CANDIDATE STATEMENT

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.

1. 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.
   

2. 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.
   

   HEALTH CARE
   
   
3. 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.
   
   
   1. 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.
      

   2. 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 goal.
      

   3. 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.
      

   4. 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.
      

4. 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?
   
   
   1. 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.
      

   2. 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.
      

   3. 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 drugs?
      

      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 drugs.
         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.
      

   4. 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?
      

      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.
      

5. If elected, what changes would you propose to expand existing programs, such as Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)?
   

   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.

   1. Will you oppose any effort to block grant the Medicaid program?
      

      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.
      

   2. 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 the answer.
      

6. Will you support the following policies to make long term care more affordable and accessible?
   
   
   1. 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.
      

   2. 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 quality care.
      

7. 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.
   
   
   1. 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.
      

   2. 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 quality care.
      

8. 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 residents.
   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.
   

   IMMIGRATION
   
   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 labor laws.
   
   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.
   
   
9. 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:
   

   1. Enforce the existing labor laws on American employers who willingly and knowingly hire undocumented workers.
      
   2. Make the minimum wage a living wage, so more Americans can afford to take these low-wage jobs.
      
   3. Implement national health care, so more employers can afford to offer jobs that pay a living wage.
      
   4. Restructure the nation's immigration policy to reflect the reality on the ground.
      
   5. Get the U.S. out of NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO, and other "free trade" treaties that have wrecked economies around the world, including ours.
      
      

10. 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."
    
    
11. 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.
    

12. 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
    
    
13. 
    
    1. 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 IN PART
       

    2. Will you support reform to strengthen the Social Security system?
       

       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.
       

    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.
    
    
14. 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.
    

15. 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 system?
    

    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.
    

    STATE BUDGETS
    
    
16. 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, Medicaid, etc.
       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.
    

17. 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 cycle.
    

    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.
    
    
18. Will you vote for the Sales Tax Simplification and Fairness Act, which ratifies the interstate compact to simplify sales taxes?
    

    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.
       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.
    

    PUBLICLY FUNDED SERVICES
    
    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.
    
    
19. Will you vote to increase federal funding for child care assistance?
    

    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.
    

20. 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 years.
       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.
    

21. Will you vote to increase federal Head Start funding by at least $1 billion to adequately meet the need for quality Head Start?
    

    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.
    

    PROPERTY SERVICES
    
    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 personnel.
    
    
22. 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.
    

23. 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 name.
    

24. 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.