Team Leader Training

Lobby Days 2021

AGENDA

• Welcome • Introductions (Break out rooms)• NASW Advocacy & Team Leader Role• Review Lobby Days Website• Legislative Process• Lobby Days Bills• Checklist and Reminders

NASW ADVOCACY• SOCIAL WORKERS ADVOCATE!– It’s in our code of ethics• 6.04 Social workers should engage in social and

political action that seeks to ensure that all people have equal access to the resources, employment, services and opportunities they require to meet their basic human needs and to develop fully.

– It’s in our history and tradition• Connecting policy and practice and part of social

work education

NASW LOBBY DAYS• Component of NASW advocacy program (800

advocates, meeting over 100 legislators)• Training social workers to be advocates within

the legislative system• The power of social workers lobbying issues

that impact their clients and their profession• Team leaders bring organization and leadership

to a mass effort

TEAM LEADER ROLE• NASW trains the team leaders on Saturday

• Team leaders organize and train their teams on Sunday

• Team leaders lead their team on Monday

• The team evaluates the experience

TRAIN AND ORGANIZE THE TEAM• Your team is assigned to you based on the legislative

district where they reside (6-8 team members).

• Most will have little or no experience lobbying

• Some team leaders will have more than one team, if this is the case, you train everyone together in one Zoom meeting.

TRAIN AND ORGANIZE THE TEAMOn Sunday after the end of the program (1:30 PM):❑ Make sure everyone has the link to the team

meeting(s)❑ Make sure the team members know when

their appointment is on Monday and that they have the correct Zoom link.

❑ Short introductions (school, internships)❑ Share the legislator background info (Profile,

committee assignments, voting record)❑ Discuss and learn the lobby bills/topics

Organize your team❑ Assign team members to speaking roles❑ Team leader should introduce the team and NASW and start off

the meeting❑ One person can talk about the role of social workers and 1-2

people can talk about each bill. Personal stories are always useful.

❑ Each bill should take 2-3 minutes, total meeting 15 - 30 minutes❑ Make sure you ask the Legislator or staff how the member will

vote on the bill.❑ Team leader should wrap up meeting and put the link to our

lobby day page in the chat: https://www.naswca.org/page/164❑ Practice, Practice, Practice!!

Who We Are• We represent the National Assn. of Social Workers, CA

Chapter and we are professional social workers and social work students.

• Professional social workers have an accredited degree in social work.

• Social workers serve as mental health clinicians, child welfare workers, medical social workers, and school social workers (just to name a few).

• Social workers also work in our courtrooms, health clinics, senior centers, homeless shelters, nursing homes, the military, disaster relief centers, prisons, and in community-based organizations.

• Social workers are essential workers, and we are everywhere!

10

AB 71 (L.Rivas, Bloom, Chiu, Wicks)(Principal coauthor: Kalra)

(Coauthors: Carillo and Lee)

Bring California Home Act

Background/Problem• Our state is facing an unprecedented homelessness crisis

which has been exacerbated by Covid-19.• California is the fifth largest economy in the world, yet,

one in four Americans who experience homelessness reside in CA.

• A recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of CA concluded that Californians identified homelessness as one of the most pressing issues facing our state.

• California has historically financed very few homelessness programs with ongoing funding.

AB 71 Summary• AB 71 plans to address homelessness by investing, for the first

time ever, dedicated annual state funding to our local governments for homelessness.

• This bill aspires to raise $2.4 billion a year for local governments to invest in localized housing solutions.

• Conforms to federal tax law on the Global Intangible Low-Tax Income (GILTI) tax law, which taxes a percentage of profits from corporations that have shifted profits overseas to avoid U.S. Taxes.

• Conforms to federal tax law on repatriated income (one-time funding).

• The bill’s sponsors are also looking to secure additional funding in the budget.

AB 71• In addition, AB 71 offers a comprehensive approach to

addressing homelessness, by:

Ø Promoting best practices among local jurisdictions.Ø Holding local governments accountable for how the money is

spent.Ø Allowing local governments to invest in housing solutions that

take into account a community’s unique needs.Ø Restructuring the existing members of Homeless Coordinating

Financing CouncilØ Includes programs that fund emergency shelters within the

purview of the council.Ø Special attentions to vulnerable populations such as: domestic

violence survivors, former foster youth, those formerly incarcerated, racial, ethnic, LGBTQ+ communities, mental health & SUD conditions, veterans, parenting youth, etc.

