ELECTION: As ballots arrive, West Seattle Chamber of Commerce provides one more look at 34th District State Senate hopefuls

Got your ballot(s) yet? King County Elections mailed them Wednesday. Ours arrived on Friday. (If you don’t get yours by tomorrow, call KCE at 206-296-VOTE.) Meantime, we have one more look at the marquee race on ballots in this area – the 34th District State Senate race to fill the seat from which Sen. Sharon Nelson is retiring.

(WSB photo: Chamber board chair Pete Spalding, candidates Joe Nguyen and Shannon Braddock, Chamber CEO Lynn Dennis)

The West Seattle Chamber of Commerce hosted the last scheduled WS forum with Joe Nguyen and Shannon Braddock on Thursday night at the DAV Hall in North Delridge. Here’s our unedited video:

The Chamber billed this as a “modified Lincoln-Douglas format.” No audience questions. We did take topline notes (not full transcriptions nor direct quotes outside of anything in quotation marks), if you don’t have time to watch:

After introductions, the first topic: “diversity of the 34th District vs. decisions made in Olympia.”

Nguyen opened by noting that the district’s geographic diversity makes it a challenge, but on the other hand, it’s a very liberal district. He observed that much of what’s called “progressive” is a matter, to him, of basic human rights. He thinks this district’s legislator can be bold and help show other legislators the importance of those rights.

In the format, Braddock then challenged him about his assertion that he would “name and shame” people who stood in the way of a capital-gains tax. He said he felt that he needed to boldly call out people opposing it because the unfairness of the current system helps many community members. While it wouldn’t be his “first course of action,” he said, being “nice” might not work.

Braddock then addressed the topic. She spoke to a diversity of issues she hears about and noted “they come up in different ways in different places.” On a topic such as transportation, for example, many in West Seattle are wondering about the light-rail plan, while on Vashon, ferries are the big topic. And there’s a “big variety” of people in this district. Staying connected to residents rather than just fellow policy-makers is vital, she said.

Nguyen asked her how she would ensure that people in the south end including those on public assistance – which his family had been on – would be engaged. Braddock said she would start by talking with the nonprofits helping those members of the community.

They had more time to address the topic, but didn’t use it. So it was on to second topic – taxation and income equality. Braddock said the current tax system is “appalling … not fair and not right.” She suggested several steps be taken, including a tax on the wealthiest “one to two percent” statewide. She suspects it will be a “heavy lift” to get support for it, so she proposed getting communities involved in a series of town halls, “engaging” and educating in public so that constituents are pressuring their legislators. She also foresaw five or six tax loopholes that could be addressed. She also thought B&O tax reform could be important and eventually an income tax but “I don’t think we have the trust of the public” so far to pursue that.

Nguyen noted that the capital-gains tax had long been proposed and blocked, so how could that be gotten around? Braddock said a “fear factor” is likely in play, with people fearing their “retirement is at risk” or money from the sale of their main residence. In the past, some had seen it as a lost cause but she feels they’re moving closer to a Senate that could make it happen. Nguyen said he’s found more people in support of an income tax than capital-gains tax, and what’s the deal with that – a problem educating people? Maybe, in other districts, Braddock said.

Taking on the topic, Nguyen again stressed that this area’s representative had the opportunity and obligation to be “bold.” And he too addressed the tax exemptions, making his oft-made point that those exemptions – unlike levies – don’t expire.

Which corporate tax exemptions would you close? Braddock asked him.

He said 22 were candidates for that, though he didn’t list them. After a followup question from Braddock about his stated desire to eliminate the B&O tax for some, he said he was mostly referring to mom=and-pop-type businesses.

This topic too ran short. Though the Chamber forum had been announced as focusing on business and transportation issues, the questions didn’t cleave to those topics. Issue #3 was homelessness. Nguyen opened, saying that the different types of homelessness needed to be treated differently. Preventing homelessness, preserving affordable housing, intervening in domestic violence – a top cause of family homelessness, he has said – are all important.

Braddock said there are “complex reasons” for the homelessness crisis. At the state level, the document-recording fee – currently set to sunset next year – needs to continue. Working with case workers and finding out what people need to not lose their homes can be an important state task too. Finding ways “to impact (people) positively so they will not fall into homelessness.”

Nguyen asked on followup how to be sure nonprofits’ lobbyists would have louder voices than other. Braddock said it’s up to the legislators to be sure they’re meeting with those people but also noted that some nonprofits don’t have lobbyists so staying in touch with folks in the district is vital.

