WHERE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES FOR COMMISSIONER OF LABOR AND INSURANCE STAND ON THE ISSUES

Progressive Democrats of North Carolina, as you know, decided to endorse in the Lt. Governors race in the Democratic Primary. We have endorsed Dan Besse in that race. The board felt that the issues in the primary for state Commissioner of Labor and Commissioner of Insurance were also very important to progressives, but, because candidates for those positions were not known until right before the filing date, we felt that we did not have the time and resources to do an endorsement process. Instead, we decided to develop questionnaires for those races, submit them to the Democratic candidates, and post the results on our website and inform our supporters and the media that they were available. We contacted all the Democratic candidates for these positions. The replies we have received to date are posted below. Candidates were also invited to supply a short biography.

REPLY OF MS. ROBIN ANDERSON, CANDIDATE FOR COMMISSIONER OF LABOR

1. Do you support changing the law that denies State and Local government
employees the right to engage in collective bargaining?

As outlined in HB 1583, I would support giving public employees the ability to
collectively bargain. I support a change in the law because I believe that all workers
should be provided the same protections in the workplace.

2. Do you support the efforts of Smithfield Foods employees to unionize? As Labor
Commissioner how would you address the concerns regarding Smithfield’s
alleged violations of labor law?

I believe as John Edwards said, "Organized labor has been the most important
anti-poverty movement in American history—strengthening the middle class and
providing good-paying jobs for millions of Americans." The lack of unions in North
Carolina has been a detriment to workers’ rights.

While the North Carolina Department of Labor does not have specific enforcement
authority as to labor violations, the Commissioner of Labor has the opportunity through
mediation to take an active role in labor disputes such as Smithfield Foods.

3. What strategies will you employ to obtain the increased funding and legal
authority necessary for the office of Labor Commissioner to properly address
violations of health and safety laws, and violations of workers rights?

Simply put, I will be pro-active in developing agenda with members of the legislature, as
well as organizations focused on the needs of working families as balanced with
interaction with business interests. I will also place an emphasis on galvanizing public
opinion behind improving workplace laws and increased funding.

4. It has been pointed out that a family, whose breadwinner works for minimum
wage—even with the recent minimum wage increase—is still living in poverty.
Do you support the idea of legislating a “living wage,” which guarantees a
worker will be paid enough to feed, cloth, and house their family? Why or why
not?

I support an increase in the minimum wage, and I support tying the minimum wage to
inflation. Currently a worker who works full time for an entire year at minimum wage
earns approximately 55% of the poverty level for a family of four. Our country was
founded on the idea that if you worked hard you would get ahead, and we must ensure
that an honest day’s work gets you an honest day’s pay.

Further, As Commissioner it would be my priority to fully prosecute wage and hour
violations to ensure that workers are paid what they have earned and are not taken
advantage of by companies looking to pad their profit.

5. What workplace ergonomic standards will you propose if elected? Will you
institute (or propose?) workplace ergonomics standards? If so, please briefly
describe them.

One of the first actions taken by the current incumbent was to follow George Bush and
Elizabeth Dole by axing ergonomic standards. North Carolina does not need to wait for
federal standards. We must pursue common sense regulations that will protect workers.
As Commissioner I would push for standards that would protect workers on the job, and I
would work tirelessly to explain to the business community why new standards are good
for everyone.

The recent investigations of poultry processing plants by the Charlotte Observer have
given North Carolina a great opportunity. Now that the public spotlight is on the issue of
workplace safety and repetitive motion industries we should move quickly for new
standards.

6. Specifically, how will you address the documented, on-going violations of health
and workplace safety laws at the Smithfield and Raeford slaughterhouses and
packing plants?

Please see attached press releases for a detailed response.

From press releases:

Raleigh – Robin Anderson, a Democratic candidate for Commissioner of Labor, had strong words for incumbent Cherie Berry following newspaper reports surrounding conditions at House of Raeford plants throughout North and South Carolina.
“The Commissioner of Labor has a moral and legal responsibility to protect the health and safety
of workers, and to protect the interests of businesses that play by the rules. The newspaper
investigation has brought national attention to North Carolina for conditions that are tragic and
deplorable,” Anderson said. “It shouldn’t take an investigation by the media or Congress for the
Commissioner of Labor to do her job.”
The investigation by the Charlotte Observer revealed that Commissioner Berry has hamstrung
her Department, keeping it from fulfilling its duty to protect the health and safety of the workers
of North Carolina through the use of inspections and fines.
The response of Commissioner Berry to the investigation was that her department should work
with the Hispanic Community to make sure they are reporting violations. Anderson countered
that enforcement is a critical tool, both as a deterrent to violators and as a means of ensuring that businesses and workers alike understand that violations will not be tolerated.
“It is the Commissioner’s legal obligation to inspect these facilities and prosecute violations. It is
obvious that Berry hasn’t done the job. It is time we replace her with someone who will.”
“You can't inspect a factory from inside an elevator.”

