Welcome & Ballot Basics

Amanda Benbow Lunn 0:08

Hello friends, this is Amanda Benbow Lunn. I'm your host with the NC Deep Dive. We are delving into yet another candidate conversation for the 2026 general election. By my best accounting, it looks like we have 18 contested races with 46 candidates in southern Wake County, specifically within Holly Springs and Fuquay Varina. There are other races that have only one candidate, but since there's only one candidate, we are not covering those in this segment. Of course, the races on your particular ballot will vary based on your address and the specific districts your residence falls within. You can always find your jurisdictions and eventually your sample ballot by searching NC Voter Search, and that's made available by the North Carolina State Board of Elections. Once you get to the page, you'll enter in your information. It will populate with all those who share your name or the information you provided. You'll scroll until you find yours. You'll click on it, verify your name and address are indeed correct, and then you'll scroll down to the appropriate sections you're looking for. Since there are so many races, please remember that your ballot will have a front and back. Keep in mind, if your time is short, you can either look at the various chapter titles for the particular questions we're asking and just listen to those that most interest you, or you can see each episode's transcripts at www.ncdeepdive.com. In this episode, we are delving into the North Carolina Senate race for District 13. There are two candidates running, and you will have the opportunity to vote for one of them. The two candidates are Robert van Brederode for the Republican Party and Lisa Grafstein for the Democratic Party. Without further ado, my friends, let's dive in.

Robert van Brederode: Intro, Why, & Experience

Amanda Benbow Lunn 2:02

On this episode, I'm honored to be speaking with Robert van Brederode, who is running for the North Carolina State Senate for District 13. Welcome, Robert. If you want to take a few moments to introduce yourself and then you can go into why you're running for this office and what experiences have prepared you to serve in this role.

Robert van Brederode 2:22

Sure. Well, those things are related. If you talk about my experience, you talk about what I've done in my life. So let me start with that, and then you will also understand why I think I am prepared to serve the North Carolina people. As you can hear, I have an accent. I was born in the Netherlands and came to the US as an adult in 1999. And you never lose your accent unless you come here as a small child. And so even after 30 years, you can still hear I was born somewhere else. Of course, I'm a legal immigrant, you understand that, so we don't have to go into that discussion. So I received my legal education in the Netherlands as well. So I'm a lawyer by training, and I started my career in tax law. First I worked for the Netherlands Revenue Service and then I switched to the big four accountant firms. I was a partner, what is now Price Waterhouse Cooper's and the head of a large tax consulting practice, and we had some of the largest corporations as our clients. We also had smaller clients, of course, and that gave me valuable insights in what matters both economically and financially to people and how government policies impact on society. During my career I have always combined practice with theory. I have an earned PhD in tax law and I taught tax classes as assistant professor at Maastricht University School of Law and later as full professor at the Erasmus University School of Economics. Tax has a lot of economics in it, of course. Both are in the Netherlands. Later on I taught a tax course at New York University School of Law as an adjunct professor, and I truly love the uh the combination of practice and theory because they complement each other. Theory can improve if we see what works in practice, and practice can borrow from theory. Certainly, when you talk about tax policy, then of course, yes, some things work and some do not, and theory needs to know what works, and so I think that is a great thing to do together. In any event, in 1999 I got the job offer in New York City, so I immigrated to the US and have been enjoying the American experience enormously ever since. I always wanted to be here. I spent a number of vacations in the US, so that opportunity was basically a wish come true. I met my wife in Connecticut and we are married for I think about 24 years now. And of course, in the meantime, 20 years ago, I became a proud American citizen. I have my own niche tax firm right now, so I don't work for another firm, so that I can avoid all the office infighting and things like that. I don't have the problem. I'm my own boss and I assist foreign companies that come to the US with US taxes. We do all taxes. I have one partner who is actually in Idaho. He's an accountant by training and I am a lawyer, which is a good combination. And we also advise US companies about foreign taxes if they expand overseas. I think law is a good background for a politician because law is the tool used to implement policy priorities. You don't necessarily have to be a lawyer, of course, to be a good politician, but it is a good background to have. But it is important to have life experience also if you want to be a leader and represent your fellow citizens. Because with experience you understand the ups and downs of life when you went through it yourself. You also learn to nuance, to understand different viewpoints, and you learn what really matters. So in addition, I have a broad interest, including philosophy and history. The letter is important. I think history is important for two reasons. First, to understand where we come from. Our country did not start today, but as you know, 250 years ago, we're celebrating that now. And beyond and even beyond, if you include the colonial days, the present cannot be approached as a time capsule, that is in isolation, but should be understood as a development over time. And today is not the end, but just an intermediary phase to the future. And the second reason history is important is to prevent making the same mistakes again. You know the saying, right? Those that do not know history are bound to repeat it. And we see that all the time people's memories are short. However, looking back provides us with the opportunity to not repeat mistakes and actually learn from the past. I'm a practical person focused on what works. Talk does not matter, results do.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 6:32

Perfect.

