You are on page 1of 22

I also am running to give Maine people a choice, because the collective choice we make next November will have

huge consequences for us, our children and our grandchildren, and for all the people of Maine who, in Teddy Roosevelt’s words, yearn for “a more substantial equality of opportunity.” I am offering Maine people a real plan and vision for getting our economy growing again and getting Maine people back to work. Every corner of Maine harbors intense sparks of desire, determination, and vitality. To harness that energy and promise, Maine needs a vision that we can share and believe in, a government we can trust, and a governor who has the courage, the experience, the temperament, and the independence to lead the way. I welcome the challenge of leadership. I’ll make the tough choices and do the hard work that is required of a leader. I have worked hard my whole life – from cleaning cooking vats in a hospital kitchen, to building roads and parking cars, to working for Ed Muskie and President Carter, to building law firms and successful companies. My grandfather was an immigrant peddler who arrived alone and penniless in Bangor when he was 12 years old. He spoke no English. He began his life in this country by walking on the Airline (Route 9) from Bangor to Calais and back, selling notions to folks who lived along the road. Through hard work, grit, and determination – and with help from a family who took him under their wing – he started a business, got married, and had three daughters, who all graduated from college and the oldest of whom was my mother. My grandfather’s story is a story of opportunity, and for me equality of opportunity is what this campaign is all about – not just opportunity for the lucky, but opportunity for every man, woman, and child in Maine. We cannot guarantee success for anyone, but we must guarantee opportunity for success to everyone. Opportunity should be the product of deliberate policies and practices, not the random consequence of birth. Opportunity for all Mainers should be what the leaders of our state work to achieve – and indeed it is what we can achieve, if we have a vision, a plan, and a strategy. My background makes me uniquely poised to lead this effort. As a public servant, I helped craft America’s foundational environmental laws and managed the policies and budgets of federal energy, natural resources, science and environment agencies. As a strategist and lawyer for governments, business corporations, and citizens groups, I helped clients grapple with worldwide legal and public policy problems during a career in three law firms and two countries that spanned more than 35 years. As an active entrepreneur, businessman, and investor, I helped start and manage successful businesses, served on the boards of directors of private and public companies and advised and managed private and public philanthropic organizations. I hope you will read the book I spent much of the last year writing, “A State of Opportunity: A Plan to Build a Healthier, Smarter, Stronger, Younger and More Prosperous Maine”, which details my plans to lead Maine forward and which is available for free download on our campaign website, And I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss the issues of most

importance to you and to work with you to return Maine to a path of vitality and prosperity for all. Let us not waste this chance to make Maine the turnaround story of the century in America.

I. Collective Bargaining Rights:
The right to organize a union is a basic human right and a public good. Unions raise wages, increase benefits & retirement security, and improve workplace safety and working conditions for union members and for all workers. Unions helped build a middle class in this country. Unionization helps close gender and racial wage gaps and continues to be one of the most effective tools to address rising economic inequality and poverty. Unions also increase respect on the job, and they bring democracy and basic constitutional rights into the workplace. Will you support the right of all workers to form a union and collectively bargain over wages, benefits, and workplace conditions and oppose any efforts to repeal collective bargaining rights for Maine workers? Yes Comments: I have always supported and will always protect the right of workers to form and to join unions, and I have witnessed the important contributions that unions have made for decades in scores of Maine communities. I will zealously guard against interference in the process through which workers are permitted to decide whether to organize or not. I also deeply respect the laws and rules that govern the relationships between management and labor. While I work within that position to ensure that all Maine laws protect the rights of workers to engage in union formation and union contract activity, I do not anticipate that as Governor I will insert myself directly in disputes between workers and employers. My goal as Governor will be to create the conditions that will encourage investment and economic activity in our state, so that we can begin creating jobs again for all Maine workers, whether union or non-union. Our problem is not that we don’t have clear rules for forming a union; our problem is that Maine’s economy has been at a standstill for more than a decade. The reason why there is so little economic activity in Maine – why there is such a shortage of jobs, incomes and opportunity – is that we have no vision, no plan and no strategy for achieving success and we have priced ourselves out of prosperity. I have put forth a detailed plan to return Maine to a path of prosperity, where we will be both a great place to live and a great place to make a living, as detailed in A State of Opportunity. If elected, would you publicly support workers who are forming unions or seeking a union contract by reaffirming the importance of unions to our communities through actions including: No

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No No No No

Publicly speaking, attending rallies, or writing in support of union organizing drives and contract campaigns? Contacting employers and urging them to not interfere with workers’ freedom of association? Honoring (refusing to cross) picket lines? Supporting union boycotts? Have you ever crossed a picket line? If yes, please explain.