Raleigh – In response to Commissioner Cherie Berry’s interview with the Charlotte Observer
published Sunday March 9th, Labor Commissioner Candidate Robin Anderson released the
following statement.
“The Commissioner of Labor is charged with the duty to inspect factories for safety violations
and enforce the laws of this state. Commissioner Berry was not elected to be a champion of
companies who continue to violate them.”
In her interview with reporter Ames Alexander, Berry was asked about a number of specific
charges made by the newspaper in its investigation of the deplorable working conditions in
poultry plants in North Carolina, specifically the House of Raeford. In response to the drop in the
number of safety inspections while she has been in office, Berry stated that “…You have to have
a reason to do an inspection. We can’t just go and inspect.”
Anderson responded, “What is she waiting for? Someone else to be seriously injured? The Labor
Commissioner is legally required to inspect factories for workplace safety violations. After 7
years in office it is shocking that Berry has yet to understand her responsibilities.”
When asked whether some companies could be underreporting injuries, Berry declared that she
was offended by the suggestion that companies may not keep proper records. Berry went on to
say that she would not change what she was doing simply because of ‘ink and paper’ from media
reports or investigations. Berry refused to agree that stiff penalties for willful violations were
necessary, stating that no company would change its ways because of fines. She went on to add
that she should be re-elected because of her ability to appease the business community.
Anderson responded, “Berry has failed in her duty to inspect factories and to punish companies
that refuse to play by the rules. Our workers can not afford 4 more years of being ignored. They
deserve a leader who will carry out the duties and obligations of the labor laws and champion
their rights. The hard working families of North Carolina deserve a Labor Commissioner who
will do the job she was elected to do.”

7. What would you do to address the well-documented conditions of substandard
housing, unsanitary conditions, dangerous pesticide exposure, and other abuses
of human rights in regard to seasonal agricultural workers?

I would be committed to work to improve the health of seasonal agricultural workers by
improving basic standards, strengthening enforcement and protecting workers from
retaliation, to include strengthening methods to locate unregistered camps and develop
stronger procedures to prosecute repeat violators of the law.

8. What practices of the current Labor Commissioner would you change, and why?

This incumbent has failed by any measure. She has put appeasing the business
community ahead of doing her duty to protect workers. She has refused to enforce the
laws that are in place, and as a member of the Council of State she has voted against our
future. She has refused to change the way she is doing business in the face of obvious
safety issues at the House of Raeford and has said that she will continue to do business
the same way. She negotiates fines with companies who violate safety measures, and
under her leadership both fines and investigations of businesses in North Carolina have
significantly decreased. This puts North Carolina workers at risk. I have made it a
central purpose of my campaign to point our her failings to the people of North Carolina,
and have attached two statements on her failures regarding the House of Raeford as well
as my release calling for increased transparency in DOL’s Posting of Reports on
Workplace Safety Violations.

These statements are also available at my website at www.andersonforlabor.org.

Robin Anderson has 18 years of experience as an attorney, focused on protecting working families. She is also the first female Chair of the State Personnel Commission,
where she has shaped workplace policy for the almost 100,000 state employees of North Carolina.

REPLY OF MR. JOHN C. BROOKS, CANDIDATE FOR COMMISSIONER OF LABOR

1.Do you support changing the law that denies State and Local government employees the right to engage in collective bargaining?

Public employees in North Carolina should be able to bargain collectively. The difference between executive pay and the pay scales for other employees continues to widen. But it is also important that State, County, and Municipal governments, and public institutions such as the University of North Carolina NOT outsource fulltime jobs such as data processing, housekeeping, security, grounds maintenance, etc. These employees are just as deserving of the benefits provided other public employees such as retirement benefits, holidays, sick leave, health insurance, family leave, vacation time and pay that is in accord with the pay scales otherwise established for public employees. This is a moral question that governments must address.

When North Carolina was faced with losing its State Symphony Orchestra because on an impasse between the Symphony Orchestra musicians, all of whom were union members and State employees at that time, and management, I initiated intervention, called the parties to the table, and hammered out a resolution that saved the Orchestra. It demonstrated that it could be done and that I had the will to do it.

2.Do you support the efforts of Smithfield Foods employees to unionize? As Labor Commissioner how would you address the concerns regarding Smithfield’s alleged violations of labor law?