Last topic: “Tell us about your prospects to pass initiatives and legislate.” Braddock said she’s seen this from multiple perspectives – her work at the King County Council as well as her volunteer work for advocacy organizations. “A big part of it is having as many stakeholders at the table as you can, even the ones you don’t agree with all the time. … Understanding how to prioritize … and how you work with the stakeholders and other elected officials” also factors into it. She said she’s helped move legislation through the King County Council – which (though officially nonpartisan) has three Republicans and six Democrats.

What are the issues you are most passionate about? Nguyen asked her.

Women’s reproductive-health issues, “issues that impact our working families… LGBTQ issues … access to child care …” were what she listed.

Nguyen said more unites us than divides us, and he has discovered that after talking to “folks on both sides of the mountains.” Immigration is an issue that he says is important in Eastern Washington too because of immigrant agricultural labor. On gun issues, he said he went to gun ranges to see why people felt the way they did and to seek common ground, (“Training” is where he found the latter, he said.)

She asked him what he considers “negative” legislation from last year. The car-tab bill, he mentioned.

The forum wrapped at 8 pm after less than an hour. No fireworks, no sharp points of difference or criticism. Voting deadline is Tuesday, November 6th; West Seattle now has two official ballot dropboxes (High Point Library at 3411 SW Raymond and The Junction on south side of SW Alaska west of California SW), and ballots are now postage-paid if you use the US Postal Service, no stamp needed.

22 Replies to "ELECTION: As ballots arrive, West Seattle Chamber of Commerce provides one more look at 34th District State Senate hopefuls"

  • old timer October 21, 2018 (1:45 pm)

    Yes, the D’s have the seat, but what is going on with the Justice positions?
    Out of 17 open Court positions, only one has a contest on my ballot.
    Is there some kind of Judge cartel operating?
    Sure makes a mockery of a “vote” IMO.

    • WSB October 21, 2018 (2:03 pm)

      If nobody runs, you get an uncontested seat. Judge positions are often uncontested, as far back as I can remember. But they’re not alone. 34th District State House – no challengers for either incumbent. For everyone who likes to gripe about politics … is there really not a single soul who wants to step up? Or is it the barrier to running – filing fees, for example? You might recall West Seattle community activist Amanda Kay Helmick (who, datapoint, has since moved to Burien) running for City Council in 2015 and trying to collect 1,200 petition signatures rather than paying a $1200 filing fee. She fell a handful short. As for next year’s council race … a little over 9 months to the primary and no one’s filed yet. – TR

    • wscommuter October 22, 2018 (8:27 am)

      I hope to god we never get to a place where our judicial elections are politicized … as it is, every few years that happens with the state Supreme Court and it is awful. We should want politics as far away from the judiciary as possible. Witness the recent US Supreme Court process as a exhibit A for why politics and justice are a terrible mix.

      WSB is correct; there is no obstacle to running for judge if one wants to. People choose not to run for judge more often when there is an incumbent there. That isn’t a bad thing.

  • Pete October 21, 2018 (1:54 pm)

    Thanks for the coverage. Now it is up to the voters of the 34th District. No matter who you vote for PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE vote. It is time to let your voice be heard in the form of your vote. If you are still one of those that think your vote doesn’t matter just remember that our City Council District 1 race was decided by less than 40 votes.

  • melissa October 21, 2018 (2:17 pm)

    As a 34th District voter, I just feel so dang fortunate that we have two wonderful candidates to choose from. We’re going to win either way.

  • Al October 21, 2018 (2:50 pm)

    great job of filming , wsb

  • Mike October 21, 2018 (9:15 pm)

    Looking forward to a Nguyen on Election Night! WE are with YOU Joe– candidate for the people!!

  • Rachelle October 21, 2018 (10:32 pm)

    Thanks for publishing WSB. I watched the entire video. I also feel very fortunate with our choices and am grateful that neither candidate is pushing to make their opponent a villain. Civil discourse at its finest in the 34th.

  • DSC October 22, 2018 (8:34 am)

    Can we hire them both?? Seriously, what amazing candidates. Thank you both for running and for volunteering to serve.

  • Peter October 22, 2018 (9:26 am)

    As far as I can find, Nguyen has never said or written anyting indicating he’s pro-choice, so I cannot trust him. In all other ways, they are identical, so Braddock gets my vote.

    • Ferryander October 22, 2018 (12:03 pm)

      I mean, you could have checked his wesite http://meetjoenguyen.com/issues/

      “I 100% support and believe in a woman’s right to make decisions about her own reproductive health, and that the government has no place in telling women what they can and cannot do. Considering the increased attacks against women at the federal level, it is up to the states to take lead on protecting the right to choose.