Biggest Issue for District 13

Amanda Benbow Lunn 6:33

What do you believe is the most important issue or challenge facing the people you would represent?

Robert van Brederode 6:38

I think there are several right now. The first one is, of course, affordability. Everybody talks about it. But there's only so much you can do about that at state level, as affordability is mostly linked to federal policy making. Prices are high, that's true, and mostly they talk about inflation. But people forget, again, short memory, right, that most of that was caused by the very high inflation during the Biden years in office. Inflation has come down significantly since. It's still higher than what the central bank prefers. Gas prices are high, but the current gasoline price is still about one dollar lower than the peak during the Biden years. Moreover, when the Iran crisis is resolved, and it will, mind my words, in the next six months, and when Venezuela is producing and exporting more oil, which also will take months to go, the prices for gas will come down. On the local level, I think we are limited in usable tools to address affordability. But we could temporarily reduce gasoline taxes, so that will bring the price down, and property taxes or sales taxes to provide relief, but this of course has budgetary consequences. So that's not an easy thing to do. But that is a thing about all we can do in the area of affordability. Another most people talk about is education. And we make progress. You may have heard that there was a recent study released that revealed that North Carolina schools scoring F and D have come down from I think it was 32% to now 23%. That's for sure an improvement. But before we boast about that, look closer. Almost one quarter, 23% of schools are still underperforming. Taxpayers should be outraged in my mind. We put a ton of money in education and not getting back an acceptable return of investment. The answer is not more money. That is the misleading message of the teachers' unions. The US already pay more per student than most other developed countries, but we rank relatively low in terms of educational outcomes. Just imagine that you have an employee telling you that if you pay him or her more, they would do a better job. Think is true. Essentially, they are telling you they are not doing their best right now. The problem is that there are no incentives for teachers to perform better or for administrators for that sake. What we need to do is bring an element of competition back into the educational market. The reason for this is that competition encourages innovation and in general terms and leads to improved efficiency and quality at a lower price. Inefficient companies or service providers simply cannot offer products or services at the same price and of the same quality standards as their competitors and will be driven out of the market. Competition in a market economy also ensures that products and services are tailored to specific segments of the marketplace and provides for product diversity and consumer choice. However, when free competition is absent, for example, when a market is under control of a monopoly or a cartel, the incentives for innovation efficiency and quality improvement disappear. Therefore, my point is let schools compete. If parents can send their children to any school in the state that fits best the specific needs of their child, and the public funding follows the parent's choice, all of a sudden parents are no longer a captive audience but an informed and powerful consumer of educational services. They can go somewhere else. Like when you buy groceries. You can go to Walmart or Target to Aldi, Harris Teeter, Public Lowe's. There's a lows coming in Fuquay Varina, as you probably know. These stores have to work to earn your patronage. In public education, clientele is distributed based on location. You are in a school district, and parents have no choice. In addition, teachers should not be paid more per se, but paid differently to bring that element of reward in. So I propose a base pay, and that progresses with years of experience, combined with a bonus depending on performance. That's not novel, but simply makes common sense. Teachers, and I say this with all due respect, are not different from other employees. You get a reward if you perform well. You do not get a reward if you do not perform well. Performance pay for teachers, and by the way also for administrators, combined with a voucher system, would make the educational market competitive and lead to better educational outcomes, and that is what we pay for. The third thing is healthcare costs, also an item that comes up often. The problem there is similar to education, a lack of free market. People often talk about universal healthcare, but forget that our system is already more than half there. It is the most regulated industry. Why? Regulation does not make healthcare better. It only leads to more red tape. The last time I was at my dentist, they have two in that office two dentists, three oral hygienists, and they have three to four support staff. So the support staff is more than 50% of all staff. Just because all the red tape by government and insurance companies, all because of laws. A single payer means one insurance company. In this case that would be the government, which will become a monopolist. That may reduce costs as the government could dictate prices, which would also lead to a reduction in the supply of medical services. It will lead to longer waiting times due to rationing, as we see in Canada and many European countries. Again, let's not repeat history, but learn from it. Free health care does not exist. Someone pays for it, that is all of us through taxes or mandatory premiums, which is essentially the same thing. More bureaucracy will lead to higher costs. Despite all its good intentions, Obamacare did not lead to lower premiums, but instead resulted in higher ones. And you could not keep your doctor, regardless the promise. So less choice in providers and no choice in healthcare insurance. Socialized medicine is popular among Democrats. Please realize that the only thing single payer so-called Medicare for all does is give politicians and bureaucrats complete control over your existence. From the cradle to the grave, what care you can get will not be determined by you and your doctor, but by elected and unelected people to whom you are just a number in a spreadsheet. Instead, we should make the healthcare market truly free with full competition between providers and full competition between insurance companies. The government should only play a role in formulating quality and safety standards.