I support the efforts of Smithfield Foods employees to unionize.
The National Labor Relations Board has sole jurisdiction over its enforcement of its rulings. North Carolina and the State’s Department of Labor have no jurisdiction with respect to NLRB rulings. At best, where violations of NLRB rulings are observed, letters can be sent to the NLRB urging that it take appropriate action to enforce its own rulings. The truth of the matter right now is that under the current administration in Washington little can be expected when violations of rulings occur. However, I expect the situation to become different next year.

3. What strategies will you employ to obtain the increased funding and legal authority necessary for the office of Labor Commissioner to properly address violations of health and safety laws, and violations of workers rights?

Since the State’s OSHA program is 50% federally funded, I would seek from the federal government a fair share of the monies appropriated by Congress to the U.S. Department of Labor for the states. In the past the North Carolina General Assembly has been willing to match the federal allocation to North Carolina; however, North Carolina has regularly received less than its share from the U.S. Department of Labor. With a new Democratic administration in Washington, I would lobby with both our Congressmen and the Democratic Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA [probably my former administrative assistant] for additional monies.

The Commissioner of Labor is most similar to a specialized Attorney General, presiding over a specific set of laws with both enforcement responsibilities and an advocacy role. The Commissioner of Labor represents the State’s workforce at the table of the 10-member Council of State. The Commissioner of Labor should be an attorney and can serve the public better if also trained in economics. The Commissioner of Labor, if an attorney, can represent the interests of government [realistic enforcement mechanisms] by participating actively in the work of the Labor Law Section of the American Bar Association where the majority of new formulations of labor laws and proposals for modifications of existing labor laws are initiated at the present time.

Stricter enforcement of OSHA standards and enforcement that is specifically responsive to North Carolina’s workforce injury experience as reflected by the workers’ compensation claims filed can and needs to significantly reduce the occurrence of workplace injuries. This reduction of work workplace injuries would both reduce the pain and suffering and loss of earning capacity of the workers and reduce the costs of scarce medical services and the costs of worker’s compensation insurance to the end of freeing up resources for better wages and benefits for the workers.

I would support requiring medical personnel to be available on site for workers in industries with higher risk of injury. There is at the present time no coordination between the Industrial Commission and the Labor Department with respect to identifying the source of injury claims and the reporting of injuries by employers to the Department of Labor. I propose changing this so that all claims are simultaneously filed with the Department of Labor.

The State’s on-the-job training programs [apprenticeship programs] are in need of upgrading. Specifically, they need to be accompanied with quality related classroom instruction by qualified teachers.

4. What workplace ergonomic standards will you propose if elected? Will you institute (or propose?) workplace ergonomics standards? If so, please briefly describe them.

I have been a long-standing advocate of adopting an ergonomics standard for OSHA. I also believe that the State should adopt the State’s Building Code as an OSHA standard in order to empower the inspectors to cite egregious violations such as barricaded exits. No new standards have been adopted for North Carolina’s OSHA program during the past 7 years.

5. It has been pointed out that a family, whose breadwinner works for minimum wage—even with the recent minimum wage increase—is still living in poverty. Do you support the idea of legislating a “living wage,” which guarantees a worker will be paid enough to feed, cloth, and house their family? Why or why not?

I support an increase in the state minimum wage in two different ways. First, I support increasing the minimum wage to $9.70. This is the same as the federal minimum wage was in 1968 when adjusted for inflation. Today the federal minimum wage is $5.85 after Congress voted to increase it by 70 cents an hour last summer. The current state minimum wage is $6.155 per hour. Second, I believe that the state law should be amended to provide for an annual cost of living or inflationary increase.

As Commissioner of Labor previously, I initiated and was successful in getting the North Carolina General Assembly to enact into law a provision that automatically increases North Carolina’s minimum wage when it otherwise is below the minimum. However, the federal government sat on the minimum without any increase for a long time and North Carolina went ahead and increased its minimum higher than that set by the federal government. Two things now needed are a provision for a cost of living adjustment to the minimum annually and a reassessment of the minimum at both the federal and stat level of governments to the end of establishing a “living wage.”

6. Specifically, how will you address the documented, on-going violations of health and workplace safety laws at the Smithfield and Raeford slaughterhouses and packing plants?

Current law assigns the Commissioner of Labor two possible roles in labor-management situations such as that exemplified by the Smithfield Foods conflict: (1) that of a mediator, and (2) that of a facilitator in bringing the parties to the table to discuss an agenda of issues. At the present time, I view that particular situation as on to which the Commissioner of Labor should respond actively as a facilitator. If Commissioner of Labor, I would initiate such actions.

7. What would you do to address the well-documented conditions of substandard housing, unsanitary conditions, dangerous pesticide exposure, and other abuses of human rights in regard to seasonal agricultural workers?

