MSEA-SEIU LOCAL 1989
FEDERAL CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE
MSEA-SEIU Political Department
65 State St, PO Box 1072
Augusta, ME 04332-1072
July 16, 2006
Dear Mr. Graham:
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to fill out your Federal
Candidate Questionnaire, a copy of which is enclosed. As you can
see, each page of the questionnaire is followed by a typed page
with my answers to the questions on that page.
In this era of corporate domination of the political process,
it is imperative that we elect to office people who understand
that workers are the underpinnings of this nation, holding everything
together. Workers are the force that keeps the economy going and
the country moving forward.
I would like to impress upon you that, as a candidate and as
a citizen, I am not only pro-union, I am pro-labor. By that I
mean that I fully support the right of workers to organize, and
will do everything I can to guarantee that right. But I also recognize
that, on some issues, government needs to take over the struggle
that unions have shouldered for far too long.
One such struggle is the minimum wage as a living wage, a position
I have long held. Another is national single-payer health care,
something that is long overdue in this country. Both of these
issues are critical for all workers, unionized and non-unionized.
If government can take over, and solve, these two issues and others
like it that affect all workers, then union organizing can become
less contentious and more focused on the unique aspects of a given
employment situation. Wouldn't it be great, for instance, not
to have to trade off wage increases for lower health care premiums?
As you know, my dad was a steelworker in Youngstown, Ohio his
entire working life. I am the first member of my family to graduate
from college. I am proud of my working-class roots, and I understand
the importance of good jobs and a sound economy from that perspective.
I urge you to keep that in mind in your endorsement deliberations.
Jean Hay Bright
I affirmatively seek the endorsement and support of MSEA-SEIU, its members, and their families. In seeking this endorsement, I pledge to support the rights of workers to join a union and collectively bargain. I understand that as a community leader, I may be called upon to help workers form unions, including speaking with employers and urging them to respect these same rights. Further, as an elected official, I will maintain regular contact with MSEA-SEIU Local leaders and members. Any campaign contributions I may receive is from MSEA-SEIU members who voluntarily give small monthly donations.
Signed Jean Hay Bright July 16, 2006
Office sought - U.S. Senate
Key contact person & phone number - David Bright 207-234-4224
EMPLOYEE CHOICE/LABOR STANDARDS
The right to form a union and engage in collective bargaining is enshrined in U.S. and international human rights laws, but for many U.S. workers it is a right that exists only on paper. More and more, workers who join together to form unions face intense employer opposition. The law giving working people the legal right to form a union through the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) elections is so weak that it is becoming irrelevant for workers seeking to improve their lives. Instead of a workers' rights law, it has become a structure for management to pressure and intimidate workers to reject unionization.
- The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) would require employers
to honor their workers' decision to join a union after a majority
of them have signed a union authorization card (a process also
known as "card-check") or petition verified by the National
Labor Relations Board or other neutral third party; establishes
first contract mediation and arbitration; and creates new meaningful
penalties against employers who interfere with, coerce, or fire
workers for attempting to join a union. This bill would amend
the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act to allow workers to form unions as
they did when the Wagner Act became law in 1935. If elected,
will you co-sponsor the bi-partisan Employee Free Choice Act
(S. 842/H.R. 1696) which was introduced in the 109th Congress
by Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) and
Representatives George Miller (D-CA) AND Peter King (R-NY)?
YES. The "Card-Check" majority process just
makes sense. I will gladly co-sponsor the Employee Free Choice
Act (S. 842) when I get to the U.S. Senate.
- If elected, will you publicly support workers who are forming
unions by reaffirming the importance of unions to our communities
and by taking actions such as contacting employers and urging
them to not interfere with employee free choice, issuing public
statements, honoring picket lines, attending rallies, sponsoring
public forums, and otherwise supporting union organizing?
YES. I am firmly and publicly pro-union and
pro-labor. In fact, I have joined several picket lines, rallies
and press conferences in the last year - in support of fired
DHL workers in Brewer, in support of IBEW technicians in Lewiston
and Portland working without a contract at Channel 13 TV,
in support of EMMC workers in Bangor wishing to unionize,
and in opposition to the NRLB proposed rule which would make
mid-level supervisors ineligible for union membership. I have
repeatedly spoken out on labor issues over the course of this
campaign, as well as the two federal primary campaigns I have
been in, for Congress in 1994 and for U.S. Senate in 1996.