As noted above, I will work within my role as Governor to ensure that laws protecting the rights of workers to form and join unions are upheld and enforced. I deeply respect the laws and rules that govern the relationships between management and labor. I will zealously guard against interference in the process through which workers are permitted to decide whether to organize or not.

So-called “Right to Work” laws: Under current law, no one can be required to join a union, but unions are legally required to equally and fairly represent members and non-members alike--or risk being sued. In some collective bargaining agreements labor and management agree to include a “union security” or “fair share” clause, which requires all workers in a bargaining unit to share the costs of collective bargaining & representation. A “right to work” law would make it illegal for workers and employers to include this clause in a contract. Will you oppose any “right to work” law in the private or public sector? Yes Comments: I will oppose “right to work” legislation (which arguably prohibits labor and management from negotiating “union security” clauses that require all members of a bargaining unit to either belong to the union, or contribute to its services) so long as “union security” clauses are negotiated openly between unions and employers and so long as the collections from nonunion employees truly reflect only the costs of collective bargaining. No

II. Health Care:
Healthcare: Maine and American workers are facing a growing healthcare crisis. Many workers are one sickness or injury away from financial ruin or bankruptcy; many have no insurance at all or are underinsured; healthcare costs dominate collective bargaining; and almost every union must battle and sacrifice merely to sustain health benefits. As a state and a nation, we believe we can do better than this. Recent federal reforms took positive steps but will not solve the healthcare crisis. The Maine AFL-CIO strongly supports a universal, single payer health insurance system as the way to solve our healthcare crisis. We support a publicly financed, single payer system based on the following principles: 1.) Everybody in, nobody out; 2.) Coverage is portable and cradle to grave; 3.) Everyone has access to their provider of choice; 4.) Emphasize prevention; 5.) Equitable financing system; 6.) Eliminate private, for-profit insurance; 7.) Public oversight and common sense budgeting. Such a system saves money, is morally sound and much more efficient. Yes Yes No No Do you believe that healthcare is a human right? Will you publicly support a universal, single payer health care system in Maine that protects our human right to health care by providing health care as a public good to everyone through equitable public financing? Will you speak out publicly about the need to adopt a single payer healthcare system?



Comments: Whether they are old or young, employed or unemployed, whoever they are and wherever they live, all Mainers should have a medical home and access to primary and secondary preventive health care – because it is the right, fair and morally responsible thing to do and because it is the financially and economically smart thing to do. With universal access to essential health care services, Maine can muscle down our health care costs — while staying in the top tier of America’s healthiest places and making Maine more competitive as a place to live and to work. Lower health care costs will be a big part of the turnaround in the Maine economy under my administration, easing the burden of crushing premiums and creating jobs and opportunities for Maine workers. As I explain in A State of Opportunity, we need to apply traditional Maine concepts of value and innovation to our health care system. Rather than fighting the ACA, Maine should be actively managing its implementation in a way that works best for Mainers. I think the old arguments around single payer vs. private insurers miss the point. The important issue is not so much about who pays, but rather about what we pay for; by failing to focus enough on the importance of keeping people healthy, we find ourselves today in a situation where 60% of all of our health care dollars is spent on treating illnesses that were preventable. My plan will provide essential health care services for all Maine citizens at a cost that we can afford and that can be sustained. We will focus on keeping people healthy, so that we are not just paying for costly procedures after people get sick.

The ACA provides an extraordinary opportunity for us to innovate with healthcare delivery organized around Maine's not-for-profit hospitals and community health centers -- not around health insurance companies -- and with rewards and incentives for consumers' healthy lifestyles and caregivers' cost-effective performance. We missed significant opportunities to capitalize on that opportunity when Governor LePage vetoed the bill to expand the pool of those eligible for MaineCare earlier this year and when he rejected the opportunity for Maine to design its own health exchange – and probably about $100 million to do it. Nearly 70,000 low-income Mainers were expected to have qualified for access through the expansion at relatively low cost to the state. The federal government’s obligation to cover the costs of newly qualified individuals would have remained at 100% for three years and then been reduced gradually to 90% in 2020, while it currently reimburses the state only 64% of the cost for current MaineCare recipients. Maine lost about $600 million in that bad bargain. MaineCare provides necessary and humane medical services to many of our friends and neighbors and serves as a safety net for so many, including low-income mothers, pregnant women, individuals with disabilities, and individuals in nursing homes. Without doubt, the extension of federal funding to many of these would improve and save lives. It would also save money by providing critical preventive care services and avoiding the need for highcost emergency room treatment.