Priorities & Hopes for Accomplishment

Amanda Benbow Lunn 13:08

If elected, what would you prioritize and what specifically would you hope to accomplish during your term?

Robert van Brederode 13:13

My campaign motto is liberty and common sense. I will evaluate any piece of legislation or regulation on the basis of those two criteria. First, does the measure, or the proposed legislative measure, make common sense? That is, will it accomplish what it promises to do? It promises sometimes a lot, and then you look at that, that's not going to work. And important as well, is it cost efficient? Second, and if so, to what extent does the measure infringe of our rights as citizens? Liberty is the most important benchmark for me. Let's not forget what made America special, the emphasis on liberty, that is individual liberty, including private property rights. Our declaration of independence and our constitution are founded on the principle of individual liberty and a limited and constrained government. It is a government focused on protecting our rights. For that reason, the federal government is allocated only enumerated powers. Read the Constitution. All other powers belong to the states and the people. However, over time, the federal government has encroached on the legislative territory of the states excessively, and I want to push back. The enumerated powers do not include healthcare, education, and many other issues. The Supreme Court was correct in its Dobbs ruling overriding roe versus wade that abortion rights are not covered in the US Constitution. Thus, regulation of abortion belongs to the states. As a consequence, abortion rights will differ among states. And I'm fine with that, as this is the logical consequence of federalism. You have stricter laws in Alabama, you have more liberal ones perhaps in California. That's all fine. And that's true for many policy issues. They are determined at the federal level but should be determined at state level. So I will judge legislation before me on the basis of its impact on our individual liberty. If it reduces our liberty, the benefits must be overwhelming for me to support it. Legislation that enhances our liberty and shives back policy responsibility to the state of North Carolina from the federal government will have my priority. You are not free if you are dependent for your sustenance on the government. Without economic freedom, the other natural rights bestowed upon us mean very little. Just let that sink in for a moment. If you agree with that pre-proposition, then as a consequence, we need to take steps to reduce or limit the dependency. In the nineteen nineties, under the Clinton administration, a bipartisan law was enacted, the intergenerational dependency on governmental aid by making assistance to needy families temporary in nature. That was a good first step. But the fundamental question is whether government should be involved in welfare at all. My thinking is close to that of Dorothy Day. I don't know whether everybody is familiar with her. She was the most influential Catholic layperson of the twentieth century. And of course she takes a religious perspective here. And she rightly pointed out that charity is a personal religious obligation. You could say a moral obligation if you don't want to use religion as a thing. And it is a sentiment that is shared by Christianity but also by Judaism, which requires stiffing, and Islam requires Zakat. In this view, except in cases of national catastrophes like hurricanes, earthquakes, economic depression, the government has no role in providing relief. So the welfare state, with its bulky bureaucracy providing for the populace from cradle to grave, does not fit in her worldview, and this is the reason why the welfare state removes charity from individual responsibility and collectivizes it. In her mind, providing welfare programs is not a function of the state. Giving to the poor is a moral or religious obligation for every Christian or every person. She advocated personal responsibility rather than government programs. They believed that when government is involved in charitable work, the government imposes its value onto areas that should be covered by personal responsibility. Basically, you could say if the government is taking over welfare, it takes it away from you and me. And it is something that we are we are responsible to help our family and our neighbors. And what you see is the government doing is people say, Well, I pay taxes, that's enough, I don't have to do anything else. It should be the other way around. The argument for state funded charity, and that's important because most people are aware of that, of course through the means of taxation, is found in creating a sort of equality between the receiver and the provider of charity. The reasoning is that if the state does it, then the receiver does no longer have to feel subordinate and express gratefulness to the benefactor. Charity has thus evolved into a right of the individual towards the community. And this approach is based on a misunderstanding of the function of charity as a moral or religious obligation. For a religious person, charity is foremost an individual religious obligation that demonstrates obedience to God through love for one's neighbor. Providing funding for charity through taxation not only collectivizes that obligation, but its inherent coercive character also removes the charitable element from that obligation. Only voluntary actions have moral value, and I totally agree with that statement. Only voluntary actions have moral value. Thus, coercive charity through taxation has no moral value at all, and cannot serve to satisfy any religious or moral obligation. Charity does not require any subordination or expression of gratitude by the receiver towards the benefactor. That's just a misunderstanding. Rather, it requires from the both the benefactor and the receiver gratitude towards God. The benefactor should be grateful for the opportunity to serve God through charity towards his fellow man, and the receiver should be grateful for being bestowed with what he needs through God's grace on which the benefactor acted. If you are not religious, I think her position is morally still correct. So what's left for government? Not charity, but the creation of opportunity to be independent, because that is what matters in a free society based on American values. That translates, in my view, to providing funding and infrastructure for efficient education, accessible to everyone and creating the circumstances under which one is able to find meaningful employee in a professional trade or start a business. Education is the foundation of liberty economically and otherwise, necessary to raise citizens able to meaningfully participate in our great societal experience, the American Republic. My priorities are in line with this philosophical approach. Bring back negative responsibility to the state level and counter federal intrusion and secondly enhance individual freedom. I believe that policy decisions should be made at a level as close as possible to those affected by the policy. So I strongly prefer decentralization, not only from the federal to the state level, but also from the state level to county and municipal level. That is in line with the concept of self-government. If I become senator and I'm elected as such, I will focus on improving education, which in my view is the foundation of effective citizenship.

