Congressman Jim McDermott was here at the Stranger earlier today to answer questions from Slog readers live. Here are the questions and his answers for those of you who missed them previously:

Q: Rep. McDermott:

What will this Congress do to make concrete progress on slowing the United States’ staggering contribution to global warming? I think it’s clear that more study and research and committees are not the answer: we need to take decisive action on as many fronts as possible (conservation, new energy sources, etc.), and Bush’s recent suggestions would be laughable if they weren’t so depressing in their inadequacy. What can we expect and when can we expect it?

Thank you for giving us this opportunity.

Posted by Levislade | February 9, 2007 10:07 AM

A: The process has already started. One of the six issues that Speaker Pelosi brought to the floor in the first 100 hours was HR 6, energy legislation. I was selected as floor manager to get the bill passed. Then Speaker Pelosi set up a select committee to coordinate all the efforts of the various committees. The committee refers ideas and proposed legislation to the standing committees for action. We’ve taken the important first step of recognizing the energy crisis we face as a nation and the need to address global warming now. The cavalry is coming.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:08 AM

Q: Congressman McDermott: Which Democrat do you support for president, of those already declared, and why?

Posted by question | February 9, 2007 11:03 AM

A: Al Gore and Barack Obama is my dream team. Gore was right on the war, the environment and universal health care. What more do you need to know?

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:11 AM

Q: Dear Congressman McDermott:

I would like to offer a public apology to you. I was Linnea Noreen's campaign manager. I needed the money, she swore she was a liberal, now she's been offered a job at the Discovery Institute. I'm mortified. Anyway, just so you know, I voted for you not her.

Sincerely,

Morgan Dutton

Posted by Morgan | February 9, 2007 11:09 AM

A: All is forgiven. Go forth and sin no more.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:12 AM

Q: How would you pay for universal health care?

Posted by golob | February 9, 2007 11:04 AM

A: I start with the premise that we already spend enough money in this country to cover health care for everyone. The employer based system we now use is increasingly dysfunctional and must be replaced by a universal system of payment. There are many ways to do it. My bill- HR 1200- pays for it by a 10% tax levy on employers (which is less than most employers pay today for health care through their provider). Individuals would pay some portion of the premium as they do in most cases today. The U.S. spends $5,400 per person on health care. Worldwide, the average in the industrialized countries is $2,400. The next highest country, after the U.S., is Switzerland at $2,700. There is no financial argument that holds water against a universal system. A universal system must be one in which the health care is delivered by a private health care system.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:17 AM

Q: Per your quote on your website: "I believe we must apply the lessons of history and begin to end a damnable war that never needed to be fought in the first place." I applaud you!

In terms of initial steps, how do you envision that we begin the ending of the Iraq war?

Posted by Josh | February 9, 2007 11:14 AM

and...

Q: On the same day that US Defense Secretary Robert Gates claims he has evidence that Iran is providing weapons and technology for Iraqi "militants", a report comes out that top Pentagon officials twisted intelligence on Iraq's weapons back in 2002.

If they lied to us then, why should we believe them now?

Posted by DOUG. | February 9, 2007 11:10 AM

A: Given the history of this war, it is amazing that anyone believes what any public official says. The disastrous decisions made by Paul Bremer (Administrator appointed by Pres. Bush) to disband the Iraqi army and the civil service makes it clear why most Arab Iraqis believe that our intention was to give control to Iran. The first step in getting out of Iraq is for Congress to make a clear, declarative statement that it is the intention of Congress to cut off the money except for the protection of our troops as they re-deploy. That's what my legislation, patterned after the McGovern-Hatfield legislation in 1970, does.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:24 AM

Q: Dear Congressman McDermott,

What steps will Congress take to restore civil liberties and roll back the Bush administration's executive power grab?

The things I'm thinking of include:
-the phone taps and other spying on citizens
-the I-won't-do-it signing statements
-Gitmo (how are we ever going to close that down without releasing any really dangerous people held there? can we even try them for crimes now?)
-the recess and temporary appointments
-the massive number of political appointees to formerly technocrat-type jobs
...and many more.

You can't do much, maybe, until the next Congress, after Bush leaves office, but are there any plans? will you hold hearings?

This destruction of the fabric of the government and the basic premises on which it operates is my biggest concern after Iraq.

Thanks.

Posted by moose@belltown | February 9, 2007 11:13 AM

A: I share your extreme concern about the erosion of liberties in all the ways you raise. I heard Rep. John Conyers just yesterday, chair of the Judiciary Committee, talk about his plans to look at these issues one by one. I share your fear that Mr. Bush will veto anything we do. But we cannot sit still and let the country, or the world, believe that we accept the loss of liberty in the country that stands for liberty. Habeus Corpus and wiretaps are only a couple of the problems we face.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:28 AM

Q: Dear Congressman McDermott,

I'm sure you've been following the viaduct "process." How are you going to vote on the March 13 ballot measure? And if "no on both" wins and a transit-and-surface option gets another look, could there be additional federal money to fund both seawall replacement and at-grade light rail down a new Alaskan Way?

Thanks!

Posted by asdf | February 9, 2007 11:25 AM

A: I've been involved in transit questions since I came to Seattle in 1966 in Montlake, and we were fighting the R.H. Thompson expressway. We refuse in this city again and again and again, whether it be on I-90 or the 520 bridge, or now the Viaduct. It is ridiculous to put before the people a plan that moves only cars, not more people. Where is the mass transit on Aurora? It should be like Martin Luther King Way will become. We've got to think like we are living in the 21st Century, not visiting.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:32 AM

Q: Thanks for speaking to us today.