III. Building an Economy that Works for All:
In December of 2007, the nation entered the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression. In reality, workers have been feeling the backslide for decades as changes in our economy have put the squeeze on middle- and working- class families. The average inflation-adjusted hourly wage hasn’t risen in nearly 50 years. Families are getting ahead by working longer hours or more jobs. Workers in the United States now work more hours per year than any other industrialized country. Despite working more hours, workers are not reaping the benefits of their labor. Here is a look at productivity and wages. Productivity is how much a worker produces in an hour, and it grows when workers are healthier, better educated, and when they work with better machinery or technology. Through the early 1970s, workers shared the profits from increased productivity, but then, the lines began to diverge. Productivity soared, but wages leveled. This gap between wages and productivity is one key factor in soaring income inequality. Flat wages mean that working families began to borrow more -- to buy cars, homes, computers, and to pay for college.

At the same time, tax structures shifted so that corporations paid a shrinking % of tax revenues and individuals paid more. During World War II, corporate taxes paid forty cents of every dollar of tax revenue the federal government took in. In the 1960s, corporate taxes made up 20 cents of every dollar. Today, it’s less than 10 cents of every dollar. For the past forty years, taxes have been shifted from corporations to individuals, and from the wealthy to working people. These changes, along with the shift to an economy dominated by the financial sector, have produced an economy defined by record levels of income and wealth inequality. The average CEO pay is 343 times the earnings of the average worker. The nation’s wealthiest 1 percent controls 34.6 percent of the country’s net worth, a larger discrepancy than at any point in our country’s history. All of these domestic changes have been exacerbated by dramatic shifts in the global economy, including the proliferation of so-called “free” trade agreements that encourage a race-to-the-bottom in wages, labor standards, environmental protections

and more among nations competing for jobs. It is no doubt that the challenges facing workers and policy-makers are large. The Maine AFL-CIO believes that in order to build an economy that works for all of us, we need to take a comprehensive approach. The fundamental components of rebuilding our economy here in Maine are: • Making strategic investments and developing an infrastructure--from roads to high speed internet access--that supports jobs of the 21st Century; • Investing in education and training that prepares young students, the unemployed, and workers in transition for high demand, good quality jobs; • Pursuing public policies that close the inequality gap and in turn, stimulate the economy by putting more money into the pockets of working people; • Guaranteeing and promoting the basic right of workers to organize and collectively bargain for a better life; • Ensuring that all workers enjoy basic labor standards that allow them to meet their economic needs, work in a safe environment that minimizes the risks of injury & occupational disease, and find a balance between work and family; • Maintaining a strong safety net for the most vulnerable among us including the unemployed, injured workers, the working class & poor, and others. Economic Inequality: Economic inequality is reaching record levels. What would you do at the state level to close the staggering inequality gap? Comments: Each of us would do well to spend at least a little bit of time thinking about the social contract that binds us together – about “the parable of the Good Samaritan and its moral analogs” – about the growing inequities that no political palaver can hide, about Maine’s bedrock values of fairness and opportunity and how those are too often ill-served today. Right now, in Maine and in America, there is more and more inequity in our society, there are more and more of our neighbors who are struggling, and is less and less cooperation to do anything about it. I agree with the principles for rebuilding our economy that you have outlined above, and believe we can achieve these goals. Great value remains in notions of common goals and mutual enterprise, where burdens, obligations and rewards are fairly shared, and that government policies ought to enable, not inhibit, real opportunities for each of us to make the most of our respective talents and ought to encourage us to pursue those opportunities.

Plant Closures & Good Faith Offer of Sale: Communities across the state have been devastated by the closure of mills and manufacturing facilities. Often companies close factories and refuse other businesses the right to purchase and keep them open. Owners of these factories have often made significant financial gains from the labor of their workers and have benefited from state and local tax breaks. We believe large corporations have a responsibility to the communities they operate in. In order to keep businesses running and jobs in our communities, will you support legislation that would require companies that are closing to accept a good faith offer of sale from any business or employee organization that wants to buy and pay fair market value for the plant, equipment and inventory? Yes Comments: I agree that large corporations have a responsibility to the communities they operate in, and I will do everything sensible within my power as Governor to try to keep a Maine business operating. If a company was in trouble, and a shutdown loomed, I would work day and night to encourage and to help make happen a transaction that would transfer the ownership to a willing buyer, including an employee organization, who would keep the business open. I would not, however, support legislation that requires companies to sell out to certain entities. I think that doing so would have a chilling effect on investment in Maine at a time when we must do everything we can to make Maine a more attractive place in which to invest. I hope you will join me in making Maine a better place to do business. If we do that, and attract investment, we won’t need to worry so much about responding to plant closures. No

Telecommunications: Telecommunications decisions made over the last few years in Maine have had far reaching impacts on Maine communities, workers and our economy. What is your vision for telecommunications in Maine in terms of how it impacts Maine communities, economic development and the telecommunications workforce? *Comments (required): High quality, high-speed, state of the art telecommunications will allow many Maine workers to compete on a level footing with workers in every other state. The three-ring binder program is critical to Maine’s future, but we need to do even more to extend our networks – particularly in areas that must depend on cellular communications. Maine is a beautiful, friendly and safe place to live; with good telecommunications infrastructure, many more people can both live here and earn a decent living here.

