neglect.

One exception would allow minors age 16 or older to access treatment for venereal disease without parental consent if the disease can be treated with a prescription duration of 10 days or less.

Becky Lew-Hobbs, a mother of three and chair of the , spoke in support of the bill at a House Judiciary meeting on April 29. She voiced her frustration with the current law, explaining that when she took her 14-year-old son to the emergency room for hurting himself, she was asked to leave the room so the doctor could ask him questions about his mental health and family alone.

“We as parents were treated as the enemy,” Lew-Hobbs said. “The doctor excluded us, preventing us from being part of the solution all because current North Carolina statute is used to exclude parents from their medical care.”

Bianca Allison, a pediatric primary care provider in the Triangle, said that confidentiality is the “cornerstone” of adolescent health care — it fosters open communication. And she added that confidentiality is not completely counter to parental rights — the goal isn’t to shut parents out. Instead, Allison said medical providers are often actively encouraging teens to involve their parents and help them work through why they may be hesitant to talk with them about their concerns.

Sometimes a health care provider is a more comfortable starting point to discuss sensitive topics, she said.

“Even as we provide that care confidentially to an adolescent, often we are having at the same time a conversation asking them, ‘Who is a trusted adult in your life who can help you navigate this situation? Can we help you have a conversation with your parents either here in the room or can I help give you a way to navigate that conversation outside of the exam room?’” Allison explained.

Change from decades-old law

When heard in committee, several doctors, including the president of the , quickly voiced opposition. They based their concerns on how the changes could worsen health outcomes for young people. They said teens would likely skip going to a provider in the first place if sensitive information, such as their sexual activity, will automatically be disclosed to a parent.

Erica Pettigrew, a family physician in the Triangle, explained to lawmakers that the conversations and questions she fields from teens won’t happen — or won’t be honest — if parents are in the exam room or have access to all communication. That will push teens to seek out information from unreliable sources such as TikTok instead, she said.

The state Department of Health and Human Services has also expressed opposition to this bill.

“The Parents’ Medical Bill of Rights would result in fewer children and youth seeking needed health care services, including mental health, substance use, services to treat sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy prevention,” a DHHS spokesperson said in a statement to NC Health News.

Young people in North Carolina have had the ability to since 1977.

The , the professional association of U.S. pediatricians, stated in an that confidentiality is an “essential component of high-quality health care for adolescents.” Other medical organizations support this stance.

However, , according to a published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The analysis found that many do not reflect pediatric professionals' standards of care.

A Planned Parenthood South Atlantic spokesperson said in a statement that, “This bill would mark a departure from historical and national trends around informed, medical consent for young people.”

Doctors, advocates push back

Allison worries about the risk of harm to youth in unsupportive environments if their parents were to have full access to medical records. Even though the number has dropped over the years, there are still tragedies within families. Of the 99 child homicides that took place in North Carolina in 2022, 31 of them were at the hands of a parent or caregiver,

“Removing confidentiality protections doesn't necessarily, by default, foster open communication between parents and children,” Allison said. “Parents should still be attempting to build the skills and creating an environment where open conversations can happen, regardless of whether or not these confidential protections are in place.”

Erica, a mother of three in Moore County, including a transgender daughter, said she’s worried about the impact of taking away a trusted space for children to go.

“I'm a mom, so of course I want my children to be upfront and honest with me, and I try to facilitate an environment where they can talk to me about anything,” said Erica, who asked to only use her first name for privacy and safety concerns. “But some parents aren't like that, and some kids aren't like that, and they need to have an outlet to share. Otherwise it's going to cause issues — physically and mentally.”

Allison emphasized that she and other medical providers don’t take lightly the responsibility that they might be the first to hear about sensitive topics during otherwise routine screenings with teenagers. Often those discussions are around sexual orientation, gender identity and sexual health.

“There's a lot of benefits to confidential care in terms of open communication with physicians and the ability for a physician to potentially be seen as another trusted adult in this young person's life, their ability to ask questions in an environment that is nonjudgmental, that doesn't have the same implications of them potentially asking these things of their parents,” Allison said.

‘Undermine care’

Allison said this bill is part of the larger trend of state lawmakers seeking to dictate medical practice, particularly around controversial treatments.

In the last legislative session, lawmakers and several medical associations. The General Assembly also — except for those who had already started care before the law change.

“I just think that medical decisions should really be driven by best practices and the needs of individual patients — not politics and political ideology. As a provider, I just want my patients to know that they are seen, respected and safe,” Allison said. “Legislation like this can really threaten the sense of safety and undermine care for really everyone that we take care of — even if individuals aren't necessarily coming in for more sensitive care and treatment right now.

“If and when it becomes relevant to them, they may fear.”

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

The officially kicked off an initiative on Wednesday that aims to provide for more than 400,000 K-12 students. The partnership is with , which is a telehealth service, and .

Virtual mental health services are currently live at Harnett County Schools and Durham County Public Schools. At the kick off event at Shawtown Elementary School in Lillington, State Health Secretary Dev Sangvai said Harnett County was chosen due to the needs of the school district.

"Partly, it was based on which counties had reached out for this type of assistance,” he said, at Wednesday’s event. “And, I think Harnett County stood up and said, ‘We're willing to do the kind of work that needs to be done.’”

Sangvai said he feels the services are needed, because one in four children are experiencing a mental health need in school.

Any students enrolled within participating districts will have access to a licensed therapist with Hazel Health before, during, and after the school day.

The services are also offered throughout the summer break.

“It reduces absenteeism,” said Anita Bachmann, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare Community Plan of North Carolina. “We're able to identify what the needs are of those children, whether it's stress, anxiety, depression, able to identify it and see it right there. To be able to get those services right on site, you don't have to stop and make an appointment days or weeks later.”

The state health department funded $3.5 million toward the virtual mental health services program. More school districts are expected to be added in the coming weeks.

Meanwhile, State Health Secretary Sangvai said it’s unclear if the program or others similar to it will be impacted by federal cuts.