- All across the country, health care costs are sky-rocketing
and services are quickly being priced out of reach of working
families. Each year, Americans are seeing double-digit increases
in the cost of health care. More than 45 million people are
uninsured and increasing numbers of working families are losing
their employer-sponsored health care coverage.
- Will you support federal legislation that provides
accessible, affordable, quality health care for all Americans
YES, I will support federal legislation that
provides accessible, affordable, quality health care for
all Americans. The establishment of national single-payer
health care has been one of the key issues in my campaign.
- Will you support federal legislation that incentivizes
employer-based health insurance and penalizes employers
that fail to provide benefits to employees and instead rely
heavily on public benefits?
YES, until we implement national health care
(which is my ultimate goal), I will support federal legislation
that encourages through incentives employer-based health
insurance and penalizes employers that fail to provide
benefits to employees and instead rely heavily on public
benefits. Maryland's approach with Wal-Mart, requiring
a sizeable contribution based on payroll towards that
state's indigent health care program, looks to be a successful
approach. But again, a national health care plan is my
- Will you support federal legislation enabling states
to enact comprehensive health care reform?
YES, until we implement national health care,
I will support federal legislation enabling states to
enact comprehensive health care reform. Given the flexibility,
states can "try out" different models, and their results,
both good and bad, can be helpful in setting up a national
plan. Dirigo Health is one such plan - a work in progress,
with adjustments that need to be made, but a good start
for Maine citizens.
- Will you support efforts to control rising health care
costs, including drug costs, in order to make coverage more
affordable for workers and retirees?
YES, I will support efforts to control rising
health care costs, including drug costs, in order to make
coverage more affordable for workers and retirees. The
first step, of course, is to remove the "no negotiations
for lower prices" clause in the abominable Medicare Part
D drug program. Olympia Snowe voted for that monstrosity
in 2003, knowing it would provide a windfall for drug
companies. That vote is inexcusable on that point alone.
But the whole Medicare Part D concept is flawed, because
it is not "single-payer," (with some 44 different options
from different insurance companies), and as such is not
only confusing but inefficient and not cost-effective.
- The new Medicare prescription drug law does little to help
most seniors and people with disabilities with their drug bills
and nothing to control skyrocketing drug prices while providing
tens of billions of dollars in new profits to drug companies
and private insurance companies. Will you support legislation
that would fundamentally change this law to do the following?
- Preserve traditional Medicare and prevent private plans
from undermining the Medicare Program through higher payments
and targeting the healthiest seniors?
YES, I will support legislation to preserve
traditional Medicare and prevent private plans from undermining
the Medicare program through higher payments and targeting
the healthiest seniors.
- Improve the coverage by eliminating gaps in coverage
and making it more affordable in terms of premiums and cost-sharing?
YES, I will support legislation to improve
the coverage by eliminating gaps in coverage and making
it more affordable in terms of premiums and cost sharing.
- Control drug prices, including requiring the Secretary
of Health and Human Services to use the bargaining power
of 40 million beneficiaries to negotiate for better drug
prices and allow for the re-importation of safe and cheaper
YES, I will support legislation to control
drug prices, including requiring the Secretary of Health
and Human Services to use the bargaining power of 40 million
beneficiaries to negotiate for better drug prices and
allow for the re-importation of safe and cheaper prescription
The inclusion of the "no negotiations"
clause in Medicare Part D, which Senator Snowe voted for,
was a clear pay-off to drug companies.
The reasons touted for the necessity
of the ban on re-importation of prescription drugs were
all illegitimate and designed to deflect attention from
the real problem - the unconscionably high cost of prescription
drugs in this country. I am glad the ban appears to be
on the way out.
- Eliminate the discriminatory treatment of retirees
who have employer-provided prescription drug coverage. Until
we get national health care, the contractual promise of
employer-provided prescription drug coverage to retirees
YES, I will support legislation to eliminate
the discriminatory treatment of retirees who have employer-provided
prescription drug coverage. Until we get national health
care, the contractual promise of employer-provided prescription
drug coverage to retirees should stand.
- If elected, what changes would you propose to expand existing
programs, such as Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance
Until we get national health care, we will need
to fund these two programs (Medicaid and SCHIP), and expand
them as needed. Public health is a national security issue,
and must be addressed as such.