Public Investments in Maine’s Workforce: Public investments that are made in construction projects, state purchasing or tax breaks should be tailored so that they benefit Maine workers and our economy as a whole. That was the principle set forth when Maine, like the federal government and most states, passed a prevailing wage law requiring that employees in public works construction projects – such as roads, bridges, public buildings, sewers, etc. – must be paid the “prevailing wage” for public works construction. The rationale behind prevailing wage laws is that state and federal governments, as major buyers in the construction sector, should not act to drive down wages. Research shows that prevailing wages help to stimulate the economy and do not add to the costs of public construction projects. Maine’s definition of “public works” does not include public school construction. Will you support requiring that any public school construction project that receives state funding should be required to adhere to state prevailing wage laws? Yes Comments: I believe that prevailing wage laws represent a band-aid approach when we need to be making much bigger changes – like lowering the costs of education and healthcare and making government work better – in order to attract to Maine investment that will provide jobs, incomes and opportunity. Indeed, I understand that “prevailing wage” requirements have actually kept some unionized companies in Maine from applying for stimulus money because the prevailing wage is actually higher than their existing union contracts. I hope that you will help me to grow the pie instead of trying to find different ways to slice up the one that we have now, which is far too small. No

Efficacy & Accountability in Tax Breaks: In 2010, tax expenditures (another name for tax breaks) for the two-year budgeting period were about $6.6 billion. That exceeds state spending by $1 billion. While many of these tax breaks benefit all Mainers, like sales tax exemptions on food or prescription drugs, other significant breaks are granted as economic incentives with the goal of creating jobs, attracting business to Maine and stimulating the economy. Unfortunately, there is little accountability within the system to ensure that companies who benefit from these programs create jobs, to examine the quality of those jobs, or to ensure that the programs result in long-term economic development for the state. The Pew Center on the States recently conducted a study and concluded that Maine was “trailing behind” and “not meeting any of the criteria for scope or quality of evaluation” when it came to examining the expenditures. Yes No Will you support a regular, more rigorous review of tax expenditures that includes an analysis of job creation and job quality? Will you support legislation that would allow the State to clawback tax breaks from companies that fail to meet job creation goals or for companies that move jobs out of state after accepting Maine tax breaks?



Comments: I was the only candidate in 2010 to seriously address tax expenditures, and I agree that we need to examine them all to ensure that they are fair and result in long-term economic development for Mainers. Each year we effectively spend hundreds of millions of dollars that are not collected because of tax breaks, deductions, and credits. That spending isn’t mentioned in the governor’s budget proposal and the legislature does not consider and appropriate it in the biennial budget but those tax breaks increase the tax burn on taxpayers on a dollar-for-dollar basis. That kind of backdoor spending might be tolerable, if we were confident that all of those tax breaks were accomplishing important objectives!but we can’t be confident, because we just don’t know. Many of those tax breaks were enacted years ago for purposes that seemed important at the time and that perhaps we could then afford. But for the most part, they’ve been on autopilot; most have never been closely evaluated to see if they’re still working, still needed, and still accomplishing their goals (if they ever did). They should be identified in our budget as expenditures that we have chosen to make. One of my top priorities is to reform Maine’s tax structure – all of it – in ways that will help us leverage our competitive advantages, create and protect opportunity, and grow our economy. As for clawbacks, we need to make sound deals in the first place with companies that have a good track record, pay good wages, and take advantage of Maine’s competitive advantages. Sound deals will contain remedies against companies that fail to live up to their responsibilities. Companies that don’t appreciate the advantages of Maine’s reliable workforce and great environment and are only looking for tax breaks and incentives probably aren’t a good fit.