Infrastructure for Fast Growing Communities

Amanda Benbow Lunn 20:33

How should the state respond to rapid growth in Wake County and the surrounding region, making sure infrastructure keeps pace?

Robert van Brederode 20:40

You told me you live in Fuquay too. You see there is a lot of building going on in the suburbs. We get a low here in town. And the problem is, of course, that certainly if you go to the center of town, the roads cannot be enlarged there. You cannot make an extra lane because there are buildings there. So you see that also on country roads where they all of a sudden build 200 apartments, but it's still a country road with one lane in one direction and one in another. And I think that is a matter of planning. You cannot plan apartments if you do nothing about the roads. And I think that's the most important thing that they combine those things. Often you see that they make either make an entrance for the to the towards the apartment building and want to access the road, but then later on, after a few hundred yards, it becomes a two-lane road again. And that is what we're missing, I think. A good evaluation of how infrastructure has to be approved before we start building. We also have to think in the state why everything has to be in Raleigh. The research triangle is so that's attractive to many industries, but there are lots of industries that don't have to be in the triangle at all. And we can say, well, should we not have more in another area, perhaps even a rural area, where they need jobs? And that is something the government can do. That of course means that the legislature, house senate, and the governor have to work together to steer that in the right direction. And that means cooperation. This is not a partisan issue, this is common sense.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 22:00

Are you suggesting businesses that may want to come to town trying to limit what does come to town and trying to kind of spread it out over the state?

Robert van Brederode 22:09

Yes, of course you you're talking. You cannot forbid somebody to start enrolling if that's the only thing they want, but you can sometimes go and discuss with them why do you pick this location? Perhaps, there is a better location. You can create incentives. That is quite common for governments to do. Say you get an exemption or a reduction in your property tax for so many years because we want you there. And especially we want people there in locations where there is more unemployment. For example, in a mountains area now, they have, of course, they have to rebuild it because of the storm of last year. But it it is a region that has lost many manufacturing jobs anyway. So that is an area you can focus in. The area closer to the Virginia border, you see some towns you say they're a bit run down. What can we do about it? Well, bring some work. If your work, people have jobs, they have money, you get shops to cater to the people, and that is a big thing to do, and that needs everybody to work together. That's not just one party, that's Republicans, Democrats, the governor, everybody.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 23:04

All right. And do you feel the North Carolina Department of Transportation is getting enough funding? Do you think that they should have more funding or where do you stand with that?

