Download California Nurses Association - Jane Kim for California State Senate

California Nurses Association/
National Nurses Organizing Committee
Statewide Candidate Questionnaire
Name: Jane Kim
Office: California State Senate
District: 11
Address: 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102
Campaign/FPPC ID #: This information will not be available until I declare my candidacy.
Phone: (415) 887-8492
Email: [email protected] / [email protected]
Fax Number: N/A
Campaign Consultant: This information will not be available until I declare my candidacy.
Current Office: San Francisco Board of Supervisors, District 6
CANDIDATE BACKGROUND:
1. Briefly describe your top priorities and the policy areas that will be of most interest to
you if you are elected.
Public Education
Criminal Justice and Prison Reform
Land Use and Tenant Rights
2. Briefly describe your background, work history, education, and prior public service.
I was elected in 2010 to serve as a member of the Board of Supervisors representing District 6 in
San Francisco. The district includes Treasure Island, South Beach, Tenderloin, Mission Bay,
South of Market, and Mid-Market/Civic Center neighborhoods. I oversee 60% of all residential
development for the City of San Francisco and close to 75-80% of all development including
commercial development. The district I represent grew over 25,000 residents between the 2000
and 2010 US Census.
In my first term, I passed landmark land use, affordable housing, and civil rights legislation. I
successfully negotiated two major neighborhood area plans--the Western SoMa Community Plan
and the Transit Center District Plan. I authored and passed two historic pieces of civil rights
legislation--the Safe San Francisco Civil Rights Ordinance, which restored local control, civilian
oversight, and transparency over the SFPD’s participation in FBI intelligence-gathering efforts,
and the Fair Chance Act, which removed unnecessary barriers to jobs and housing by regulating
the use of background check information for individuals with conviction histories. I negotiated
the successful Minimum Wage ballot measure, which recently won by an overwhelming 77.43%
in the November 2014 election, mediating amongst labor, community, non-profit stakeholders,
the Chamber of Commerce, and the Mayor’s Office.
I also spearheaded San Francisco’s “Vision Zero” policy in January 2014, aiming to achieve zero
traffic fatalities by 2024 through street engineering, enforcement, and education.
My key community initiatives include advocating for more affordable housing, securing robust
funding for San Francisco public schools (and solidifying plans to build a new pre-K through 5th
grade elementary school in the Mission Bay neighborhood), acquiring new parks and open space,
transforming liquor stores into corner groceries, and tackling homelessness with a public
health/mental health lens. I recently negotiated and won the largest affordable housing
commitment on any site, 40% affordable and middle income housing on 8 acres of public state
land in my District, with the Giants, who are developing this lot through a ground lease with the
Port and San Francisco.
Before joining the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, I served as President of the San
Francisco Board of Education and worked as an attorney with the Lawyers Committee for Civil
Rights. Prior to serving on the Board of Education, I was a fellow at the Greenlining Institute,
where I researched and crafted economic development policies with a broad statewide coalition
of African American, Latino, and Asian American communities. I then spent six years as a
Senior Community Organizer at Chinatown Community Development Center leading the youth
leadership and organizing program and piloting a nationally recognized youth alleyway
stewardship program.
I received my undergraduate degree from Stanford University, where I studied Political Science
and Asian American Studies, and received my law degree from U.C. Berkeley School of Law,
Boalt Hall. I currently serve as the Chair of the City and School District Joint Select Committee
and the Vision Zero Committee, and I serve on the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, as well as
the City’s Land Use Committee.
3. Have you failed to vote in any elections in the past five years? If so, why?
No.
4. Please describe your membership, work, or experience with labor unions.
Organized labor has been a constant vanguard when it comes to social justice and progressive
policies. In the Bay Area alone, our history has been enriched by the work of labor champions
such as Harry Bridges, with his personal and public battles with the U.S. government for fair
immigration policies, eradicating anti-miscegenation laws, and workers’ rights to Pam Tau Lee
and her pioneering advocacy to make workplace safety--especially in hazardous occupations, as
well as in workplaces dominated by workers of color--recognized as an environmental justice
issue. I share in labor’s support for the worker and have spearheaded several pieces of workers’
rights legislation during my first term: Fair Chance Act to reform the use of criminal background
checks in employment and housing; Job Security for Hospitality Workers to ensure our hotel,
concession, and restaurant workers have stable and secure employment even when management
changes; and collaborated with labor leaders in crafting a minimum wage consensus measure,
which passed overwhelmingly last November.