Training the Workforce for Today’s Economy: A key component of growing Maine’s economy, attracting employers, and improving the lives of working Mainers is to increase access to education and training that prepares students and workers for high-wage, high-demand jobs. Developing and improving these programs--Parents as Scholars and the Competitive Skills Scholarship--helps ensure that the needs of the job market match the skills of the workforce. Will you support efforts to increase access to training for high-wage, high-demand jobs for students, the unemployed, and workers in transition? Yes Comments: As I note in A State of Opportunity, we are at a crucial time in our state’s history. Our economy is small and our incomes are limited while our expenses are high. The development of a strategy has to be the starting point for moving Maine forward. I believe that North Carolina has learned lessons that Maine should benefit from. Industries that left Maine for North Carolina have since left North Carolina; yet North Carolina has fared better than Maine because it consciously and strategically retooled, while Maine didn’t. Although we have known for decades that fewer workers would be needed to harvest the timber, produce the paper, process the seafood, and otherwise run our traditional industries, we have not created an economic development strategy to address Maine’s present reality. A key piece of Maine’s economic development strategy will be to strengthen our preK-12 education system for students and to initiate a serious set of investments in early childhood education. At the same time, we must lower the costs of higher education and make it attainable for many more Mainers. We should consider implementing “Pay it Forward, Pay it Back,” a plan to create a fund to support tuition-free post-high school education for Maine high school graduates. The Parents as Scholars program is a national model of which Maine should be proud. I applaud those who persevere through the program to reach their goals and obtain what others who have completed the program have: a substantial increase in their hourly earnings, increased likelihood of obtaining a job with benefits packages including health insurance, permanent freedom from the need to access welfare benefits, and increased aspirations for their children. And finally, we need to re-equip our workers who have lost jobs in traditional industries. While we unlock value, jobs, and income from Maine’s natural resources, we must support those who wish to retool their own skills in order to greet the new economy. The Competitive Skills Scholarship Program was designed by the Legislature to help participants prepare for high wage, skilled jobs that are in demand by employers in Maine. This type of program, matching of skills to employment, is a critical component of Maine’s ability to move forward out of the difficulty economy in which it has been languishing. No

IV. Social Insurance:
Unemployment Insurance: According to recent US Department of Labor data, only 3 out of 10 unemployed Maine workers are actually receiving unemployment benefits. These benefits help workers make ends meet when they lose their jobs through no fault of their own. They are also spent directly in communities where they support the local economy. Maine’s average weekly unemployment benefit – $281 before taxes – as well as our maximum weekly unemployment benefit - $378 before taxes - are the lowest in New England. Maine’s low unemployment benefit rates make it difficult for workers to make ends meet as they seek new employment. Additionally, Maine’s unemployment dependency benefit, the amount your unemployment benefit increases per child or dependent, is only $10 per week. Yes No Would you support legislation to increase access to these vital benefits to more unemployed workers who need them and oppose efforts that restrict access? Would you support legislative efforts to increase Maine’s unemployment benefit amount and dependency benefit?



Comments: I would consider increasing Maine’s unemployment benefit amount and dependency benefit, if they are out of line with the cost of living in Maine and relative to similar neighboring states, and if doing so would not raise taxes or place undue additional burdens on Maine employers. My priority, however, is getting people back to work by making Maine a more attractive place to do business. We must start thinking in terms of long-term strategies instead of short-term fixes.

Social Security, Medicare, and MaineCare (Medicaid)? Do you support maintaining and strengthening Social Security, Medicare and MaineCare (Medicaid)? Yes Comments: I absolutely support maintaining and strengthening the foundations for Social Security, Medicare, and MaineCare. As discussed above, I believe we should expand the access to MaineCare afforded by the ACA. No

V. Workplace Standards & Protections:
The labor movement has fought for decades to establish and protect the most basic workplace standards and protections for workers like establishing a minimum wage, the eight-hour day, overtime pay, and the prohibition of child labor. Yes Yes Yes No No No Will you support increasing the state minimum wage? Will you support indexing future increases in the minimum wage to the cost of living? Will you oppose any efforts to weaken child labor, prison labor, minimum wage, and/or overtime laws?

Comments: Had it come to my desk, I would have signed LD 611, the bill that raised the minimum wage from $7.50 an hour to $9 an hour by 2016. The minimum wage right now is not a living wage and it’s too far below a living wage. Raising the minimum wage ought to be part of a comprehensive strategy to improve the opportunities for all Maine workers. Among our most important objectives ought to be increasing the demand for skilled labor in Maine’s highest-paying industries (including, for example, construction, forest products, and precision manufacturing) and to increase the number of skilled workers who are available for those jobs. As for efforts to weaken child labor, prison labor, minimum labor, and overtime laws, such efforts are counter to our efforts to build a strong economy and a strong workforce. I would oppose them. Misclassification as Independent Contractors: Some employers have established a trend to misclassify employees as independent contractors, thereby circumventing payroll taxes, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation insurance, employee benefits and the protection of basic labor laws like the right to overtime. Misclassification hurts all of us. It negatively impacts workers, it puts law abiding business at a competitive disadvantage, and it shifts costs onto the general public. A 2005 study offered a conservative estimate that Maine loses between $18 - $36 million annually in state income tax revenues (all general fund monies) due to misclassification. Today, the actual general fund loss of revenue is likely much higher.