As Commissioner of Labor for 16 years, I initiated the nation’s first seasonal agricultural workers inspection program and adopted OSHA standards covering both conditions at camps and other facilities housing seasonal agricultural works as well as their exposure to hazardous conditions and dangerous pesticides and/or other chemicals. This program, while vigorously opposed by the U.S. Department of Labor when it was established, is continuing to be pursued by the North Carolina Department of Labor. I am not currently in a position to know how comprehensively the program is executed, but I believe it is doing the work for which it was designed.

8. What practices of the current Labor Commissioner would you change, and why?

I do not believe that the current Commissioner of Labor is an advocate for the new laws and safety standards and revisions in current labor laws that are urgently needed.

I think that the present level of enforcement of OSHA standards can most easily be seen by the fact that the OSHA Review Board appointed by the Governor scheduled three appeals for OSHA fines in 2007. These appeals have not overworked the OSHA Review Board’s full-time staff consisting of an attorney and secretary.

The Department of Labor oversees formal apprenticeship skill training in North Carolina. Each apprentice is required to have 144 hours of related instruction each year, is supervised one-on-one by a licensed journeyman in his/her trade, and is interviewed annually by a staff member of the Department of Labor. Most skilled trades require 8000 hours of on the job training to qualify for journeyman status. While there are a number of fairly small excellent apprenticeship programs in North Carolina, the current emphasis of the program is reflected by the fact that there are at present time 1686 active apprentices training as prison guards, 243 training as highway patrolmen, and 245 training as police officers. These apprentices account for more than half of this state’s current apprenticeship program. As Commissioner of Labor I would refocus the program to emphasize training tool and dye makers, plumbers, electricians, carpenters, crane operators, elevator mechanics, auto mechanics, bio-technicians, and craft workers in the approximately 550 trades for which no North Carolinians are now being trained.

CAREER HIGHLIGHTS
President, Easter North Carolina High School Government Congress and graduate of Greenville High School, Greenville, NC
Morehead-Cain Scholar, UNC, Chapel Hill
J.D. Degree, University of Chicago
Law Clerk, Justice William H. Bobbitt, N.C. Supreme Court
Staff, Governor Terry Sanford, Office of Race Relations
Administrator, N.C. Mayors’ Cooperating Committee
Staff Attorney, North Carolina Fund
Chief of Staff, Maryland Constitutional Convention
First Administrative Officer of N. C. General Assembly
Executive Assistant to the President, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention
Served 16 years as N.C. Commissioner of Labor
Staff Attorney, Industrial Commission, N.C. Department of Commerce

EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS
Served 16 years as N.C. Commissioner of Labor
Attorney, J.D. Degree
First Administrative Officer of N.C. General Assembly
Former Member, Occupational Safety and Health Law Committee, Section of Labor and Employment Law, Public Co-chairman, American Bar Association
International Association of Governmental Labor Officials, Former Member, Executive Committee
Former President, National Association of Governmental Labor Officials
Former President, National Apprenticeship Program
Former Chairperson, National Occupational Safety and Health State Plan Association

REPLY OF MARY FANT DONNAN, CANDIDATE FOR COMMISSIONER OF LABOR

1. Do you support changing the law that denies State and Local government employees the right to engage in collective bargaining?

Yes. Recognizing that many of these people are essential workers in times of crisis or in response to community health or safety issues, I think the option for collective bargaining with limitations on work stoppages could be explored. The key thing that is missed in the absence of collective bargaining is the opportunity for workers who are making all of our lives better to speak about their working conditions, the safety there, their wages, and the impact of under-funding on the work loads.

2. Do you support the efforts of Smithfield Foods employees to unionize? As Labor Commissioner how would you address the concerns regarding Smithfield’s alleged violations of labor law?

Yes. From what I have read, most of the violations fall under the jurisdiction of the federal labor department, and the efforts to unionize are at this point tied up in the courts. I think the most important way to address these issues is to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, and to create a workplace framework that allows workers to advocate for their own needs with a focus on safety, fairness, and productivity.

3. What strategies will you employ to obtain the increased funding and legal authority necessary for the office of Labor Commissioner to properly address violations of health and safety laws, and violations of workers rights?

This response will be two-fold: to develop sound policy recommendations to bring the framework of our regulatory system into sync with workplaces of the 21st century and then to advocate for those recommendations in the General Assembly – both for funding and for the rules oversight review necessary to get new regulations passed.

4. It has been pointed out that a family, whose breadwinner works for minimum wage—even with the recent minimum wage increase—is still living in poverty. Do you support the idea of legislating a “living wage,” which guarantees a worker will be paid enough to feed, cloth, and house their family? Why or why not?

