Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Sondheim + Disney = A Film Adaptati… | A New Gallery of World Contemporary… »

Thursday, January 12, 2012

2012 Suzan DelBene on Darcy Burner, the Millionaire's Tax, Occupy, and How Much Victory Is Worth to Her

Posted by Eli Sanders on Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Suzan DelBene

Suzan DelBene, the newly-announced candidate for Congress in Washington's 1st District, spoke to me by phone earlier today. Here's our interview, as transcribed by intern Marley Zeno.

Eli Sanders: You’re entering a crowded field. Why are you the best candidate who’s running in this district?

Susan DelBene: I think this is about jobs and the economy, and about what we do to support people in the 1st Congressional District who have been really impacted by this recession. And that means we need someone in Congress with the right skills to put policy together that has the impact we need it to have in the real world. And I have a unique set of skills that I bring to the table. I’ve worked in small business, managed, and worked with small businesses who are growing from scratch. I have worked in large business. I’ve worked in microfinance helping folks in poverty develop businesses and get back on their feet. And now I’ve spent time here in Olympia actually tackling these issues from a different direction in state government, and so I believe that experience really gives me unique knowledge on how policy hits the real world, and what we need to do to address the challenges that we face right now, not only in Washington state but across the country.

Parts of your resume match up pretty closely with the resume of another person in this contest. Why are you a better choice than Darcy Burner, the other female, former Microsoft manager who has tried and failed to unseat Dave Reichert and now wants to represent the 1st?

I think, once again, it’s about what the experiences are that someone brings to the table. I think my breadth of experience in small business, in large business, in entrepreneurism, and in biotech, and high tech, and even my work down here in state government really gives me a unique set of experiences and perspectives that the other candidates in the field don’t have.

There’s that old saw about how you learn a lot more from your defeats than your wins. What’s the biggest thing you learned from your loss to Dave Reichert in 2010?

I thought we ran a great campaign. I learned—and I think it’s just a reiteration of the work we did—that the most important thing that you can do is talk to people, understand their issues, and listen, because they have many of the answers. That was true in our last campaign and I have no doubt that’s going to be true in this campaign as well.

You’ve spent some time leading the Department of Revenue as an appointee of the governor, and you’re leaving that position now to run this campaign, but obviously the Department of Revenue connects right up with tax policy, and as a Congressperson you’d be dealing a lot with tax policy. When it comes to federal tax policy, would you be in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire?

I believe it should expire for higher wage earners.

What about the "Millionaires Tax" that Warren Buffett proposed earlier this year, which I believe would affect someone like you?

I think that he started a great conversation and we need to have a balanced approach to make sure that we can fund the things we want to fund, as well as make sure that government is operating efficiently—and that we put the reforms in place to make sure it’s up to date. So we need to look at both sides and come up with a balanced approach, and I appreciate the fact that he has sparked more of a conversation on that side to hopefully get us moving forward.

You put $2.2 million, I believe, into your 2010 campaign against Dave Reichert. Will you be self-funding this campaign and how much will you be putting in?

I believe it’s important that if I’m asking people to support me that I do my part and I will do my part. But I’m very confident that we’re going to have the resources we need to have a great campaign.

The Occupy movement has actually been a topic of a lot of conversation in the 1st District race already. What do you make of the movement, where it’s been, and where it’s going?

The real issue that people are bringing to light is the need for economic opportunity. I was fortunate to have that. My father lost his job when I was young, and my parents struggled quite a bit. Yet I was still able to go to college with student loans and grants and work-study. And we’ve eroded a lot of the opportunities that are available now, and folks are crying out and saying that we need to put that back together, and I believe for the long-term health of our economy—so that my children and my children’s children, and all of us across this great state, have the ability to pursue their dreams—that we need to put that back together. And I think they’re putting a light on that and we need to have that conversation as well.

FacebookShare

Comments (11) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

The problem was when they allowed lawyers and accountants and venture capitalists to avoid the Millionaire's Tax and they made it for less than a million, instead of having it on any person with more than $1 million in income (salary, capital gains, dividends, forward AGI, bonus) with zero exemptions other than the base $1 million.

Going to be fun seeing these two debate!

Posted by Will in Seattle

on January 12, 2012 at 2:11 PM

as soon as i saw 'balanced approach' in her response to the millionaire's tax i knew she was another bullshit 1% supporting democrat. maybe we should just call both parties kleptocrats? that is what they are doing, passing laws that siphon money from the rest of the nation into the hands of the 1%. it is the unified political project of both parties.

Posted by philosophy school dropout on January 12, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Christ, what a boring interview. No wonder she lost to Reichert.

Posted by Reverse Polarity on January 12, 2012 at 2:35 PM

She'll kowtow to the interests of the rich & corporations just like the rest of them. Feh!

Posted by treacle on January 12, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Wait, Eli, I thought Darcy Burner got the nomination and office automatically because she's Darcy Burner. Or did Goldy have that wrong?

Posted by Teslick on January 12, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Seven questions, 1.5 answers. She sounds like a real pro.

Posted by pox on January 12, 2012 at 3:31 PM

This doesn't happen very often, but I agree with @2. I would like to see her say "people like me have been getting a free ride for far too long". Her answer on taxing the rich is abysmal.

Posted by Fnarf

on January 12, 2012 at 4:08 PM

@7, she's treading lightly lest her Medina neighbors send a platoon of houseboys to TP her estate.

Posted by gloomy gus on January 12, 2012 at 4:55 PM

What @6 said.

DelBene sure did talk a lot to actually not say anything.

Posted by sisyphusgal on January 12, 2012 at 5:00 PM

hey- she's semi-bangable....

Posted by ....you know, cause most Democrap broads are scary ugly. on January 12, 2012 at 5:04 PM

She's clearly the establishment candidate. I'm sure she's made a lot of promises in that regard already. Going to be very hard going against her...

With the cash she'll bring and draw to the table you can do a lot of getting people to listen to you say what they want to hear. But if she and her H are going to take it to the next level and get invited to the next level of parties, they are going to have to really do some things for people that matter, and you can't do that in the Department of Revenue or by lending people money to get a new milk cow or herd of cheese milk pygmy goats.

Posted by cracked on January 13, 2012 at 12:34 AM