Just released…

Progress NC Action files formal ethics complaint against Gov. Pat McCrory
Gov. McCrory has shown a clear pattern of deceptive omissions of income, stock ownership and even simple membership and affiliation with private corporate interests. With these omissions, McCrory has hidden clear conflicts of interest from the public. The State Ethics Commission should investigate.

RALEIGH – Progress North Carolina Action today filed a formal ethics complaint with the State Ethics Commission against Gov. Pat McCrory, detailing the governor’s clear pattern of deceptive omissions of income, stock ownership, and conflicts of interest between his private financial ties and his public duties as governor.

As numerous press reports have shown, Gov. McCrory has omitted key financial information from his Statements of Economic Interest in several places:

1. McCrory initially failed to accurately disclose ownership of more than $10,000 in Duke Energy Stock on his 2008 and 2014 Statement of Economic Interest (SEI).
2. McCrory failed to disclose more than $185,000 of income from dividends and director fees from on his 2014 SEI.
3. McCrory failed to even disclose membership on the board of directors of on his 2013 SEI.’s mortgage business is regulated by the state.

The 50-page ethics complaint also details other clear discrepancies between public documents of other private firms and McCrory’s ethics disclosure forms. Read More


You’ve got to hand it the the folks at Progress NC Action for getting down to the basics with the media release they distributed last night:

Progress NC Action Calls on Gov. McCrory to “Read the Bill,” Stop Misleading the Public & Veto SB 353

Pat McCrory’s claim that abortion bill is “not further limiting access” is contradicted not just by language in SB 353, but by even the bill’s title.

RALEIGH – Progress North Carolina Action today called on Governor Pat McCrory to confirm for the public that he has actually read the controversial abortion bill which is heading to his desk, to retract his statement that SB 353 “will better protect women while not further limiting access,” and to veto SB 353.

The Governor’s claim that SB 353 will not limit access to abortion care flies in the face of not just language inside the bill, but the very title of the bill itself.  Read More