Republican nominee
Democratic nominee
Page is Rockingham sheriff. Casino fight with Berger defined the primary. Luking is a retired physician. Civitas has rated the seat R+9; the general is still the first post-Berger test.
Green ✓ = closer to this concern set: levy-limit and reappraisal relief, ICE detainers, school choice, energy costs that do not raise the home bill, tighter election rules, and a caucus vote that does not grow Raleigh.
Red ✗ = farther from that set. Gray — = no recorded vote and no published plank. We do not invent a mark. Both may earn ✓ on the same row.
Matches the Piedmont concern set
Sam Page · 12 of 12
Steve Luking · 2 of 12
Issue-by-issue marks are in the table below.
| Issue | Sam Page (R) | Steve Luking (D) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Property-tax levy limit (HB 1089) | No House/Senate vote yet. Aligns with the cap-the-growth side as a sheriff-tax hawk. | ✓ | Democratic nominee. Party caucus opposed the levy-limit amendment. | ✗ |
| Reappraisal moratorium (SB 889) | Local-control sheriff. Backed state relief when counties overshot values. | Would keep more of the decision in Raleigh Democrats’ spending frame. | ||
| School choice vs. county school operating money | Republican caucus: Opportunity Scholarships stay. Local schools compete. | Rejects vouchers. Put the dollar back in the county formula. | ||
| Teacher pay (SB 257 — 8% avg, $48k start) | GOP-written budget Stein signed. Page was not yet seated; his caucus passed it. | Supports the enacted raise. Wants a larger next step. | ||
| Medicaid and rural hospitals | Work rules and anti-fraud. Rockingham hospitals need a solvent program. | Protect expansion. Physician lens on coverage. | ||
| Crime, jails, and ICE detainers | Sitting sheriff. Honor detainers. Operations first. | Democrat line: enforcement without a 287(g) push. | ||
| Casinos and local say | Primary was a casino revolt against Berger. Local veto is the brand. | Not a casino candidate. Health and schools first. | ||
| Housing and zoning preemption | Keep towns in charge of growth. Local ‘no’ stays a no. | No published housing plank. Party line: state rules that override a local ban on more units. | ||
| Data centers — jobs vs. the grid and the household bill | No published ordinance. Local-control record from the casino fight. Weigh tax and jobs against the resource load; keep the county veto. | Posted that Rockingham and Guilford should regulate locally: special-use rules, closed-loop cooling, and a guarantee the load does not raise local bills. | ||
| Election rules | Photo ID and citizenship checks. | Oppose new proof-of-citizenship hurdles. | ||
| Roads and rural Guilford / Rockingham | No published roads plank. Infer: DOT money to county roads, not just the urban core. | No published roads plank. Campaign emphasis is healthcare and schools, not a DOT program. | — | |
| Who they caucus with | GOP Senate. One seat toward a veto-proof majority. | Democratic minority. One seat against that majority. |
Property-tax levy limit (HB 1089)
No House/Senate vote yet. Aligns with the cap-the-growth side as a sheriff-tax hawk.
Democratic nominee. Party caucus opposed the levy-limit amendment.
Reappraisal moratorium (SB 889)
Local-control sheriff. Backed state relief when counties overshot values.
Would keep more of the decision in Raleigh Democrats’ spending frame.
School choice vs. county school operating money
Republican caucus: Opportunity Scholarships stay. Local schools compete.
Rejects vouchers. Put the dollar back in the county formula.
Teacher pay (SB 257 — 8% avg, $48k start)
GOP-written budget Stein signed. Page was not yet seated; his caucus passed it.
Supports the enacted raise. Wants a larger next step.
Medicaid and rural hospitals
Work rules and anti-fraud. Rockingham hospitals need a solvent program.
Protect expansion. Physician lens on coverage.
Crime, jails, and ICE detainers
Sitting sheriff. Honor detainers. Operations first.
Democrat line: enforcement without a 287(g) push.
Casinos and local say
Primary was a casino revolt against Berger. Local veto is the brand.
Not a casino candidate. Health and schools first.
Housing and zoning preemption
Keep towns in charge of growth. Local ‘no’ stays a no.
No published housing plank. Party line: state rules that override a local ban on more units.
Data centers — jobs vs. the grid and the household bill
No published ordinance. Local-control record from the casino fight. Weigh tax and jobs against the resource load; keep the county veto.
Posted that Rockingham and Guilford should regulate locally: special-use rules, closed-loop cooling, and a guarantee the load does not raise local bills.
Election rules
Photo ID and citizenship checks.
Oppose new proof-of-citizenship hurdles.
Roads and rural Guilford / Rockingham
No published roads plank. Infer: DOT money to county roads, not just the urban core.
No published roads plank. Campaign emphasis is healthcare and schools, not a DOT program.
Who they caucus with
GOP Senate. One seat toward a veto-proof majority.
Democratic minority. One seat against that majority.
If these are your District 26 priorities
This district just fired the most powerful man in Raleigh over casinos and home-county control. The November election is not a rerun of that primary. Rather, it is a referendum on whether the next senator votes with the levy-limit, ICE, voucher, and election-rule majority or against it.
Page has no HB 1089 roll call. He has a sheriff’s record and a primary that was a local-control revolt. Luking’s case is Medicaid expansion, teacher pay, and a Democratic caucus. Both men pass the data-center load test on this card. On tax cap, detainers, casinos, and election rules — Page is the closer fit.
- Sources (public record)
- Ballotpedia SD-26 · March 2026 primary (Page 13,135 – Berger 13,112) · Herald-Sun on Page v. Kevin Berger suit · Civitas R+9 rating · Our Piedmont HB 1089 brief · Steve Luking 4 NC on data-center special-use rules (Mar. 30, 2026) · SB 257 teacher-pay budget (signed July 7, 2026)
Our Piedmont Education Foundation · 301 S Elm Street, Suite 605, Greensboro, NC 27401. This page is voter education. It is not an endorsement of, or opposition to, either candidate. Draft for internal review · August 28, 2026.