Ask Washington A Question
Questions are no longer being accepted in this category. You can read previous questions and answers below.
Race: Congress WA-08 | Reichert (R) vs DelBene (D)
Category_default

Congress WA-08 | Reichert (R) vs DelBene (D)

Congressman Dave Reichert (R) faces Susan DelBene (D) in the campaign for this seat for the US Congress. This is one of the hottest races in the country and could determine which party controls the US Congress. &...

Answers
Questions
Recent Comments
  • Comment on Jack's answer…
    Avatar_default

    The problem with this answer is simple: the only term which this (or any other representative) is guaranteed to serve is the one in which they're serving. If your explanation were hers - ie "I'm going to vote to cut Congressional pay but I know it'll only affect the terms after this one" - then she can't be said to be voting to cut her own pay at all, because there's no guarantee she'll be on the receiving end of that cut in two years.

    Her own answer is only slightly better (see comments above).

  • Comment on Suzan DelBene's answer…
    Swimming_small

    ctrl v

  • Comment on Suzan DelBene's answer…
    Swimming_small

    Wow, thanks but I was asking you about the environment not energy. You apparently have no idea how to read a question and answer it thoughtfully or your staff are wasted ass tired. Not an improvement on the status quo... I still hope you win but I am no more confident about the future if you do.

  • Comment on CRSeattle's answer…
    Electionland_avatar_pmocek_small

    CRSeattle, the fact that Ms. DelBene, along with a majority of her peers, could vote to reduce the salaries of all representatives does not explain how she could reduce her own salary.

  • Comment on Electionland's answer…
    Electionland_avatar_pmocek_small

    She has not yet answered the other question. She responded without answering. It's a two-part question, asking 1) how she will reduce her salary, and 2) if the 27th Amendment prohibits her from reducing her salary.

    Her response there included the following:

    1. Congress should reduce their pay by 10%.

    2. Congress reducing their pay by 10% would not solve the nation's fiscal problems.

    3. Congress reducing their pay by 10% would cause the culture in Congress to change

    4. Congress reducing their pay by 10% would emphasize that there isn't money to spare right now. (She didn't say to whom this would be emphasized.)

    5. Until Congress reduces their pay, she would reduce her own pay (she didn't way how) and donate the difference (the difference between what and what was not specified) to the Bureau of Public Debt. Presumably, she means that until Congress reduces pay for all representatives, she'll donate part of her own pay to the public treasury.

    None of those explains how she would reduce her pay (in fact, #5 suggests that she will be unable to do so), and none of them indicates whether or not the 27th Amendment prohibits her from reducing her pay.

    That said, I'd almost certainly vote for her over Reichert if I lived in the 8th district. DelBene refuses to answer simple questions about her campaign promise fluff on Electionland, but Reichert refuses to have a live debate with her and answer questions on-the-fly.

  • Comment on Suzan DelBene's answer…
    Electionland_avatar_pmocek_small

    Ms. DelBene, your response did not contain answers to either of the questions Soundslikepuget asked, which were: 1) How will you reduce your salary? 2) Does the 27th Amendment prohibit you from reducing your salary?

    I suspect that what you meant to say in response to the first of this multipart question was that while you will be unable to reduce your salary as you claimed you would, you'll do what you consider to be the next best thing, which is to promise to dedicate part of your salary to reducing the national debt. But you didn't say that, instead dodging both parts of this multipart question.

  • Comment on Suzan DelBene's answer…
    Avatar_default

    Ms. DelBene - thank you for responding, but I'm afraid that doesn't answer my question about the 27th Amendment precluding such action until an intervening election. I understand that you would voluntarily give back some of your own pay to the Bureau of Public Debt but that is not the same as cutting your pay.

    Thus, I'm forced to believe either that your television ad was disingenuous or that you don't fully understand the Constitution. I'm not really thrilled about either.

  • Comment on Suzan DelBene's answer…
    Ab_0022_small

    Thank you for your answer Susan. I definitely appreciate hearing that you will vote to support gay rights.

    However, my question is more concerned about being an active fighter for gay rights. For DOMA, would you help draft legislation for the repeal of DOMA?

  • Comment on CRSeattle's answer…
    Avatar_default

    She could vote with a majority to cut their salaries taking effect with the following term. You cannot raise your own salary (as a collective congressional cohort--too tempting). But, a cynic may wonder--with higher incumbent reelection rates than the Russian Duma thanks to gerrymandered districts, does it matter? This is governed by the 27th Amendment. They get a COLA, by the way.

  • Comment on Suzan DelBene's answer…
    Avatar_default

    Thank you Ms. DelBene - Mr. Reichert, I'm still waiting.

  • Comment on CRSeattle's answer…
    Electionland_avatar_pmocek_small

    CRSeattle: Thanks for the useful information, but you didn't answer Soundslikepuget's question.

    You explained how Ms. DelBene could sort of negate part of her salary if elected to Congress, but didn't say whether or not she would be able to cut (reduce) her salary if elected.

    She is reportedly running advertisements that say she will reduce her salary if elected, not that she will donate some of the money she earns to any particular cause.