In June, I worked with UNITE HERE! Local 2 to negotiate with the Giants on their Mission
Rock development plans to increase their commitment to build affordable housing units in their
Mission Rock development from 33% up to an unprecedented 40%.
And last year, I negotiated the successful Minimum Wage ballot measure, which recently won by
an overwhelming 77.43% in the November 2014 election, mediating amongst labor, community,
non-profit stakeholders, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Mayor’s Office. Minimum wage
will gradually rise to $15/hour by July 2018. Our minimum wage will not include any health care
or tip credit.
Additionally, I authored legislation that protects hospitality workers in restaurants, concessions,
and hotels from being summarily dismissed in the event of a change in ownership or
management. In the event of a transfer or sale of place of employment, workers would keep their
jobs for 90 days, affording workers the opportunity to showcase their skills or to secure new
employment. Before my legislation, there was no existing San Francisco law protecting the jobs
of over 84,000 hospitality workers in this multibillion-dollar industry. When the industry as a
whole is thriving, the workers that comprise the backbone of the industry should be protected
and afforded the opportunity to also thrive.
I have never had the opportunity to be a member of a labor union.
Healthcare is becoming more important than ever with our aging population, and I support
California Nurses Association’s mission and goal of improving not only the working conditions
of healthcare workers, but also the care they provide to patients. I seek CNA’s endorsement
because I believe that an endorsement by CNA publicly acknowledges that my work and values
reflect the priority that I place on workers’ rights and social justice. Further, I have always had
incredible respect for the CNA since I served on the San Francisco People’s Organization in
2005. I saw clearly that statewide, CNA was often one of the few unions that felt that it had the
liberty and independence to endorse statewide measures that it felt were right, even if it could
politically hurt them in the future. It would be my honor to receive CNA’s endorsement.
5. Please list organizations you belong to.
Asian American Bar Association
Teachers 4 Social Justice
Young Elected Officials Network
6. Have you ever been endorsed by a labor union?
Yes. Last year, the following unions endorsed my re-election campaign:
California Nurses Association
Carpenters Local 22
International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers Local 21
LiUNA Laborers’ Local 261
National Union of Healthcare Workers
Operating Engineers Local 3
San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council
San Francisco Firefighters Local 798
San Francisco Labor Council
SEIU Local 87
SEIU Local 1021
UFCW Local 648
UNITE HERE! Local 2
7. What other endorsements have you received?
I have not announced my candidacy yet, and thus have neither received nor asked for
endorsements yet. While several elected officials and organizations have offered their support, I
have not accepted any formal endorsements.
HEALTHCARE:
1. Currently, 35 million Americans have no health insurance. The majority of the
uninsured work at jobs that provide no health benefits. There are systematic problems
within the public and private health care system including hospital closures, ER diversions,
and denials of care by insurance companies. Are you in favor of a publicly administered,
universal health care system (i.e. “single-payer”); and if so, how would you participate in
efforts to achieve it in your state nationally?
Yes, I support a publicly administered universal health care system (i.e. “single-payer”).
Although the Affordable Care Act has insured 3 million Californians, more than 3 million
remain uninsured. Medicare should be expanded to include everyone. I would request to meet
with union leadership and membership to listen to their concerns and priorities and discuss how
to coordinate efforts to achieve a publicly administered universal health care system in
California. I look forward to working with CNA and others in the healthcare field to achieve this
goal.
2. Understanding the Affordable Care Act is currently the law and that it does many good
things - do you believe that ACA has shortcomings? Do you favor building incrementally
on the current system or would you support universal single payer health care on a
“medicare for all” model?