I do support the concept of a living wage. So far, it is the most accurate assessment of what it takes to support a family. The first iteration of a living wage standard was the basis of my initial work at the Department of Labor around how to develop Individual Development Accounts and to provide worker supports that make for a living income. I believe work should pay enough to provide for the worker. I refer frequently to the N.C. Justice Center’s living wage research. It provides a helpful way to understand the local economies, and the very challenging nature of finding work in many communities that pays a living wage. It also lifts up examples of how many public sector employees are paid below a living wage.

5. What workplace ergonomic standards will you propose if elected? Will you institute (or propose?) workplace ergonomics standards? If so, please briefly describe them.

I believe very much that ergonomics is vitally important to today’s workplaces. The Ergonomics Center of the 1990’s was one important way to help employers find ways to re-engineer work processes and to adjust systems to reduce injuries. Prevention and education are very important elements of an ergonomics standard. I also believe that an ergonomics standard does need to be re-visited. The science behind ergonomics is complicated. I would commit to working with representatives of industry and labor as well as health providers to determine what the best way possible is to minimize all workplace injuries, and would be a staunch advocate for making necessary changes.

6. Specifically, how will you address the documented, on-going violations of health and workplace safety laws at the Smithfield and Raeford slaughterhouses and packing plants?

I support the efforts in Congress this week stemming from The Charlotte Observer’s research that opens the conversation about overhauling our workplace safety system so that such practices cease. Answer #5 mentioned the important steps for preventing injuries. No employer or any other resident wants to see another employer not living up to the highest quality standards of the industry. Inspections have dropped off, and injuries are being discussed, but concerns about reporting remain. All of these factors must be addressed in any steps moving forward. I am a candidate willing not only to look at the issues but also to act on what I find.

7. What would you do to address the well-documented conditions of substandard housing, unsanitary conditions, dangerous pesticide exposure, and other abuses of human rights in regard to seasonal agricultural workers?

Last summer’s revisions for migrant farmworker safety were steps in the right direction, and the efforts through the Grower’s Association, the H2A Program, and the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (along with many other advocates) have created a system that led to the first death-free summer. That should always be the case. I would work with farmworker advocates and growers to create the best possible policies for fairness and safety. All of us benefit from the food harvested in our state by many migrant farmworkers. It is only just to make sure that they do not suffer for our benefit.

8. What practices of the current Labor Commissioner would you change, and why?

I think it is time to break the silence. For worker safety and health, it is essential to ask that all aspects of injuries and illnesses be reviewed (not just fatalities). It is important to speak up on issues within the department’s purview (such as ergonomics, state minimum wage, migrant farmworker housing) when those issues come before the General Assembly. It is also important to bring a voice of workers and industry to the overall discussions at a state level regarding the future of our state. That voice has been lacking in these past seven years, and I can be that voice.

NOTE: REPLY FROM LABOR COMMISSIONER CANDIDATE TYRONE RICHARDSON HAS NOT YET BEEN RECEIVED.

REPLY OF WAYNE GOODWIN, CANDIDATE FOR COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE

1. Are you participating in the state public financing program? Why or why not?

Yes. In fact, I was the first person in the Insurance Commissioner race to file the requisite “Declaration of Intent” form with the State Board of Elections. I did so only two business days after filing for office. The other candidates in this race waited for more than a month before making a decision on whether to participate or not. Until those other candidates made such required declaration, they were free and able to solicit and accept special interest money, and until then were not actually taking part in the program. My campaign, on the other hand, has refused to take special interest money and follows the mandatory guidelines of accepting individual contributions of only between $10 and $200.

For the record, as a member of the Board of Directors of the NORTH CAROLINA CENTER FOR VOTER EDUCATION I became a prominent spokesperson and vocal advocate for public financing in Council of State races beginning many years ago. I drafted legislation on public financing of Council of State races as early as 1997 when I began my service as State Representative in the General Assembly. Additionally, I introduced legislation that eventually became the Judicial Public Financing Program, the model on which the Voter-Owned Elections (Council of State) model was based. My op-ed columns on this subject have run in Statewide newspapers.

2. Do you believe that acceptance of campaign contributions from individuals employed by companies that are regulated by the Insurance Commissioner creates a conflict of interest? Why or why not?