Will you be a voice in the House for Sen. Eric Oemig’s impeachment efforts?

Posted by Saunatina | February 9, 2007 11:29 AM

A: There's probably nothing that many of us would like more than to impeach George Bush, but the problems that face America are more important than beginning a process that will last longer than his term of office. We must put our energy at this point into stopping the war in Iraq, preventing the President from widening the war in Iran and bankrupting the country while failing to deal with the social needs- like health care- of your own people. Remember, if we remove George Bush, we get Dick Cheney- is that improvement?

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:36 AM

Q: Given the clear intransigence of the GOP in the U.S. Senate, what real chance do the non-binding resolutions against President Bush's "Iraq Surge" really have in terms of exerting any meaningful effect on Administration policy, particularly given that the surge is already underway?

Posted by COMTE | February 9, 2007 11:10 AM

A: First of all, stop saying "surge" and call it what it is: escalation. Just because you think the President will ignore it does not mean the Congress should not act to prevent it. He is simply setting the stage for a total obliteration for the Republican Party in the next election if he refuses to recognize where the American people are. Unfortunately, cutting off funds is not a surgical procedure, but is a meat-ax approach, but that's all we have. Like it or not, there is a process. This President has already indicated that if we give him money, he will do whatever he wants with it; that's why I am doing an amendment the way I am--to get at the orderly withdrawal specifically.

Winston Churchill said "Democracy is the worst form of government until you consider the alternatives." The Congress has the power to control the purse; if we fail to use it, we allow the President free rein to do what he wants. If he goes beyond us, as he seems inclined to do, he risks creating a constitutional crisis, but if we never say 'No' he is a free agent. It's just like dealing with a teenager- if you don't say no, they figure it is okay.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:42 AM

Q: Barackal Gorebama! What can Democrats do to avoid the "swiftboating" of their candidates, when CNN and other news organizations are so complicit in going along with right wing smear campaigns, like Pelosi's "jet scandal" and the Edward's "blogger scandal"?

Posted by Rambo | February 9, 2007 11:18 AM

A: In this political atmosphere, there is no alternative but to be ready to fire back instantly at all times. No one should ever get a second shot without having to duck.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:47 AM

Q: Rep. McDermott,

We understand that you support the surface/transit alternative for replacing the Viaduct. True? If so, can we count on federal dollars helping us tear down the Viaduct, replacing the seawall, and implementing surface street improvements?

Friends of Seattle

Posted by FoS | February 9, 2007 11:34 AM

A: The Viaduct must come down and the seawall must be replaced. The question then is: What's the most environmentally constructive way to move more people through the city? There are several alternatives that I would find acceptable, a tunnel on the waterfront, or on Western, or on 2nd Avenue, or a revised plan for surface traffic, as long as the net result is there is transit in addition to cars. In 1972, I tried to change the State Constitution to add the words "and transit" but it never happened. So, the Transportation Department remains a highway department, no matter what you call it. Transit options are always an afterthought or never-thought. As far as the federal money, I will work hard with the rest of the delegation for a result that replaces the seawall and removes the present danger- the Viaduct, and replaces it with a comprehensive transportation solution. Working with the rest of the delegation we have delivered over $130 million already.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:54 AM

Q: I sat behind you at the Varsity last month and would like to know how you would rate Bob Barr's performance in "Borat" versus yours in "Fahrenheit 9/11"?

Posted by DOUG. | February 9, 2007 10:48 AM

A: I'm still waiting for my "Best Supporting Actor" nomination, does that sum it up?

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:55 AM

Q: Bush has stated that nukes are an option in dealing with Iran. I have lost faith in the democratic party as a whole, but I did vote for you. Does it bother you that Pelosi has stated impeachment is off the table? If so, what are you going to do about it?

Posted by Gary | February 9, 2007 11:46 AM

A: A way to head the President off at the pass is for the Congress to immediately pass a law requiring a vote before any attack on Iran. Several have been introduced and I think we should act on them.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 11:59 AM

Q: Rep. Jim:

In the book "The Two Percent Solution", you and Rep. McCrery (R-LA) ironed-out a compromise on healthcare reform.

Now with the Democrats in the majority, do you think you and McCrery can "get the band back together" and pass universal healthcare in the near future?

Posted by Will | February 9, 2007 11:57 AM

A: Rep. Jim McCrery (R-LA) and I talked just the other day about how it might be possible to move forward now. I'm not sure that we will get it done this session, but we are going to try to set the stage for the 2008 presidential election, so that both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates must put forth a credible plan to be seen as a serious candidate. Our differences are not unreconcilable, but not easy to bridge.

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 12:05 PM

Q: Jim, I just wanted to say thanks for addressing questions on the Slog today. I appreciate this direct approach much more than sound bites served up by the AP.

Posted by Adam | February 9, 2007 11:19 AM

A: @20, and to everyone else, thanks. I prefer it too. I can't be very clear in a 12-second soundbite on television. We hope we are asked back. Thank you. Peace. Jim

Posted by Rep. Jim McDermott | February 9, 2007 12:07 PM

Here's the original Rep. McDermott post.