14

AB 71 Amendments• Removed the increase in the corporate income tax rate.• Incorporated recommendations from the Franchise Tax Board

to strengthen their ability to implement AB 71. • Removed references to housing development in the bill.• Expands the ability of counties and homeless continuums of

care to pay for the ongoing operating and services costs of board and care for those who cannot live independently.

Arguments for the Bill• California was already seeing an increase in homelessness

prior to the pandemic.• Between 2018 and 2019, CA’s homeless population

increased by nearly 17 percent. • Researchers believe we could experience another 25 percent

increase in homelessness due to the pandemic.• Our current approach to homelessness does not address the

specific needs of certain communities, such as racial, ethnic, LGBTQ+. Two in five Californians experiencing homeless are African American.

• Local Governments do not want to be left on the hook for funding.

• This bill will provide a reliable sources of revenue.

Support• NASW-CA• Corporation for Supportive Housing• Housing CA• City of Los Angeles, Mayor Eric Garcetti• City of San Francisco, Mayor London Breed• City of Oakland, Mayor Libby Schaaf• Episcopal Community Services – San Francisco• John Burton Advocates for Youth• National Alliance to End Homelessness• Non-Profit Housing Assn. of Northern CA• Steinberg Institute• United Way of Greater Los Angeles (Partial list)

Status• This bill has been referred to the Assembly Revenue and

Taxation committee for a hearing on April 19, and to the Housing and Community Development Committee on April 29.• The Members of Rev & Tax are: Chair, Autumn Burke (D),

Vice-Chair, Janet Nguyen (R), Adam Gray (D), Timothy Grayson (D), Marc Levine (D), Chad Mayes (I), Kevin Mullin (D), Cottie Petrie-Norris (D), Bill Quirk (D), Luz Rivas (D), Kelly Seyarto (R).• The Members of Housing & Community Development include:

Chair, David Chiu (D), Vice-Chair, Kelly Seyarto (R), Jesse Gabriel (D), Ash Kalra (D), Kevin Kiley (R), Brian Maienschein(D), Sharon Quirk-Silva (D), Buffy Wicks (D).

Political Realities

• This bill as amended, improved its chances • The May Revise is expected to show increased

revenues which increases the changes to augment the funding for this program.

• There is competition to secure General Fund revenue from the budget surplus.

• This is an urgency measure, requires a 2/3 vote• Work through the Budget Process

AB 1400 (Kalra, Lee, and Santiago)

(Principal coauthors: Asm. Chiu and Asm.Ting)(Coauthors: Assemblymembers Friedman, Kamlager,

McCarty, Nazarian, Luz Rivas, and Wicks)(Coauthors: Senators Becker, Cortese, Laird, and

Wieckowski)

Guaranteed Health Care for All

Why Single Payer Healthcare?

• Our System is Terrible• High Costs• Uninsured and underinsured• Bad Results• Extreme inequity• Failed public health though resource starvation

21

Background/Problem• Nearly 3 million Californians do not have health insurance,

while millions more have insurance they can’t afford to use because their copays and deductibles are too high.

• This number has grown since the Covid-19 pandemic caused many people to lose their employer-based health care.

• Even before the pandemic, 57 percent of all Californians supported replacing private insurance with guaranteed coverage provided by the government.

• Health care spending in the US far outpaces other industrialized countries.

• Yet, we have worse health outcomes, including shorter life expectancy and a greater prevalence of chronic conditions.

• Disparities among vulnerable populations and our growing senior population further strains our health care system.

AB 1400 Summary• Creates the California Guaranteed Health Care for All Act

(CalCare).• This will guarantee comprehensive, high-quality health care

for all Californians as a human right.• A single payer system will take the profit out of healthcare.• Will save families and businesses thousands in annual health

care costs by cutting out the bloat, waste, and inefficiencies of our fragmented, for-profit insurance system.

• Will streamline payments and lower per-capita spending. • Aligns reimbursements with the actual cost of care.• Will set in place a comprehensive framework of governance,

eligibility and enrollment, benefits, delivery of care and health care cost controls and program standards.

CalCare Mission and Duties

• Comprehensive benefits – including prescription drugs, reproductive care, mental health & dental. Must meet or exceed, Medicaid/Cal, Medicare, ACA, CHIP, Knox-Keene.

• Freedom of Choice in choosing doctors, hospitals and other providers.

• No premiums, copays, or deductibles• Addresses health care disparities by removing barriers to

care and funding health care facilities in rural or underserved communities.

• Long-Term Services and Supports for People with Disabilities and the Elderly.