It depends. If the Insurance Commissioner accepts significant numbers of large contributions – for example, of $250 or more – from a significant number of individuals so employed, then it may create that perception. However, please keep in mind that the Department of Insurance not only regulates insurance agents and insurance companies, but also has a role in the regulation of firefighters, manufactured housing industry folks, bail bondsmen, life safety educators, and building code inspectors, among many others. And then there are folks who are indirectly regulated by the Department –persons who come before the Building Code Council, the Arson Awareness Council, the Fire and Rescue Commission, the Safe Kids Program, etc. If we were to completely deny the rights of those persons from making a minimal contribution of even $10 through the public financing program then the program itself would fail. In sum, there would be an appearance of a conflict of interest, in my opinion, only if a significant number of one industry contributed a significant number of large dollar (>$250 each) contributions to the Insurance Commissioner. Ultimately it is still up to the Insurance Commissioner to do his or her job in a manner and method that gives favor to NO ONE, regardless of the size or amount of contributions. I strongly encourage continuation of the public financing program beyond the 2008 election cycle.

3. Do you support or oppose Blue Cross Blue Shield of NC’s efforts to convert to a for-profit corporation?

Oppose. Consistent with my position while a State legislator and based on all
information available to me, I will oppose such conversion to a for-profit corporation.

4. What action will you take as Insurance Commissioner to monitor Blue Cross Blue Shield of NC’s recently created for-profit subsidiary?

I will follow existing law, which is an appropriate method. The Department of Insurance and the Insurance Commissioner will closely monitor the situation and maintain communications so that the public (through the Insurance Commissioner) is well aware of the activities and plans of the subsidiary. Transparency is vital.

5. What will you do as Insurance Commissioner to help all North Carolinians get affordable health care insurance?

First of all, I would use the office of Insurance Commissioner as a “bully pulpit” to champion the cause of increasing the affordability and accessibility of health care insurance for North Carolinians. This office is the ONLY elected office whose mission – better yet, whose duty – is to advocate for the benefit of all citizens on matters of insurance and related items. Clearly, at least in my mind and as part of my platform, it is the Insurance Commissioner who must take the lead in helping our citizens obtain affordable health insurance. And as you know, to take the lead a leader must be a forceful, effective, articulate, and respected advocate.

Second, and in tandem with the above, I would work with our legislators and consumer-minded interest groups in the drafting of legislation that will further improve not only affordability of but also accessibility to health insurance. (One example where I have already done this: Working with Commissioner Jim Long, our Department of Insurance staff, lawmakers, and the insurance industry to craft a workable “high risk insurance pool” during the last year. This is one piece of the puzzle that will help us expand the pool of available, affordable health insurance for North Carolinians.)

Third, part of the Insurance Commissioner’s job description is to prevent unreasonable, unfair, discriminatory, high insurance rates. Therefore, I would wield the authority of this regulatory office to do the very best possible in keeping a lid on insurance rates of all kinds.

Fourth, I will utilize the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) to see what has worked in other states on this issue and, where possible and appropriate, use such legislation as a model for us to build on and implement in North Carolina.

6. The insurance lobby tried, but failed, to take away the authority of the Insurance Commissioner to set insurance rates in the 2007 General Assembly. Do you support or oppose those efforts?

I oppose those efforts!

As Democrats around North Carolina and our state legislators know, I personally fought very had to prevent the insurance industry from stripping the Insurance Commissioner of his current authority regarding consumer protection. I delivered speeches statewide, authored op-ed pieces and resolutions passed by countless county and state organizations, drafted legislative amendments, and personally met with most of the legislature in opposing that measure. In fact, the insurance industry also tried to do so in 2006 but worked harder at it in 2007.

I believe these same forces will redouble their efforts to strip the Insurance Commissioner of authority after 2008 because there will be a new Commissioner. However, this is the very reason why it is so monumentally vital that North Carolinians elect an Insurance Commissioner who has been a regulator (e.g., I’ve been Assistant Insurance Commissioner for three years already) and who has the legislative experience and relationships (e.g., I have 4 terms of House service) to dissuade the General Assembly from taking disastrous steps. My opponent in the Democratic Party primary works for the insurance industry (and is President-elect of the Health Insurance Underwriters Association) and has aligned himself with the very forces that attempted to strip away the Insurance Commissioner’s (i.e., the People’s) authority. We do not need the fox guarding the henhouse!

We must prevent the insurance industry from making the Department of Insurance the Department “for” Insurance.

7. Considering that the Insurance Commissioner is also the state’s Fire Marshal, what role would you play in addressing the increased threats of wildfire, and decreased water resources with which to fight them, due to the drought?

As State Fire Marshal, I would utilize my statewide relationships with the media in every corner of North Carolina to educate the public about this issue. More importantly and perhaps much more successfully, I will issue an Executive Order to all 1,500 fire departments in the State asking each of them to follow a measured plan on educating each fire district about the increased threat of wildfire and decreased water resources. I will also utilize the Arson Awareness Council, which the Insurance Commissioner chairs, in tandem with the NC Fire Marshals Association and the NC Fire Chiefs Association to develop an action plan.