Will you support legislation and ongoing efforts to improve enforcement, stiffen penalties and take the necessary steps to solve the misclassification problem in Maine? Will you support legislation that would establish stronger employee remedies, like those allowed in other areas of employment law, for workers who have been misclassified including private right of action (the right to sue) for unpaid wages, health and other benefits, including double damages and attorney fees?



Comments: I would support those reforms, as long as the rules for employers are clear, consistent and fair. Recent changes have imposed many unnecessary burdens on employers and contractors, with confusing and often conflicting rules. I want to see workers and contractors classified properly and for everyone to be able compete on a level playing field. RN-to-Patient Ratios: Registered Nurses, like most other workers, have been tasked with an increasing amount of work to complete in fewer hours. But for RNs, the dangers of an unreasonable workload can be a matter of life and death. Staffing ratios ensure that each nurse is caring for a safe number of patients. Research demonstrates that the ratios increase patient safety and dramatically lower turnover of nursing staff. Will you support patient safety legislation that requires hospitals to follow minimum safe staffing levels? Yes Comments: I would support such legislation if minimum safe staffing levels are established by statutes and regulations that have patient safety, positive outcomes, and cost containment as the paramount objectives. No

VI. Workplace Health & Safety:
Work can be dangerous. Since the passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) in 1970, safety and health conditions have greatly improved. Many hazards, however, are still unregulated, and despite improvements, workplace safety remains a primary concern for many workers. In 2011, 30 Maine workers lost their lives on the job. In 2010, there were 21,000 reported work related injuries or illnesses--that’s a rate of 5.3 per 100 workers, which is significantly above the national average of 3.5 per 100 workers. OSHA Health & Safety Training: Investing in training is one of the most effective ways to prevent on the job injury and exposure. Would you support legislation requiring that workers receive OSHA-certified health and safety training on all state-funded construction projects? Yes Comments: Yes, if it is done at a reasonable cost with programs that have been proven to be costeffective. Workers Compensation: Despite the best efforts from employees and employers, workers are injured on-the-job. Workers' Compensation systems were formed nearly 100 years ago in a grand compromise-employers were exempted from any liability in civil trial for workplace injuries and workers were provided with "guaranteed" medical care and wage replacement for on-the-job injuries. In Maine employers' immunity from civil trial remains completely intact but the "guaranteed" medical care and wage replacement for injured workers has been badly eroded. Despite a twenty year history of reduced costs to employers amounting to more than a 56% reduction in constant dollars, the 125th Legislature enacted legislation (LD 1913) that will harm injured workers and will result in significant additional savings to employers and insurance companies. Legislators who advocated for and passed this bill repeatedly stated that the bill was designed to be "revenue neutral." If there are any savings as a result of this legislation, will you commit to ensuring those savings result in improvements for workers including but not limited to: extension of the duration of benefits, increasing the amount of benefits, lowering the threshold for the most severely injured workers to qualify for extended benefits, and/or other provisions that would improve the system for workers? Yes Comments: No No

The amendments that became effective as part of LD 1913 were a real compromise between business and labor. Our system is working better. Indeed, injured employees now have an automatic right of appeal that they did not have for more than 20 years. Vocational rehabilitation is being used more than ever before, and indemnity benefits are more simply calculated. Yes, the bill was designed to be revenue neutral. Any savings from the legislation is not meant to go to the government; rather, it’s meant to go to the employer community, in the form of lower premiums.