Yes, as I stated in my answer to #1 above, I support a publicly administered universal health care
system (i.e. “single-payer”). Ideally, Medicare would be expanded to include everyone, and we
can work to incrementally build on the current system. I look forward to working with CNA and
others in the healthcare field to achieve this goal.
3. The health care industry is being rapidly transformed. Through mergers and
acquisitions, hospitals, nursing homes, HMOs, and other health care businesses may soon
be operated by a small handful of giant firms. Public facilities and services are
underfunded and facing privatization. For-profits are taking over community and public
facilities. What measures would you take to require for-profit companies that acquire
nonprofit or public facilities or HMOs to maintain health care services? Do you support
measures which would require public and nonprofit hospitals to provide services to the
uninsured as a condition for receiving below market rate bond financing? If so, how would
you enforce such a requirement from your office?
Yes, I support measures that would require public and nonprofit hospitals to provide services to
the uninsured as a condition for receiving below market rate bond financing. Hospitals that
receive public funding should serve the public, including the uninsured. This has been
particularly important to me on the Board of Supervisors--both when negotiating with CPMC on
St. Luke’s Hospital and in our ongoing partnership with UCSF on General Hospital. I look
forward to working with CNA and others in the healthcare field on these issues.
4. The financial imperatives transforming the health care industry increasingly undermines
the ability of clinicians to make health care decisions based strictly on the needs of their
patients. What steps would you pursue in your office to protect the quality of patient care?
Do you support mandated nurse-to-patient ratios, such as the California law AB 394?
Would you support measures to limit unsafe, premature discharges of patients or transfers
from acute care hospitals to nursing homes or other subacute facilities? Would you support
proposals to require more public reporting of health care quality data?
I agree that the quality of patient care should be protected, and I do support mandated nurse-topatient ratios. If nurses have too many patients to care for, the quality of care each nurse is able
to provide will decrease because he or she will have to spread it out over many patients. I have
personally witnessed the stress on patients when there are not enough nurses, with family
members and friends in acute care. I also would support measures to limit unsafe, premature
discharges of patients or transfers from acute care hospitals to nursing homes or other subacute
facilities, as well as proposals to require more public reporting of health care quality data. If
premature discharges or transfers of patients affect the health of the patient, they should be
limited. And I look forward to working with CNA and others in the healthcare field on these
issues.
5. Private nonprofit hospitals make up the vast majority of hospitals in California. In
exchange for providing various community benefits, such as charity care and improving
community health, California’s private nonprofit hospitals are eligible for certain tax
exemptions due to their nonprofit status. However, charity care and community benefits
are not uniformly denied or measured. This ambiguity prevents California communities
from determining if these hospitals sufficiently benefit the community, a duty nonprofit
hospitals are required to fulfill under state and federal law. Studies show nonprofit
hospitals often fail to adequately perform this role. For example, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) found little or no meaningful difference in the level of
uncompensated care provided by nonprofit and for-profit hospitals, especially when
compared to the far greater role played by public hospitals in the provision of
uncompensated care. Do you support standardizing a definition of charity care and
community benefit for hospitals and support stricter reporting requirements? And, would
you be willing to help pass a resolution in your municipality in favor of these
requirements?
Yes, I support standardizing a definition of charity care and community benefit for hospitals, as
well as stricter reporting requirements. All hospitals should provide the same quality and level of
care. I have demonstrated this commitment during the City’s negotiations with CMPC on their
Development Agreement. I would also be willing to help pass a resolution in my municipality in
favor of these requirements. And I look forward to working with CNA and others in the
healthcare field on these issues.
6. Hospital mergers have produced an epidemic of emergency room closures and
consolidations that threaten the public’s access to essential health services. Do you support
laws that would declare emergency services to be “essential public services” similar to
police and fire and provide funding to keep emergency departments and trauma centers
open that are able to meet certain criteria, including providing care to the uninsured and
indigent? If so, how would you assist this effort in your office?
Yes, I support laws that would declare emergency services to be “essential public services”
similar to police and fire, and I would provide funding to keep emergency departments and
trauma centers open that are able to meet certain criteria, including providing care to the
uninsured and indigent. As District 6 Supervisor, I secured funding for a 24-hour medical respite
shelter. Because everyone deserves emergency health care services, they should be declared
“essential public services.”