In sum, there is a tremendous role for the Insurance Commissioner (State Fire Marshal) to play in addressing this issue. That is yet another reason why my years of service as Assistant State Fire Marshal and Assistant Insurance Commissioner in the Department of Insurance already make me best suited to be our next Insurance Commissioner.

8. What role do you see the Insurance Commissioner playing in insuring safe oversight and evacuation planning for the state’s nuclear plants? Do you see any specific safety concerns that need to be addressed if the number of reactors at the Shearon Harris plant is increased?

This is an excellent question. Many months ago I had conversations with PDNC’s Pete MacDowell about this very subject, and have worked with him and others on resolutions from the NC Democratic Party and legal memoranda on this subject during my time as Assistant General Counsel for the Department of Insurance (before becoming Assistant Commissioner).

Given that the Insurance Commissioner is statutorily mandated to be the State Fire Marshal, and thereby works with all public emergency services workers and first responders, I believe that the Insurance Commissioner does have a role in ensuring safe oversight and evacuation planning for the State’s nuclear power plants. This role includes incident planning, incident training, and coordination of information between and among the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), other federal agencies, and both State and local agencies so that we’re all on the same page.

As for specific safety concerns, I have these: If the number of reactors at Shearon Harris is increased, then it is imperative that municipal, county and State emergency management officials – as well as fire fighters, etc. – amend their response plans. An increased number of reactors will necessarily have some impact on the type and amount of response needed by local and State government.

Furthermore, and as a corollary to the above, an increased number of reactors may very well cause an indirect unfunded mandate on local governments (and the State) in that a larger number of first responders will be required if there is any type of nuclear incident at Shearon Harris. A larger number of first responders will affect local budgets negatively. This fact must be addressed by the nuclear industry. I suggest that the Insurance Commissioner, the NC League of Municipalities, the Utilities Commission, and the legislature have a discussion about this very subject.

I encourage submission of additional information on this specific topic, and would welcome further dialogue in the near future.

REPLY OF DAVID C. SMITH, CANDIDATE FOR COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE

1. Are you participating in the state public financing program? Why or why not?

I am participating in the state public financing program because I believe it is
absolutely essential that we restore confidence in our public institutions. I have gone
further by limiting contributions to $200 from all individuals and promised not to
accept any political action committee donations now or in the future.
I have long been a proponent of public financing, including during my race for State
House in 1998 and while serving on the Common Cause of North Carolina Governing
Board in the early part of this decade.

2. Do you believe that acceptance of campaign contributions from individuals
employed by companies that are regulated by the Insurance Commissioner
creates a conflict of interest? Why or why not?

I do not believe it is a conflict of interest provided candidates disclose all of our
contributors, so voters may hold us accountable for those relationships.

The reality of our current system is that we must raise money in order to be a
competitive candidate. To highlight my commitment to the system and to limiting any
influence, I will only accept contributions up to $200 from qualified individuals
according to the rules of the public financing program. I have not accepted nor will I
ever accept a contribution from PACs – not just now but throughout my service as
Insurance Commissioner. That is a stance that no one else in this race is willing to
take.

Unfortunately the realities of paying for a modern campaign require a high level of
funding, but I believe by limiting contributions to $200, accepting no PAC funds and
fully disclosing all my contributors is evidence that I will not be unduly influenced.

3. Do you support or oppose Blue Cross Blue Shield of NC’s efforts to convert to a
for-profit corporation?

I oppose any effort by BCBSNC to convert to a for-profit enterprise and would never
favor a for-profit conversion by BCBSNC. The allure of the “conversion money” that
would come to the state, like the tobacco settlement money, would be seen by future
policymakers as just a pool of money to spend on unrelated projects. I do not believe
conversion would benefit health insurance consumers in our state because a for-profit
Blue Cross would not remain headquartered in North Carolina. In fact, a for-profit
company is more likely to be absorbed by the “Blue” Wellpoint/Anthem giant that
has monopoly power in far too many states and has already lost most of the original
Blue Cross mission of helping individuals to afford health care in their local
community.

As Commissioner, I will work to ensure that the public trust is maintained by Blue
Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina and all other health insurance carriers so that
health insurance premiums are appropriate and fair, and that appropriate reserves are
maintained.

4. What action will you take as Insurance Commissioner to monitor Blue Cross
Blue Shield of NC’s recently created for-profit subsidiary?

I will closely monitor the entity and ensure their strict compliance with our state’s
conversion law through this subsidiary.
It is not the first for-profit entity which BCBSNC owns. Currently there are four other
entities: Saegis, which was previously known as Group Insurance Services and is
their arm for ancillary product sales; Personal Care Plan, the original BCBSNC HMO
(which I believe is now defunct), Partners, which it purchased a few years ago from
Novant and is the source of its sales of Medicare Advantage programs, and a ACS
Benefit Services, Inc., a third party administrator which was also a part of the Novant
sale.