- Will you oppose any effort to block grant the Medicaid
YES, I will oppose any effort to block grant
the Medicaid program, since such block grants tend to
diminish over time. The exception would be if a state
requests such a block grant, to be used at its discretion
in the implementation of an "experimental" plan for better
coverage of its citizens.
- Will you oppose legislation that would establish a
voucher-based system of health care for Medicaid recipients?
YES, I will oppose legislation that would
establish a voucher-based system of health care for Medicaid
recipients. Again, national single-payer health care is
- Will you support the following policies to make long term
care more affordable and accessible?
- Encourage individuals to purchase long-term care insurance
by making premiums tax deductible?
YES, I would encourage individuals to purchase
long-term care insurance by making premiums tax deductible.
Also, I would push to extend the time limits of the long-term
care provisions under Medicare.
- Create a federal long term care benefit that provides
affordable and accessible quality care?
YES, I would support the creation of a federal
long term care benefit that provides affordable and accessible
- Due to the critical problems of understaffing and the use
of mandatory overtime in many hospitals, a staggering number
of nurses are leaving for other less stressful jobs or retiring
early. This has created a nursing crisis in our nation's hospitals
and other health care facilities. The Institute of Medicine
has issued a number of reports highlighting the almost 100,000
deaths each year from accidental medical errors and the importance
of working conditions, including adequate staffing, in ensuring
patient safety. There is also clear evidence that as levels
of nurse staffing rise, the quality of care improves and the
number of medical errors decreases. SEIU is working to pass
legislation both on the state and federal levels that would
help address these problems.
- If elected, will you co-sponsor and support passage
of the Safe Nursing and Patient Care Act (S.351/H.R.791),
introduced by Reps. Pete Stark (D-CA) and Steven LaTourette
(R-OH), which would establish a federal limit on the maximum
hours a nurse can work in most Medicare-funded health facilities?
YES, if elected, I would co-sponsor and support
passage of the Safe Nursing and Patient Care Act, which
would establish a federal limit on the maximum hours a
nurse can work in most Medicare-funded health facilities.
I would furthermore support a federal limit on the maximum
hours for student doctors in residency, since studies
have shown that tired residents forced to work long hours
without sleep make serious, and sometimes fatal, mistakes.
- If elected, will you co-sponsor and support passage
of the Nurse Staffing Standards for Patient Safety and Quality
Care Act (H.R. 1222), introduced by Rep. Jan Schakowsky
(D-IL), which would establish minimum nurse-to-patient ratios
in hospitals to help ensure patient safety and quality care?
YES, if elected, I will co-sponsor and support
passage of the Nurse Staffing Standards for Patient Safety
and Quality Care Act, which would establish minimum nurse-to-patient
ratios in hospitals to help ensure patient safety and
- If elected, will you support and co-sponsor legislation
that would help establish nursing home staffing standards and
improve the quality of care for nursing home residents?
YES, if elected, I will support and co-sponsor
legislation that would help establish nursing home staffing
standards and improve the quality of care for nursing home
I would also encourage the establishment of more small "home
environment" facilities, where patients have their own rooms,
and the atmosphere is friendlier and less institutionalized.
This is a "quality of life" issue, and is being done cost-effectively
in a few areas. As the baby-boom generation ages, this issue
will only grow in importance.
Immigrants work hard, pay taxes, and are essential and productive
contributors to our economy and our communities. We need comprehensive
immigration reform that recognizes the reality of the modern
American workplace and rewards work. As the largest union of
immigrant workers, SEIU is committed to reform that:
Creates an orderly, controlled process for immigration
with realistic limits to replace the deadly, chaotic, and illegal
flow of workers to jobs. The nation needs a new worker visa
program with an earned path to citizenship that protects the
wages and working conditions of U.S. and immigrant workers and
meaningfully enforces both the program's rules and existing
Provides an earned path to citizenship for undocumented
immigrants already working hard and paying taxes.
Restores the rule of law and enhances security by instituting
smart inspections and strategies that crack down on criminal
smugglers, getting tough with lawbreaking employers, and reducing
illegal immigration. Such a system will better enable the nation
to know who is already here and allow our overburdened law enforcement
and border patrol to focus on protecting Americans from those
who might do us harm.
Reunites families who are divided by restrictive laws
and bureaucratic delays. Those waiting in line should have their
admission expedited and those admitted on work visas should
be able to keep their nuclear families intact.