Robert van Brederode 23:13

Well, I cannot really answer that because I don't know exactly how much they get and how much they spend. But you are correct with your question because you suggest that with that, well, that needs indeed to be evaluated too. Because if you say we start building tons of apartments somewhere and the Department of Transportation have no money to make roads, they will not be built. So they have to allocate funds. So that is, if you make an overall plan for developing certain areas, you look at the whole package. Where do we go and build? Where do we get industry? What roads are needed, and provide the right funding for it? Because otherwise, of course, it is useless if you don't have money. You can hey it's easy to put a road on paper, but you also have to fund it.

Data Centers: Thoughts & State Role

Amanda Benbow Lunn 23:56

Okay. What role do you believe the state should play in balancing the potential economic and technological opportunities of data centers with their potential cost and community impacts? And where should the authority of the state end and local control begin?

Robert van Brederode 24:12

Well, you heard I like local control. Because if the data center goes in a certain area, that that county or that town or city should have a big voice there. I'm not against data centers. A lot of people are afraid of it. But of course, what you do with that information, and there we have some laws to keep that under control. But data center does bring money into an area, and data centers do not have to be in poorly per se. They can be anywhere. So that is a good thing to have, perhaps an area where we need jobs. They pay property taxes, so it's that's good for the community. But there are two problems we see with data centers. One is because those computers have to be need cooling, they need a lot of water, and they need a lot of power, energy, electricity. It cannot be that you and I and all every every other North Carolinian have to pay more in our energy bill because the data center needs more energy and they have to build more. No, they have to fund that themselves. So I want the data centers to be responsible for their own water supply, at least to pay the cost for that, and to pay for their own energy. So if there's more cost, they pay for it, or they have to generate their own energy. That's certainly possible. There are tons of ways to do that. And you do that by talking to them and negotiating. And I'm not the only one saying that. This is also not a partisan issue, this is a bipartisan issue. I think everybody in North Carolina says we're not most people are not opposed to data centers, at least per se, but we don't want the consumer to pay more because of it.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 25:38

Okay.

Public Education: Balancing Needs, Funding, & School Options

Amanda Benbow Lunn 25:39

What should the General Assembly do to improve public education? And how should that be balanced with charter and private school options in regards to funding?

Robert van Brederode 25:48

Ah, I think I answered that already when I talked about education. I'm not against public education. I think it schools have to be good. I don't care whether it's public or private schools. I don't think in some areas of the states you will get public schools because private schools cannot function there. There is not perhaps not enough students for it. But I think schools should be more independent and I want them to compete because that's the only way to improve our educational outcome. And that's important. As an economy, if you look at the future, if we have people with insufficient education, they cannot hold a job. Already we learned that we have a lot of people who have trouble writing and reading and cannot do basic math. And then, and not necessarily North Carolina, but at least nationwide, otherwise schools that say, Well, hey, here's your high school diploma, and you have a B plus for everything, and they cannot pass the tests, the proficiency tests, and that is a problem. So we need to keep those tests. We have to talk to the schools, administrators, and teachers on how to improve. The state should only set standards and let the schools compete to offer better services. And the funding for schools, of course, you can go to a private school and parents can pay, but we all paid for our taxes. So I'm in favor of a voucher system that if you have a child and it doesn't matter where you live, it should not be bound by your school district. You can go to any school you want, and you take your money with you and let the schools fight for their customers, like any other business. A school education is a service industry. It's like healthcare, it's a service industry. You always talk about oh, our heroes, and there are police officers and military, and then we all of a sudden we get teachers and nurses and doctors. But not more heroes than anybody else, except perhaps for police and military, they really storm to danger. But being a teacher doesn't make you a hero, really, in the normal definition of that word. It's an important role, and you can be proud to do that. It's a calling perhaps, but it is a job. Plumbers are important too. If you have a lead, you don't need a teacher, you need a plumber. So let's treat them like any other industry. Hey, there is competition, you do a better job. I can tell you if teachers get a base salary and they get a bonus, and let's say you have a school that is underperforming, and all of a sudden the teacher, and there could be a new teacher coming to a new class, the students were not proficient the year before, and at the end of the year he gets the proficiency rates up, he gets a bonus. He starts doing a better job like anybody else because that's an incentive that is attractive to people, and that is what we should set up, I think, in this state.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 28:19

All right. Would you be for charter schools and private schools being held up to the same mandates and regulations that public schools are?