I support laws that would declare emergency services to be “essential public services” similar to
police and fire, and I would provide funding to keep emergency departments and trauma centers
open that are able to meet certain criteria, including providing care to the uninsured and indigent.
As District 6 Supervisor, I secured funding for a 24-hour medical respite shelter. Because
everyone deserves emergency health care services, they should be declared “essential public
services.”
7. Technology is being widely applied to many sectors in society. It is often marked as
beneficial and worthy of new investment by private and public funding. One example,
touch/computer voting machines sound good; but have limitations and deficits. The same is
true for medical technology in the health care field. Electronic charting; e-ICUs, and many
other applications are being marketed to providers and elected leaders by the hi-tech
sector, yet these technologies can undermine or replace the clinical judgment of RNs,
doctors, and other providers. Do you believe that that use of information technology in
healthcare has risks and that government should assess and study these technologies before
they are implemented in the health field?
I agree that there are risks associated with using information technology in healthcare, and I
agree that the government should assess and study these technologies before they are
implemented in the healthcare field. Technology often advances more quickly than legislators
can study and regulate them, and it is crucial to evaluate and regulate the use of information
technology in the healthcare field when people’s health and lives are at risk. I look forward to
working with CNA and others in the healthcare field on this issue.
8. In addition to the above, expansion in the use of telehealth services (telehealth is the use
of electronic information and telecommunications technologies to support long-distance
clinical health care, patient and professional health-related education, public health, and
health administration) continues to proliferate. In order to properly assess a patient a
registered nurse must see, touch, feel, and even smell the patient. Each of these elements
can indicate subtle changes in a patient’s condition, which are vital to the proper
assessment and diagnosis of patients and the overall provision of quality patient care. What
is your position on telehealth services?
I believe that telehealth services should only be used sparingly when a patient has a question
about his or her health, but it should not be relied upon to properly diagnose a patient. A proper
and accurate diagnosis is worth a trip to the doctor. Everyone’s health depends on it.
9. Do you support requiring health insurance plans and carriers to justify and receive state
approval before raising rates?
Yes. Raising rates will price people out of health insurance, and the public will ultimately have
to pay the costs associated with treating uninsured people in hospitals, so health insurance plans
and carriers should be required to justify raising their rates to the state for approval.
SCOPE OF PRACTICE:
1. There are specific differences in the scope of practice of RNs and LVNs/LPNs which
define who does what relative to caring for patients. The differences in scope of practice are
based upon education and knowledge. The health care industry often tries to save money
by blurring the lines between scope of practice and arguing that LVNs/LPNs or Medical
Assistants can perform certain tasks such as putting medications into intravenous (IVs) or
giving out medication without a physician in the office; which is outside their scope of
practice. Would you support protecting patients by opposing attempts to undermine the
RN scope of practice? How would you respond if another labor union or health care
professional association tried to convince you that this practice is just RNs being elitist and
arguing that this is nothing more than a union turf issue?
Yes, I would support protecting patients by opposing attempts to undermine the RN scope of
practice that would threaten the health and quality of care of a patient. If another labor union or
health care professional association tried to convince me that this is nothing more than a union
turf issue, I would meet with representatives from all unions and associations involved in the
matter and would facilitate an agreement. And I look forward to working with CNA and others
in the healthcare field on this issue.
2. Do you believe that prescription drugs should be administered through an appropriately
trained and licensed provider or do you believe that people, including unlicensed
personnel, can be trained to administer some prescription drugs?
If administered incorrectly, prescription drugs could seriously harm a person’s health and even
kill the person, and thus should only be administered through an appropriately trained and
licensed provider. This ensures that if a negligent mistake is made, we can revoke a person’s
license, if necessary, to ensure that the mistake is never repeated.
BUDGET:
1. Given the ongoing fiscal crisis faced by state and local governments, and the
disproportionate impact of budget cuts on health services, what measures do you support,
if any, to raise revenues, reform the budget process. and ensure adequate health and
human services?