Workers’ Compensation benefits include two parts -- medical benefits to cover treatment and wage replacement benefits that cover a portion of the wages a worker lost because of their onthe-job injury. While many workers recover quickly from an injury, other severely injured workers will never realize the same earning potential that they had prior to the injury. Currently, these wage replacement benefits do not factor in increases to the cost of living which makes it more difficult for the most severely and long-term injured workers to make ends meet. Will you support an annual cost of living adjustment for injured workers receiving workers’ compensation benefits? Yes Comments: Most jurisdictions in our country do not have cost of living adjustments. We have to keep Maine competitive, which means keeping workers compensation benefits in line with the rest of the Northeast. Chemicals Policy: In 2010, the President's Cancer Panel concluded that "the true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated" and that reducing toxic chemical exposures “should be the cornerstone of a new national cancer prevention strategy.” Based on well-documented associations between occupational exposures and cancer, it is estimated that 4% to 10% of U.S. cancers are caused by occupational exposures. Hazardous chemicals used in everyday consumer products expose workers and their families both at work and at home. Phasing out dangerous chemicals protects workers throughout the manufacturing and supply chain and protects children and families at home. Maine's safer chemicals law (the Kid-Safe Products Act) was passed overwhelmingly in 2008 and reaffirmed unanimously in 2011. The law is being implemented to target some of the most dangerous chemicals - like bisphenol-A (BPA) - that expose Maine children, research alternatives, and replace dangerous chemicals with safer ones. BPA is a toxic chemical linked to cancer, learning disabilities, obesity and other health problems. It leaches into food from the linings of many metal cans and glass-jar lids. BPA exposure could be reduced by two-thirds if food packaging were BPA-free. Do you support mandatory replacement of BPA in food packaging sold in Maine with safer alternatives that are already readily available? Yes Comments: I support tough and effective regulation of toxic and harmful chemicals and additives that is based on sound science. Unfortunately, we do not have enough information about the vast majority of the chemicals we are exposed to in work and daily life, which is a problem we must remedy so we can move forward in protecting our children and families from those that are harmful. LD 1181 was aimed at reducing the presence of BPA in food packaging and had broad, bipartisan support. Governor LePage’s veto was extremely disappointing. The evidence that BPA is harmful is sound and our laws and regulations should reflect that. No No

VII. Work & Family Balance:
Most workers find themselves working full or part-time and caring for their families -- their children, their parents, or sometimes both. With the increasing number of hours that workers log, the struggle to “burn the candle at both ends” has become even more difficult. Right now, nearly two in five private sector workers lacks a single paid sick day to use when they get sick. Among low-wage workers, the number is even higher: 80% of low-wage workers are forced to work through illness, or lose needed pay--even lose their jobs--just because they get sick. According to research, sick employees are less productive and this loss in productivity costs our national economy an estimated $160 billion annually. Would you support legislation guaranteeing a minimum standard of at least 7 paid sick days for all Maine workers? Yes Comments: As you point out, the economy loses money when employees come to work sick. It is also not good public health policy. We also must take into account the impact of imposing yet another mandate on business owners -- especially start-ups and small businesses – which are the very employers we need to help grow in Maine so they can provide good jobs at livable wages. I believe most employers try to do the right thing, and we need to give those who do the chance to grow. No state in the union has required businesses to provide a set number of paid sick days to all workers. To be the very first state to do so would send the wrong signals about Maine as a place to build and expand businesses. In 2011, Connecticut was the first state to mandate paid sick days, but Connecticut limited the application of the rule to service businesses that employ more than 50 employees. Covered employees can take one hour of sick leave for every 40 hours worked. Let’s watch and learn from Connecticut’s experience, improve our public health system, provide universal access to essential health care services to all Mainers, and work together to grow Maine’s economy, so that benefits such as paid sick days become the norm for all employees. No

Current Maine law provides that most workers qualify for unpaid leave for family emergencies like the birth or adoption of a child, their own illness, or the illness or death of a family member. Unfortunately, the vast majority of workers who need family and medical leave cannot afford to miss a paycheck. A paid family and medical leave insurance system can shift the burden of providing wage replacement from individual businesses to a pooled fund in which everyone contributes—just like any other insurance mechanism. Workers receive partial income replacement for up to ten weeks from a fund administered by the State. Would you support legislation, such as that in Washington state, New Jersey, and California to provide paid family and medical leave insurance for the care of a family member, to deal with their own illness, or to bond with a new child? Yes Comments: As an important first step, I would support establishing a legislative study commission to consider the feasibility of a paid family leave or insurance system and to better understand how a “pooled fund” would be capitalized. Earlier this year, Vermont did exactly that. I will listen carefully to the results of a study commission and to the arguments in favor of instituting such a program. Without knowing more about the financial mechanism to fund the program, I would be reluctant to make this commitment. No

Unions transform workplaces by giving workers a voice at work—by bringing democracy to the job. Likewise, when more workers participate in our democracy by registering to vote, voting, and participating in policy-making, we develop the strongest solutions to improve our state’s economy and advance workers in both their work lives and their home lives. Unfortunately, there is a growing trend to restrict access to the ballot box, especially for low-wage workers, people of color, and senior citizens. Yes Yes No No Do you support universal registration, including eliminating all barriers to registration until universal registration is achieved? Will you oppose any obstacle to voting and support promotion of greater voter participation, including early voting? And will you support the right to vote regardless of economic condition or race?