Robert van Brederode 28:28

Well, at least in terms of quality standards. And certainly in terms of non-discrimination and that kind of laws that we have, because they apply to everybody. But they will have more freedom because they're not they may not be state funded at all or only partly. But if the state starts funding them, then the state can claim a right to regulate. Because that's the way it is, right? If you go to a totally private school and the parents pay and the state is not involved financially, then the state would not really have too much to say there, except that it could say these are the standards for a diploma. If you want a high school diploma, this is the test. If you fail, bad luck. Same as public schools. But if the state starts funding all those schools, the states can claim within reason to have some say of what's going on.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 29:12

Okay.

Security & Oversight Versus Privacy & Due Process Rights

Amanda Benbow Lunn 29:13

North Carolina agencies and law enforcement increasingly have access to personal information through technology and government databases, including automated license plate readers like flock cameras, healthcare and benefits records, and voter registration information. Where do you believe the line should exist between legitimate government oversight, fraud prevention, and public safety, and an individual's rights to privacy and due process?

Robert van Brederode 29:39

And that's a very good question. And you already know where I will go with my answer because our personal rights are very important to me. Those cameras, I know there's always a benefit to all those things. That's how they sell it. Oh, it benefits this and this. So those cameras that you have to say, well, they can read the license plates and it helps us find stolen cars. Is that true? Of course that's true. But see what happens. They're not looking your my license plate, your license plate, everybody's license plate can be read. But they read more. They can read stickers on your car. Perhaps you have a sticker with uh, I don't know, you support Obama or Donald Trump, it doesn't matter. Now they can see that. And yes, they can see who's in the car. And then you get the next step is facial recognition, and then we are all in a database with our face, what car we drive, what stickers we have. That's none of the government's business. So I'm not a big fan of those cameras. And that's why I said, yes, I understand there is a benefit, but you have to look at to what extent is it infringing on our liberties, and the benefit has to be enormous before I support that. I think those cameras don't do that. That's not important enough. It doesn't mean you can have no cameras anywhere. If you have, let's say, in a big city like Charlotte, you have a place with a lot of crime, you may have for security reasons some cameras, but that's a different thing. But also, let's not remind we're getting conditioned to accept cameras. I don't know whether you watch much TV or crime, but if you see like CBS has a thing that's called FBI and in New York, and you have other crime scenes, and you see these people behind the computer, and there is a criminal on the run that's like, yeah, he's in debt in that car, and they look at all the cameras. Oh, he's on this street and that street, they follow him. That means you get conditioned in accepting that there are cameras everywhere because it stops crime. Yes, it does that to some extent, and I'm not against all cameras, but we have to be very careful with our personal rights. There's only so much information that the government needs. So this is for cameras, is for cars, uh, but also they can track where you come and go. The cameras have a timer on it. So you know what time you go through the camera, they see you on another camera, they can basically route your whole day. Just imagine what that means. That's big brother that I'm not a big fan of.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 31:46

Okay. How

Approach to the Responsibilities and Decision-Making Authority of this Office

Amanda Benbow Lunn 31:47

would you approach the responsibilities and decision-making authority of this particular office?

Robert van Brederode 31:52

Well, I have to do right to the people of North Carolina because they are my fellow citizens. So for me, legislation has to be for the benefit of North Carolina, for all of us, not to any particular group. And my responsibility as senator is to make North Carolina as a state more responsible for the well-being of its citizens vis-a-vis the federal government, and to work hard to enhance the individual liberty of every North Carolinian. That responsibility for well-being is not government charity, but the creation of circumstances that allow each individual the opportunity to flourish and reach his or hers full potential.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 32:31

Okay.

Balancing Taxes, Obligations, Investments, & Fiscal Responsibility

Amanda Benbow Lunn 32:32

North Carolina has to balance keeping taxes and the cost of government reasonable with paying its obligations and investing in infrastructure, roads, public safety, schools, and other services residents rely on. How do you balance that and what does fiscal responsibility mean to you?