Yes, I would support measures to raise revenues, preferably progressively, reform the budget
process, and ensure adequate health and human services, which is a public right. I have strongly
supported progressive revenue measures in San Francisco and have been a strong advocate in our
budget process each year for our health services system.
2. Under what circumstances, if any, would you vote in favor of privatization (i.e.,
corporatization) and/or contracting our existing state services?
There are very few circumstances under which I would vote in favor of privatization and/or
contracting our existing state services. I would consult with CNA, as well as other union and
health care professional associations, before voting in favor of privatization and/or
corporatization.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING:
1. Defined benefit pension plans are under attack for replacement by defined contribution
plans (i.e. 401k’s, etc.). What are your views on this and what should be done to provide
workers who retire with a livable pension?
As employees commit to work for many years and stay loyal to a company, hospital, or
organization, those employers have, also, made a commitment to their employees.
Please answer if you support or oppose and reasons why.
2. Efforts to make it easier for workers to join a union through employer neutrality
agreements, majority sign-up, or other processes that allow workers to choose free from
fear or intimidation.
Yes. Please see my answer to #4 under “Candidate Background” above.
3. Expanding majority sign-up rights (“card check”) to apply to more workers.
Yes. Please see my answer to #4 under “Candidate Background” above.
4. Imposing furloughs, reducing employee benefits, moving to a two-year pension system or
adopting other worker takeaways outside the collective bargaining process.
No. Please see my answer to #4 under “Candidate Background” above.
5. Unilaterally impose a contract on workers instead of negotiating in good faith.
No. Please see my answer to #4 under “Candidate Background” above.
6. Ban any group of workers from engaging in any form of collective action, including the
right to strike.
No. Please see my answer to #4 under “Candidate Background” above.
7. Would you support workers who are attempting to win union recognition or union
contracts from recalcitrant employers by?
(a) Honoring (refusing to cross) union picket lines? Yes
1) Please tell us about any strike or picket you have supported or
participated in: I have supported and walked numerous strikes and pickets
including most recently with CNA at Kaiser Hospital last year.
(b) Supporting union boycotts? Yes
1) Please tell us about any boycott you participated in:
(c) Publicly speaking or writing in support of union organizing drives and contract
campaigns? Yes
1) Please tell us about any support you have provided to organizing drives or
contract fights:
Have you ever crossed a union picket line? No, I have not knowingly crossed a union picket
line. I support unions’ right to picket because it’s their right.
If yes, please explain.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:
1. Do you see a connection between the environment and public health? If so, please
describe and talk about what role, if any, you see for the government in that connection.
Yes, there is a direct connection between the environment, public health, and social justice, from
the air we breathe, to the water we drink, to the food we eat, to the grass we play on.
Vehicles make up 33% of our GHG emission, and I am working to reduce the number of cars
on our roads by spearheading Vision Zero, our plan to improve pedestrian/bike safety,
supporting public transit systems, such as MUNI, DTX, High Speed Rail, and programs such as
Free MUNI for Youth/Seniors. I also support a Congestion Pricing Plan in the San Francisco
downtown core and have been pushing the study of this policy at the Transportation Authority.
As we grow in residential and employment density, San Francisco cannot sustain the growing
number of cars. We must reduce our travel related carbon emission. By cutting emissions and
reducing smog, fewer inner city children grow up with asthma and lung-related health issues,
which reduces the financial burden on government health agencies.
I have been a strong supporter of ensuring that environmental policies, such as the bag
surcharge policy and CleanPowerSF, take immigrant and low-income community voices into
consideration. I worked to ensure that the Department of Environment performed
comprehensive and robust outreach to neighborhoods and communities, such as the Tenderloin,
Chinatown, and the Arab American Grocers, for the plastic bag ban and bag surcharge policy,
which set a national trend in the U.S., and that the Public Utilities Commission worked closely
with Single Room Occupancy building owners on the CleanPowerSF program, approved by the
Board of Supervisors, 8-3, in 2012. I am also supporting the CleanPowerSF ballot measure on
the November 2015 ballot.
Factory farms are also an environmental, public health, food safety, and social justice issue.