My focus will be to maintain BCBSNC’s exclusive ownership of any subsidiary
which sells health insurance or administers health plans in North Carolina to ensure
that the nonprofit entity maintains its mission to our state’s citizens.

5. What will you do as Insurance Commissioner to help all North Carolinians get
affordable health care insurance?

I have outlined a comprehensive plan on addressing the ills in the health care system
in North Carolina. First, we do not need to focus on affordable health insurance – we
need to focus on affordable, high quality health insurance. We can achieve the goal of
more affordable health insurance by eliminating the level of benefits and reduce
mandates, but that would be, in my opinion, counterproductive.
I support an expansion of Medicaid to 200% of the poverty level to cover the
significant number of individuals who are among the state’s working poor. I also
favor streamlining North Carolina's application processes for public health insurance
programs like Medicaid and SCHIP, and allow for presumptive eligibility, so that all
eligible participants are enrolled and their providers are paid instead of incurring
uncompensated care expenses.

I will strongly advocate an expansion of the S-CHIP program in North Carolina so
that all children in North Carolina are covered for their health care needs. I would
also support using the S-CHIP program in North Carolina to subsidize the cost of
health insurance for those working for small businesses in North Carolina.
I want to explore options for a multi-state stop loss reinsurance pool for small
business health insurance (1-100 employee groups) to cover claims above a certain
threshold (e.g. $200,000) for the purpose of reducing the cost of health insurance for
the employees of small businesses, a significant portion of our uninsured population.
As someone who supported the creation of a high risk pool for individuals in North
Carolina for over 10 years, I am proud that it is formed and will be operational
January 1, 2009. I am hopeful that this Pool will help deal with the high cost of health
insurance for individuals who, because of their medical history, cannot find coverage
they can afford.

Finally, I propose the formation of a Cost Containment Commission to bring together
consumers, business leaders, health care providers, pharmaceutical companies,
private insurers, and patient advocates to recommend ways to reduce the trend of
increasing in health care through efficiencies in administrative cost, ongoing attention
to spending trends, technology and consistency in care.

6. The insurance lobby tried, but failed, to take away the authority of the
Insurance Commissioner to set insurance rates in the 2007 General Assembly.
Do you support or oppose those efforts?

I oppose any effort to reduce the Commissioner’s authority to set insurance rates as I
believe that public accountability must be maintained.

7. Considering that the Insurance Commissioner is also the state’s Fire Marshal,
what role would you play in addressing the increased threats of wildfire, and
decreased water resources with which to fight them, due to the drought?

I favor the use of lower thresholds during drought conditions for setting burning bans
and an increased role for firefighters to work directly with the Emergency
Management Division and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(and the federal Forest Service) to more closely monitor conditions for wildfires and
drought. I would also be an advocate for more efficient management of our old
growth forests to prevent future problems.

It should also be noted that the Insurance Commissioner also has responsibility for
the state’s building codes and licensure and training of building inspectors throughout
North Carolina. Therefore I would use the power of the office to reduce the likelihood
of fire loss, I would favor stronger building codes and the integration of green
building standard into the code and to encourage their adoption through tax incentives
for housing that reduces its carbon footprint by 75% over traditional building. One
concrete example: I would change the building code to permit builders to use gray
water systems in residential and commercial settings to reduce water usage.

8. What role do you see the Insurance Commissioner playing in insuring safe
oversight and evacuation planning for the state’s nuclear plants? Do you see any
specific safety concerns that need to be addressed if the number of reactors at
the Shearon Harris plant is increased?

There is a clear and urgent need to ensure that safety and planning are well
considered for areas around the state’s nuclear power reactors, as well as those
reactors near our borders in surrounding states.

I see two immediate concerns about the increase in the number of reactors at Shearon
Harris. First, I believe that every fire department within a 30-mile radius should
receive special training in the handling and management of nuclear power plant fires
so that they are prepared to assist with any emergency at Shearon Harris. Second,
because adding a reactor would of the increased the risk of fires, due to the additional
reactor, I would demand that there be adequate fire suppression capability be on site
before any additional reactors are built or put into operation at that or any other
nuclear power plant in North Carolina.

Beyond these specific nuclear issues, I would also play be an advocate role on other
essential environmental issues which might arise (e.g. my opposition to the National
Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility in Granville County because of its negative potential
impacts to the community and the likelihood that any property damage resulting from
an accident would not be covered by residential and commercial liability policies.)