Robert van Brederode 32:49

Well, I'm a big fan of uh balanced budgets. The only reason not to have it is in times of a crisis, like what happened in northwestern North Carolina. All of a sudden you have a disaster there, of course that money has to come from somewhere. But for that, you're also in your budgets to build up a reserve for those events. We do that privately too. Most people have hopefully some money in the bank for when you lose your job or when you have health care costs that are not insured. Whatever can happen, you say I have a reserve. So you want reserve in your finance that you can buffer for those things that you have to do. But I like uh balanced budgets because it's so easy for government to say, well, we just spent a little bit more. Where does the money come from? We just raise taxes. Nobody else can do that. You cannot go to the supermarket and just say, hey, we want to make a higher profit. A loaf of bread is not four dollars, it's now six dollars because people will not buy it, they go somewhere else. But the government has a monopoly on government services, so that's the only institution, more or less, that can just raise their prices without raising the quality of whatever service they deliver or what they do. So it is in the interest of the people of North Carolina that we are strict with our budget and we have to keep that in check. And of course, the responsibility for the budget is is basically house and senate. More so than, I mean, the governor has something to say there, but or has certainly has a wish list, but it is Congress, so the House and the Senate, that has to be responsible. And I will be very strict when it comes to spending.

Thoughts on Constitutional Amendments

Amanda Benbow Lunn 34:20

Okay. And talking about the taxes and the budget, what are your thoughts on the constitutional amendments that will be on everybody's ballots, in particular the one about property tax limitations?

Robert van Brederode 34:34

Yeah, the property tax is a very old tax. Just remember those tax come from the medieval times because there was no income tax, and you could not have an income tax because literacy rates were low, people could not read and write, so they didn't keep book. Uh, we didn't know what the income was. So you look at wealth and you say, well, he has a big house, so that person is wealthy and you tax it. And although we have an income tax now, the property tax has never disappeared. It is a form of wealth tax. Not a great fan of property taxes, but you know, you cannot just get rid of it, then you need another source of income for local government because they're dependent on it. But again, it is related to your previous question. You want to make sure that they not indiscriminately increase the rates for property taxes. That is just not acceptable. So I have no problem with capping the increase, saying you cannot do more than this. I think that is a good idea. So I actually support that amendment.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 35:28

Okay. And are you in support of the corporate taxes going to zero percent by 2030?

Robert van Brederode 35:34

Corporate taxes are the most ridiculous taxes in the world. Because and it is always sold like, hey, if you pay taxes, then corporations should too. Corporations do not pay taxes. It looks like they pay taxes. But every corporate tax is a cost for corporations, and economically those taxes are either shifted forwards into the price, that means that you and I, as consumers, pay it, or it is shifted backwards to the labor factor or the capital factor. That means less dividend, people that provide the capital, or the people that work there, they don't get less money, but they may not get a raise or a lesser raise than they expected, or less fringe benefits. And of course, generally they ship forward and backward. So in the end, they actually don't pay any taxes. So the corporate tax, we should not have a corporate tax, because it is a nonsense tax. You and I pay that tax. So that's my first point. So if we try to get rid of it, I think that's a good idea. It also makes us more competitive. Let's not forget Tennessee is next door and they don't have a corporate income tax. And some other states have no income tax. So to be competitive, I think it's good not to have a corporate income

Deciding What Takes Precedence

Robert van Brederode 36:37

tax.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 36:37

When priorities compete or resources are limited, how would you decide what takes precedence?

Robert van Brederode 36:42

Well, that's difficult to say in the abstract. Priorities always compete, right? And resources are naturally limited, and you can only spend the dollar once. But generally, I will prioritize what safeguards liberty, including private property, most. And I will prioritize what costs the least. Does that answer your question?

Amanda Benbow Lunn 37:02

Yes, I think it does.

Accountability: What & How

Amanda Benbow Lunn 37:03

What should voters hold you accountable for if you're elected and how?

Robert van Brederode 37:07

I say what I mean and I do what I say. You recorded my statements on liberty and common sense. You heard my priorities. If people elect me on that basis, on the basis of my philosophical premises, they should judge me on the same. So we all understand that political reality may require some compromise. But cross-modo, if I do not live up to the standards I raised for myself, I do not earn to be re-elected. When I get elected, I will institute a committee of fellow citizens to advise me on policy issues and keep me posted on what is important to my constituents. It's easy, and I do that because it's easy to lose the perspective of those you represent. Because you're enrolled and they are somewhere else, right? And such a committee will serve to keep me grounded and connected with my constituents. I can of course not discuss every detail, but yes, some important uh policy issues say, hey, I want to have some input. What do you think? And it's not that they all have to be Republicans because I'm a Republican. No, I want people that they don't have to live next door. They could could be somebody else, could be you, could be there, will probably be a Democrat in there as well, or somebody who's independent, will be men and women, different age groups. It will not be 50 people, will perhaps be only 10, because with 50 people you never get somewhere. And I get the input. What can I put my feelings out? What do you think of this? Why do you stand there? What impacts your life with this measure? Because sometimes measures come up and you actually have no idea how that will impact people because it doesn't affect me. Well, then I have to ask somebody else who who is affected by it, hey, what does it do to you? And they get a better idea whether that plan is good or not.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 38:45

Okay.