Promotes citizenship and civic participation by providing
adult immigrants with quality English instruction, preparing
them for citizenship and providing them with opportunities to
move up the economic ladder.
- If elected, will you support comprehensive immigration
reform that adheres to these principles?
YES, if elected, I will you support comprehensive
immigration reform that adheres to all of these principles
(with the one exception noted below):
I DO NOT AGREE with this one provision:
"Provides an earned path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
already working hard and paying taxes."
That "earned path to citizenship," in my opinion, is the path
laid out in our immigration policy.
Except for that one exclusion, everything in your comprehensive
immigration reform package, as detailed above, is in agreement
with my stated position on immigration:
- Enforce the existing labor laws on American employers
who willingly and knowingly hire undocumented workers.
- Make the minimum wage a living wage, so more Americans
can afford to take these low-wage jobs.
- Implement national health care, so more employers
can afford to offer jobs that pay a living wage.
- Restructure the nation's immigration policy to reflect
the reality on the ground.
- Get the U.S. out of NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO, and other
"free trade" treaties that have wrecked economies around
the world, including ours.
- Will you support/co-sponsor the Bi-Partisan DREAM Act
or the Student Adjustment Act which removes penalties against
children of undocumented immigrants who are seeking to further
their education? (This legislation has not yet been re-introduced
in the 109th Congress, but it was introduced in the 108th Congress
in the Senate by Senator Hatch (R-UT) and by Reps. Cannon (R-UT)
and Berman (D-CA) in the House.)
MIXED ANSWER. If the children of undocumented
immigrants were born in this country, they are U.S. citizens,
and all the appropriate federal programs should be available
to them. If the status of their parents is the sole reason
for these penalties, then I can see removing those penalties.
If the students and their parents are all undocumented immigrants,
then the student should apply for a foreign student visa.
TAXATION AND FISCAL POLICY
The Administration and the Congress have had a destructive fiscal
and taxation policy over the last 4 years. They have turned
our country's largest surplus into our largest deficit, putting
at risk low interest rates, and cutting deeply into future funding
for infrastructure, health care, and education. Many of these
tax cuts were passed under budgetary gimmicks, with expiration
dates, in order to be part of "balanced budgets."
- Will you oppose making these tax cuts "permanent"?
YES, I will oppose making these destructive tax
cuts "permanent." In fact, I am in favor of rescinding all
those tax cuts for the rich, and putting them back on the
course of paying their fair share for the privilege of living
in this great nation.
These tax cuts have been also heavily skewed, with a bias
that allows large corporations and the wealthiest Americans
to get off tax-free, while the percentage of federal tax paid
by the middle class and working families has risen.
- Will you oppose further tax cuts that increase tax unfairness?
YES, I will oppose further tax cuts that increase
tax unfairness. And I will work hard to put fairness and balance
back into our tax code, including corporate tax rates that
need to be readjusted, so that corporations once again pay
their fair share.
RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY
Adopted in 1977, the Government Pension Offset reduces the Social
Security benefit of public employees with public pensions who
are eligible for benefits as a spouse or widow. The offset reduces
the amount of the benefit by two-thirds of the individual's
public pension. The 1983 Windfall Elimination Provision affects
public employees who have worked in a job covered by Social
Security, and who also have a public pension. Public employees
affected by this provision could see their estimated Social
Security benefit reduced by as much as half.
- Will you oppose any attempts to privatize and undermine
the Social Security System, in whole or in part?
YES, I will oppose any attempts to privatize
and undermine the Social Security system, IN FULL, or
- Will you support reform to strengthen the Social Security
YES, I will support reform to strengthen
the Social Security system. These efforts may include
raising or eliminating the cap on income contributions.
Making the minimum wage a living wage would also put more
funds into the Social Security system.
- Will you co-sponsor bipartisan legislation (H.R. 147/S.
619) that reforms the government pension offset and windfall
elimination provisions which unfairly penalizes public sector
retirees and their families?
YES, I will co-sponsor bipartisan legislation
that reforms the government pension offset and windfall elimination
provisions which unfairly penalizes public sector retirees
and their families. I will also actively push for a resolution
on this issue. I feel very strongly that people who separately
earn benefits under Social Security and under government retirement
plans should be eligible for benefits under BOTH plans. In
the current economic climate, people may hold many different
jobs over the course of their working life. This punitive
arrangement may discourage talented people from taking government
jobs after having a successful career in the private sector.