24

CalCare Mission and Duties

• Reduces Health Care Spending and Improves Care –implements a simplified payment system to free health care providers from devoting time on billing rather than patient care. CalCare can negotiate bulk drug prices.

• Global budget for institutional providers – CalCare would negotiate fair, adequate global budgets to hospitals and other institutional providers to help contain the exorbitant cost by aligning payments with the actual cost of care.

• By passing AB 1400, the state can seek federal waivers from the federal government to provide flexibility, expand benefits, and eliminate cost-sharing.

• Will be governed by a diverse nine-member board with expertise in health care policy and delivery. .

25

What AB 1400 Does Not Do

• Change practitioner licensing or infringe on practice acts• Impose rigid clinical guidelines (respects

autonomy/judgement of providers)• Impose prior authorizations• Allow step therapy (not allowed)• No referral from a specialist required to see a provider• Doesn’t allow enrollment fees, premiums, co-pays,

coinsurance, deductibles• Allow HMOs or capitation payments

26

How Will We Pay for This?• A: The money is already there - it is just misappropriated to for-profit

entities.• Currently we pay over $3 trillion for our health care this includes

premiums, copays and deductibles, as well as our tax monies that pay for Medicaid and Medicare.

• Studies on a single payer system estimate it would cost the nation somewhere between $2.9 and 3.2 trillion for a single payer system --mind you this is the cost to cover EVERYONE, and provide them with EVERYTHING including hospitals stays, operations, pharmaceuticals, rehab, mental health AND dental, vision and hearing -- All without monthly premiums, copays or deductibles.

• Possible funding sources include a corporate tax on major corporationsand rolling back the Trump tax break for the wealthy as well as a tax on Wall street transactions.

• There may be an increase in the Medicare tax, but that increase would be far less than what they pay for health insurance.

27

How Does AB 1400 Institute Single Payer In A Single State?

• Pass a bill (or a ballot initiative) that defines the health program.

• Request and receive federal “waivers” that allow you to redeploy federal funds from Medicaid, Medicare, and the Affordable Care Act

• Pass a tax program (probably another bill) to replace the funding that would be paid in the private sector (secret –would be less than we currently spend)

• Verify that all the money is in place before it goes into effect. (Falls on the Secretary of Health and Human Services)

28

Support• California Nurses Association (Sponsor)• NASW-CA• California Alliance for Retired Americans (CARA)• California Women for Workplace Justice• California OneCare• Health Care For All California• Indivisible CA Statestrong• Peace and Freedom Party of California• Physicians for a National Health Program, CA Chapter• UPTE-CWA• Various Democratic Clubs (partial list)

Status• This bill should be referred to the Assembly Health

Committee. It must be heard by April 30th. • Assembly Health, Chair, Jim Wood (D), Vice-Chair - Chad

Mayes (I), Cecilia Aguiar-Curry (D), Frank Bigelow (R), Rob Bonta (D), Autumn Burke (D), Wendy Carillo (D), Heath Flora (R), Brian Maienschein (D), Kevin McCarty (D), AdrinNazarian (D), Luz Rivas (D), Freddie Rodriguez (D), Miguel Santiago (D), Marie Waldron (R).

Political Realities

Since the last Single Payer bill - SB 562 (Lara) 2017-18 died in the Assembly, we have:– A new Governor– A new President– Covid experience– 2020 March Primary – With an Assembly author, there may be a better chance this

bill will be referred to committee, but if that does not happen…

• This is the beginning of a new movement to demand a single payer system in California.

• We are part of that movement!

31

AB 256 (Kalra, Kamlager, Robert Rivas, and Santiago)

(Principal coauthor: Assemblymember McCarty)(Principal coauthors: Senators Bradford and

Gonzalez)Coauthors: Assemblymembers Bonta, Carrillo,

Friedman, Lee, Levine, Stone, and Ting)(Coauthors: Senators Durazo, Laird, Skinner, and

Wiener)

The Racial Justice Act

Background

• Black men convicted of a felony are 42 percent more likely to be sentenced to prison than a white man. (Judicial Council)

• Latino men convicted of a felony were 32.5 percent more likely to be sent to prison than a white man. (Judicial Council)

• Despite being only six percent of the state’s overall population, African American men make up one-third of all people on death row ($142,000 annual cost).

• Every ten people incarcerated in state prison are African American men – ten times the imprisonment rate for white men. (Public Policy Institute of CA)

33

Background• The McCleskey v. Kemp US Supreme Court decision, on

April 22, 1987, was a historic and terrible ruling that had a lasting negative impact on the presence of racial bias and prejudice in the American Court System.