According to a UN (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) report entitled
“Livestock’s Long Shadow,” “[t]he livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most
significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to
global. The findings in this report suggest that it should be a major policy focus when dealing
with problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water
pollution and loss of biodiversity.” The report finds that factory farms contribute more
greenhouse gas emissions (18%) worldwide than the entire world’s transportation systems put
together. In addition to the connection between climate change and California’s severe drought,
factory farms are responsible for 47% of California’s water usage, and animal waste runoff from
factory farms pollutes clean, fresh water with animal waste, antibiotics, hormones, and
chemicals. Additionally, most factory farms are located near poorer communities, whose water
and air end up being polluted because they live so close to these factory farms. Runoff from the
vats of animal waste these factory farms produce often spills into clean water sources, poisoning
the water for many of these communities that live near factory farms. Additionally, these
communities are breathing in air filled with particles of animal waste, antibiotics, hormones,
and chemicals. Legislators and agricultural and environmental agencies should work together to
more strictly regulate these factory farms that are polluting our water, air, and land.
San Francisco’s largest and oldest wastewater facility is located in the southeastern part of San
Francisco, primarily a low-income neighborhood is a problematic. The city needs to implement
the vision of the Southeast Digester Task Force and a new vision for the plant.
I support the Sewer System Improvement Program (SSIP) to upgrade, replace, and seismically
retrofit San Francisco’s hundred-year-old combined sewer system. Our public health relies on it.
A major earthquake, tsunami, and climate change (including rising sea levels and torrential
rainfall) are almost guaranteed to happen in our future, and it is imperative that our combined
waste water/storm runoff system be able to handle such natural and destructive events. We need
a reliable sewer system that will not further threaten our health and safety during an emergency.
2. Do you support measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Yes. My office strongly supported the Clean Power initiative on the San Francisco Board of
Supervisors. Please also see my answer to #1 under “Environmental Health” above on the
connection between the environment and public health.
3. Do you support a ban on fracking?
Yes. Last year, fracking in California resulted in the loss of 70 million gallons of fresh water that
Californians could have used to drink. I absolutely support a ban on fracking.
WOMEN’S HEALTH:
1. Do you support a woman’s right to make her own decision regarding her reproductive
health, including the right to choose an abortion?
Yes, absolutely.
One of my most notable accomplishments, recognized in the Washington Post, was my work
with Supervisor Malia Cohen in barring misleading advertisements by the City’s Crisis
Pregnancy Centers (CPC). These faith-based nonprofits had misleading advertisements implying
that they provided full family planning services, including abortion services and referrals even
though no such amenities were offered. CPC advertisements targeted low-income and vulnerable
women in order to force feed anti-choice messaging once the women walked through their doors.
I co-sponsored a bill that required CPCs to be clear about what services they offered, requiring
CPCs to be upfront about their anti-abortion stance. The bill was implemented and serves as an
example for other cities.
I also support public funding of abortion and other reproductive health services for all women,
especially low-income women and women of color. Reproductive services, including birth
control and abortion, are a basic public health right that all women should have regardless of
their socio-economic status or income level. Just as every American (citizen or not) should have
access to affordable, quality health care, every American woman (citizen or not) should have
access to affordable, quality reproductive health services.
I also co-sponsored Supervisor David Campos’ legislation, in 2013, to create a 25-foot buffer
zone around reproductive health clinics, to prevent anti-abortion protesters from harassing
women going into the clinics. Last year, we amended the ordinance in compliance with the
Supreme Court’s decision in McCullen vs. Coakley, ruling that the free speech rights of
protesters who enter or remain in a buffer zone should be protected. The amended ordinance
shifted focus from the buffer zone itself to the conduct of the individual within the buffer zone.
People engaged in “quiet, consensual conversations” are allowed in the 25-foot the buffer zone,
while those who choose to shout or speak with amplifiers must stand 50 feet away. This
ordinance protects a woman’s right to choose, while balancing anti-abortion activists’ First
Amendment right to free speech. I am committed to continuing to fight for our right to choose
free from harassment.