- When Social Security was established, state and local
government employees were excluded. Many state and local governments
then set up their own retirement system with a mirror employee-employer
contribution. Federal law was then changed in the mid-1950's
and governments were allowed to opt in voluntarily. However,
many stayed out, content with their own system of contributions
and benefits. Now, there are proposals to mandate the inclusion
of all state and local public employees, which would cripple
the existing systems (i.e. States could not continue to contribute
8% of payroll to their own system if they had to do the same
to FICA). Will you oppose proposals to mandate the inclusion
of state and local government employees into the Social Security
NO. Pension plans across the country are in
crisis. Private plans have not been adequately funded and
leave workers and retirees out in the cold when corporations
go bankrupt. State governments under-fund retirement plans
to deal with temporary shortfalls in their general funds.
While termed "temporary," such shortfalls have cumulative
negative effects on the plan's earnings down the road. Wild
fluctuations in the stock market, as we experienced in the
late 1990s, put many funds at risk.
Under these changing circumstances, it may
be time to rethink this issue, looking to the long-term. Among
the mix, Social Security is looking like the most stable and
dependable of the options - made more so with the inclusion
of this large block of workers.
I can see a split system, with current employees
under existing state programs being given the option of continuing
until their own retirements, but new hires being put immediately
under Social Security, with additional personal retirement
accounts, such as 401K or other plans, also made available.
Such additional personal retirement accounts must be "portable,"
moving with the employee if he/she changes jobs.
Also, this all presumes that the Government
Offset problem is resolved first.
- Will you vote to increase federal funding in education,
such as Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, Title
I under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, No Child
Left Behind, and Head Start, Medicaid , and other programs where
federal mandates are under-funded?
YES, I will vote to increase federal funding
in education where federal mandates are under-funded - PROVIDED
the underlying program is worth supporting. I believe that
federal mandates come with the responsibility to fund those
programs mandated. Several you mention qualify in that regard
- Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, Title I
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Head Start,
However, programs such as No Child Left
Behind, which has major problems both in concept and in implementation,
would not get funding support from me, as a means to kill
the program outright and start over, if I can't get the law
changed or revoked directly.
- Will you support additional efforts to help states address
the fiscal crises that are forcing them to cut services and
jobs, including voting to make federal payments for Medicaid
more immediately and quickly responsive to changes in the business
YES, of course, I will support additional efforts
to help states address the fiscal crises that are forcing
them to cut services and jobs, including voting to make federal
payments for Medicaid more immediately and quickly responsive
to changes. This should be straight-forward, but it would
appear that all accounting systems at the federal level have
computer problems. That too is a major issue that needs to
be not just addressed, but solved.
Eighteen states have agreed to simplify their sales tax definitions
and enter into a compact that will eliminate red tape and overhead
costs for business, level the playing field for local merchants,
and provide a mechanism to collect the largely uncollected sales
taxes on Internet purchases. This would amount to an estimated
$36 billion in extra revenue for state and local governments
by 2008. The Congress must ratify the compact in order for it
to go into effect.
- Will you vote for the Sales Tax Simplification and Fairness
Act, which ratifies the interstate compact to simplify sales
YES, I would vote for the Sales Tax Simplification
and Fairness Act, which ratifies the interstate compact to
simplify sales taxes. I support the concept that sales tax
should be applied to internet sales. States are losing billions
of dollars of needed revenue under the current exemption of
such sales from state sales tax.
PUBLICLY FUNDED SERVICES
However, this proposal is just one to be
considered. Another would have internet vendors apply the
sales tax where the vendor is located, not where the customer
is located. For example, L.L. Bean would apply Maine sales
tax to all its sales, in its store in Freeport, in orders
taken over the phone or over the internet.
The other arena that needs to be addressed
is the lack of sales tax applied to interstate shipments of
items bought on-site. For instance, if you stand at the L.L.
Bean counter and buy a couple of shirts, and have them shipped
to your home in Maryland, no sales tax applies. That loophole
needs to be closed.