VIII. Outside the Workplace

Comments: I oppose all efforts to restrict access to the ballot box, and have been appalled to see the changes taking place across the country, moving us away from increased citizen participation in our democracy. Of course, I support the right to vote regardless of economic condition or race. I also believe that greater voter participation is achieved by providing voters with a political process that belongs to all of us, not just the two political parties. Our electoral process should give us broad and good choices among candidates – choices that appeal not only to the few of us who stand on the left and right ends of the spectrum, but also to most of us who occupy the center. Voters can have the kind of choices that they want and deserve, and consensus at the end of the electoral process, if we have run-offs, open primaries, or ranked choice voting. Fewer and fewer Americans identify themselves as a Republic or Democrat these days and fewer people vote in party primaries. The last five general elections for governor illustrate the trends at work in Maine: independents have won 38.1% of the votes, while Republicans have won 30.3%, and Democrats 29.9%. Four to six weeks of early voting isn’t a reform; it’s a mechanism to allow political parties to wrap up votes early. True absentee voting is important, and people who can not – for any reason – get to the polls on Election Day should have reasonable and sufficient opportunity to cast their votes in person or by mail a week or two ahead of the election. I also think we should make voting as easy and convenient as possible for everyone, but I believe that allowing voting too many weeks before Election Day, when many voters are just starting to pay attention, does not make for a better democracy. Obviously, many people who voted early in 2010 now regret voting early because the dynamics of the campaign changed so much in the final days.

IX. A Fair Budget for Maine’s Working Families:
It is anticipated that the fallout from the recession will continue to have negative impacts on Maine's economy with slow growth at best. Moreover recent changes to Maine’s estate and income taxes disproportionately benefit Maine’s wealthiest residents and will create significant budget shortfalls for the state in the years ahead. This means that state revenue collections will be inadequate to sustain current levels of funding for public services upon which all Maine people, Maine communities and Maine businesses rely: K-12 education funding for local school districts, funding for the University of Maine and Community College Systems, health care funding, etc. This comes after nearly a decade in service cuts to programs like these and many others that serve the common good. While state and local taxes have been declining as a share of personal income, no new broadbased taxes have been increased to balance the state budget; therefore budget solutions have relied on cutting vital programs, as well as wage and benefit cuts to state workers. Please explain what you would do to balance the State Budget. What is your position on taxes, tax breaks, and generating revenue? *Explain: As explained above, standing between Maine and sustained economic growth, more jobs and shared prosperity is an outmoded, inefficient, highly regressive, and unfair tax structure. One of my top priorities as governor will be to reform Maine’s tax structure – all of it – in ways that will help us leverage our competitive advantages, create and protect opportunity, and grow our economy. I believe that the path to prosperity for Maine’s economy is to leverage our extraordinary combination of hard working people, natural resources, location, and quality of life. We should invest in a serious and sustained way in the development of an umbrella Maine brand that can be an enduring economic driver even in challenging economic times. A focused effort to leverage Maine’s competitive advantages can generate jobs and increase incomes. Our future growth will be drive by the manufacturing and research sectors, agriculture, tourism, and the arts. Wise decisions about capital investments – choosing among compelling needs for spending on infrastructure repair and human capital development – will require a capital budget and a capital budgeting process. Wellrun businesses have capital budgeting processes, and so should the State of Maine. As stated in response to earlier questions, I think our whole tax structure needs to be overhauled to make it more fair and sustainable, and that tax breaks should be treated – and justified – like any other expenditure.

Tax Structure: Over the last several decades there have been significant tax shifts from corporations to individuals and from the very wealthy to the rest of us. In light of these shifts and in the face of painful state budget crises, many states have raised the state income tax on high-income taxpayers, those making over $500,000 or $1million. In Maine, increasing the income tax 1% on taxpayers with adjusted gross income over $500,000 would generate $19.1 million in annual revenue while only impacting 0.3% of Maine taxpayers. Will you support a 1% income tax increase on high income Maine residents making over $500,000 as a way to fund crucial public services and stave off painful budget cuts? Yes Comments: My priority is increasing net incomes across the board for all Maine people. We can do this by broad reforms in our tax structure (including reducing the burden of property taxes), by reforming health care, by investing in a serious and sustained way in education, our competitive advantages and our infrastructure, and by developing an umbrella Maine brand that can be an enduring economic driver even in challenging economic times. Picking out one element of tax reform as a symbolic exercise is no substitute for a vision, a plan and a strategy. A focused and strategic effort to leverage Maine’s competitive advantages will generate jobs and increase incomes, and the members of Maine’s unions ought to support a candidate for governor who has the experience, skills and independence to lead the way in that effort. No

X. Action:
For the measures above that you have agreed to support, would you be willing to: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No Sponsor legislation Work with our affiliated unions and allies to pass the bill Lobby relevant legislators in support or opposition of a bill Testify at a committee hearing in support of legislation Speak at public events in support of legislation

I want to grow Maine’s economy and help create jobs for Maine people and I will support any efforts by any group that will help me do that.