Last Thoughts

Amanda Benbow Lunn 38:46

As we wrap up, do you have any last thoughts? Is there anything we haven't discussed that you would like voters to know or anything from our conversation that you'd like to expand upon or clarify?

Robert van Brederode 38:55

No, I think I was quite extensive in my answers. People have an idea of where I stand philosophically. And for me, the basis to run is philosophy, is the values and the ideas that you bring with you, because that is the basis on which I will work. And I express that as liberty, individual liberty, property rights, small government, and effective government, and government that is careful with how it spends money. Try to fight waste. I don't know how much waste we have in this state because I don't have that information, but I would like to work with the governor too to see whether there is any, because we don't want that. We certainly don't want the fraud that they have in Minnesota. I'm sure the governor doesn't want that either. So that money we can save if that happens, but that is the way I approach things.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 39:41

Okay.

Where to Learn More

Amanda Benbow Lunn 39:42

For voters who want to learn more about you, your platform, your campaign endorsements, and priorities, where can they go to find that information?

Robert van Brederode 39:49

Well, I have a campaign website. It's Robert- for-nc.com.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 39:55

All right, and is that the number for or spelled out for?

Robert van Brederode 39:58

No, no, it's spelled out.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 39:59

Okay. Perfect. Well, thank you so much, Robert, for joining me today. And I appreciate you speaking directly to voters and choosing to do that. And I wish you the best of luck with your campaign.

Robert van Brederode 40:08

Oh, thank you very much, and thank you for having me.

Amanda Benbow Lunn 40:11

Absolutely.

Closing Reflections & Voting Info

Amanda Benbow Lunn 40:12

Democracy is built on participation. Politics can sometimes feel distant or abstract, but the decisions made by our elected officials at the county, state, and federal levels have a profound effect on the communities we call home and the way we live our lives. From the roads we drive on and the schools our children attend to public safety, parks and recreation, housing, health care, taxes, the economy, and the many other services and amenities that make up our communities, government plays a role in shaping both our everyday experience and our future. That makes taking the time to understand the choices on your ballot and the people asking for your vote an important part of being an engaged member of your community. Early voting for the 2026 midterm election begins October 15th and runs through October 31st. In southern Wake County, there will be early voting locations at the Hunt Center in Holly Springs, the Hilltop Needmore Town Park Clubhouse in Fuquay Varina, Beech Bluff County Park, and Southern Wake Tech Campus close by. Election Day is November 3rd. A general reminder that you will need a valid photo ID to vote. The regular voter registration deadline is October 9th, although you may still register when you vote during the early voting period. Please note that you cannot register to vote on Election Day itself, and that that day you will absolutely have to vote at your designated precinct location to have access to your full ballot. And because there are so many races and ballot measures this year, your ballot will likely be double-sided. It can be helpful to start on the back so that you don't accidentally overlook anything. You'll vote for the races that apply to your jurisdiction along with statewide amendments and for Southern Wake County voters, local Wake County bond referenda. Voting is one of the ways we take part in the communities we share. You don't have to agree with your neighbors or even with the candidates you've heard here to recognize that our communities are shaped by the people who show up, ask questions, learn about the choices before them, and cast their ballots. So please take the time to get informed, make your voice heard, and encourage the people around you to do the same. Your vote matters. Your voice matters. And you absolutely matter, my friend. And with that, this episode of the NC Deep Dive has come to an end. Please feel free to check out this episode's show notes at ncdeepdive.com for further information and relevant links for this candidate along with general election information. As always, if you have any topics or thoughts you'd like to share, you can find us on social media or email us at ncdeepdive at gmail.com. If you found value in this episode, I'd love for you to subscribe, rate, and share it so that others may more easily be informed. Please make sure to stay tuned for all the relevant candidate, amendment, and referenda episodes for the 2026 midterm election by visiting ncdeepdive.com, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Audible, or wherever you currently listen to your podcast. Until next time, my friends, Namaste: The Love and Light in me sees and honors the love and light in you.