Resources for child care assistance help low-income working
families get and keep jobs and ensure that their children get
a strong start so they can be ready for school. If significant
new child care funds are not made available, fewer and fewer
low-income families will get the help they need. Still, federal
funds have been frozen for the past several years. States will
be forced to continue to cut back eligibility for child care
assistance, increase co-payments for the parents who do receive
help, and cut back on reimbursement rates to already low-paid
child care providers. More than 2 million children receive assistance
through the federal child care block grant (Child Care and Development
Block Grant or CCDBG); however, estimates indicate that current
funding covers only 1 in 7 eligible children.
- Will you vote to increase federal funding for child care
YES, I will vote to increase federal funding
for child care assistance. Particularly for low-income parents,
such assistance is the only way out of poverty and toward
a more productive working life. Low-wage jobs do not pay enough
to allow for paid child-care and the other necessities of
life. Without government support of these programs, these
parents with entry-level skills could not afford to place
their children in quality programs and still have enough money
left to pay their household bills. With the five-year lifetime
restrictions under federal welfare programs, without government-sponsored
child care assistance, these working parents are placed in
a serious financial bind, and their children might be placed
in risky situations while the parents are at work.
- Will you take steps to help family child care providers
win the freedom to form a union and have a voice at work?
YES, I will take steps to help family child
care providers win the freedom to form a union and have a
voice at work. This is a "freedom" they should already have,
but one that has been undermined in recent years, by the anti-union
Republicans and the Bush administration. Child care workers
are underpaid and under-appreciated. I have long advocated
for a minimum wage that is a living wage, which would be a
start in getting these workers adequately compensated for
the care they give to children in their important formative
Head Start has been around for 35 years
and it has been proven in many studies to improve the educational
chances of low-income children. We know Head Start children
are successful and that accountability measures are already
built into the program. But unfortunately, only 3 out of 5
eligible children are served by Head Start. In the proposed
FY 2006 budget, it is likely that there will be no dedicated
resources to improve the quality of Head Start programs, including
salary increases for hard-working Head Start workers, or resources
to provide services to Head Start families.
- Will you vote to increase federal Head Start funding
by at least $1 billion to adequately meet the need for quality
YES, I will vote to increase federal Head Start
funding by at least $1 billion to adequately meet the need
for quality Head Start. With its proven record of success,
this is one government program that needs to be fully-funded.
Whether it's a bomb threat, burglary, or natural disaster, some
two-million private security officers in America are responsible
for spotting dangers in our buildings and ensuring our safety.
They search packages, look for suspicious persons, and handle
evacuations and other emergency, crime, and accident response.
Stable and well-trained security officers who are familiar with
their building, its tenants, visitors, the surrounding neighborhood
and local law enforcement are our first line of defense. But,
with job turnover rates among private security officers as high
as 300 percent and inadequate training, many officers are ill-prepared
to deal with the security challenges of a post 9/11 world.
In New York, SEIU has teamed up with employers and community
groups to establish a state-of-the-art training program that
makes New York City apartment buildings safer and more secure.
The training program increases officers' security awareness
and equips them with best practices for identifying, reporting
and responding to suspicious behavior. This training enables
officers to provide high quality information to emergency service
- Would you support joint labor/management efforts to raise
security standards, such as the training program recently adopted
in NYC? Would you support allocating federal funds to such programs?
YES, I would support joint labor/management
efforts to raise security standards, such as the training
program recently adopted in NYC. I would also support allocating
federal funds to such programs, possibly under the auspices
of the Department of Homeland Security.
- Do you agree that companies who bid on federal security
contracts should be required to demonstrate that they have not
recently violated any federal laws, including labor laws?
YES, at an absolute minimum, I agree that companies
who bid on federal security contracts should be required to
demonstrate that they have not recently violated any federal
laws, including labor laws, such as the hiring of undocumented
workers. "Recently" is a relative term and must be codified.
Also, the severity of the violation of any federal laws must
be taken into account. Serious violations should bar contractors
from any further government work, ever, with the restrictions
traveling with the company's officers/owners, not with the
company that might be disbanded only to reemerge under another
- Would you support independent and thorough inter-departmental
investigations of security contractors at sensitive facilities,
for companies who have been found by government agencies to
have had significant deficiencies at least one such facility?
YES, I do support independent
and thorough inter-departmental investigations of security
contractors at sensitive facilities, for companies who have
been found by government agencies to have had significant
deficiencies at least one such facility.
This also speaks to the issue of the problems
we are having with the privatization of several functions
that government agencies and government employees should be
doing. The lack of oversight and accountability in so many
of these private contracts is a real and growing concern.