• An African American man (Warren McCleskey) was accused of killing a white police officer during a robbery and was faced with the death penalty.

• His attorney presented statistical evidence demonstrating that African American defendants were more like to receive a death sentence, and this ruling violated his constitutional rights.

• The court stated that the defendant must show “exceptionally clear proof of discrimination” and statistical evidence was insufficient.

34

The Problem

• The California Racial Justice Act, which was passed as AB 2542 in 2020, prohibits the state from seeking or obtaining a criminal conviction, or from imposing a sentence, based upon race, ethnicity or national origin.

• This allowed a person charged or convicted of a crime to challenge racial bias in their case, it was prospective only, excluding judgments rendered prior to January 1, 2021.

• Originally, the bill applied retroactively but that provision was amended out of the bill.

• Justice, should apply to all.

AB 256 Summary

• This bill, AB 256, applies the Racial Justice Act retroactively to all convictions that may have been racially biased.

• This will allow a defense attorney to look at things such as:– Blatantly racist statements by attorneys, judges, jurors and expert

witnesses– The exclusion of all, or nearly all Black or Latinx people from

serving on a jury– Stark statistical evidence showing systemic bias in charging and

sentencing

Arguments in Support • The California Racial Justice was a giant step forward in

addressing the problem of institutionalized and implicit racial bias in our criminal courts.• Justice must be applied to all, without regard to when the

unjust conviction or sentence was imposed.• This measure will save money.

ØAccording to the Judicial Council, criminal courts disposed of approximately 170,000 felony cases in 2019 alone.

ØMaking a conservative assumption, if only one percent of cases resulted in a more proportional prison sentence equaling a prison term of one less year, the state would save, $154.7 million in one year.

ØThe Legislative Analyst Office has estimated that the state spends $55 million annually on challenges to death sentences.

Support• NASW-CA• ACLU• American Friends Service Committee• Ella Baker Center for Human Rights• CA Coalition for Women Prisoners• CA United for a Responsible Budget• Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of LA• Initiate Justice• League of Women Voters of CA• Next Gen

Status of the Proposal• This bill passed out of the Assembly Public Safety Committee

on March 23 on a 6-2 vote. Bauer-Kahan (D), Jones-Sawyer (D), Lee (D), Quirk (D), Santiago (D) and Wicks all voted “AYE”. Lackey (R) and Seyarto (R) voted “NO”.

• The bill now goes to Assembly Appropriations. Chair -Lorena Gonzalez, Vice-Chair, Frank Bigelow, Bonta, Calderon, Carillo, Chau, Dahle, Davies, Fong, Gabriel, Garcia, Levine, Quirk, R. Rivas.

• It will have a “low” fiscal cost - $40 million

Political Realities• Advocates never thought AB 2542, the original Racial Justice

Act would be passed in one year, but it was passed during a year of racial unrest.

• After George Floyd and other instances of racial injustice, the Legislature is focused on this issue.

• Last year, AB 2542 slipped through the cracks and the opposition was not organized, things could be different this year.

• Important to state the case that this saves money.

The Visit(Monday)

❑If you can arrange a separate Zoom to practice beforehand, that may be useful.

❑Everyone should be on the Zoom about 10 minutes early.

❑Use the “waiting room” feature if possible so the Member or staff does not enter the meeting while you are preparing.

❑Team Leader:–Introduce the team, visit purpose–Say something positive (voting record)

The Visit• Individual Team Members presentation:–Introduce yourself, if constituent, say so–Your background in social work, or school–Field of practice–Who we are (1 person)–Speak to your section of the bill (2-3 minutes)

• Team Leader or Team Member–Ask if the Legislator supports the bill(s)–If not why? Record answers (Seal the Deal form)–Conclude the meeting, thank the member or staff

Check-off list❑Make sure everyone has the correct Zoom link,

including the legislative office.❑Dress and act professionally (business attire)❑Don’t be late and don’t bring non team members. ❑Turn off cell phones.❑Turn on your cameras and be attentive❑Watch you Zoom backgrounds❑Put yourself on mute when not speaking.❑Don’t switch appointments with someone else

After the Visit❑Debrief the visit with the whole team after the event

to complete the “Seal the Deal Form” which will be emailed after the event. Include any comments or follow up.

❑Attend the Virtual Social Action Rally, from 12 pm to Noon. (Open forum at the end)