      I was extremely pleased to see that the legislature passed the Reproductive Parity Act this past session which requires insurers that cover maternity to care to also cover abortion, and would look forward to working with organizations such as NARAL and Planned Parenthood to make sure we are doing everything possible to protect reproductive rights.”

      He also received a pro-choice candidate distinction from NARAL https://www.prochoicewavotes.org/list/

      • Peter October 22, 2018 (2:42 pm)

        That’s a late addition to his website, it wasn’t there either of the two times I read his website earlier in the campaign. The whole “reproductive rights” section is new. It’s important to note that he speaks against government telling a woman what she can and can’t do, but doesn’t say he’s againat relifion telling women what they can and can’t to, which Braddock explicitly does.
        ” I will support requiring hospitals and health centers to provide patients with medically accurate and comprehensive health information, as well as referrals, regardless of religious affiliation.”
        Braddock gets my vote of Nguyen not just for that statement, but for holding that position since the beginning of the campaing rather than finally coming to it near the end.

        • Ann265 October 23, 2018 (12:26 am)

          Nope, that’s been on there since day one! He completely supports a woman’s right to choose. And while I’m glad Shannon is taking a proactive stance towards hospitals, that is under federal jurisdiction; I’m more concerned about her taking money from corporate PACs (Justice for All PAC, Washington Forest Protection Association and the logging company Weyerhaeuser) that have heavily donated to anti-choice candidates like Susan Hutchison, Dino Rossi and Marco Rubio, as well as $152,000 to the Republican National Committee. Why would Republican PACs be donating thousands to her?

          • westside feminist October 23, 2018 (8:27 am)

            It really hasn’t been on there since day one…it appeared yesterday. I was looking at both candidate’s websites on October 21st and it was not on Joe’s website (neither was LGBTQ rights). Then suddenly on the 22nd they were both tacked on at the bottom. They’ve been campaigning since what, May? June? And it took until late October right before the election for it to be added. That worries me as to what Joe’s priorities are.

          • Peter October 23, 2018 (9:27 am)

            That’s the lames argument ever. The sun is in the sky, the sky is blue, the sun shines on the grass, therfore the grass is blue. You’re trying to tie Shannon Braddock to anti-choice politicians through third parties without any shred of evidence that she shares those anti-choice views.

          • Peter October 23, 2018 (9:32 am)

            And the state absoilutely can pass laws protecting patients form mythological interference in healthcare. Dismissing it as just a federal issue is saying you’re willing to abondon patients in washington state to ongoing restrictions and abuses by religionists. It is imperative that we get mythology out of healthcare completely, and we can start at home.

        • Ferryander October 23, 2018 (6:05 pm)

          Again, I will direct you to NARAL’s candidate list where both Shannon and Joe are listed as pro-choice https://www.prochoicewavotes.org/list/

          If Joe is supposedly anti-choice as you are claiming, then why would NARAL give both candidates a pro-choice distinction instead of just endorsing Shannon? Additionally, Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest and Hawaii declined to endorse either candidate in this race which means rather than endorse both candidates for being pro-choice they chose to sit it out. https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/planned-parenthood-votes-northwest-and-hawaii/elections/candidate-endorsements-washington-2018

          And for the record Westside Feminist, both Joe’s sister and brother are members of the LGBTQ+ community.

  • Nancy R. October 23, 2018 (8:04 am)

    I agree that these are two great candidates; we are very fortunate and either will do a fantastic job representing our district. On the West Seattle ballot, the stark choice is between a $15/ton fee making the largest polluters finally pay for the waste products they emit and investing the fees collected into clean air and energy projects, and between an oil company based “no” vote that is spreading falsehoods about costs. For example, one of the oil industry’s spokespersons, Rob McKenna, portrays himself as a “consumer advocate”, when he is actually works for Chevron Oil. Please get educated; there are canvassers coming out to talk with you and answer any questions you might have. Please open the door and be kind; we are volunteers who believe Initiative 1631 is sensible climate policy.

  • KM October 23, 2018 (10:24 am)

    You know there’s a strong candidate on the ballot when people are drilling down on WHEN they think he published his beliefs on his website, then using that to try to convince others that the candidate position is not believable.

    Good luck Joe! You have both votes from our family.

    • Ferryander October 23, 2018 (6:17 pm)

      I couldn’t agree more KM! If I had to guess, Shannon and her team are feeling the heat for her decision to take tens of thousands of dollars from Corporate PAC’s, Coca-cola and the soda industry, Charter School groups and out of state for-profit education companies, the Washington Hospitality Association which tried to kill the $15 minimum wage, and the Republican-supporting PAC’s Ann265 mentioned above, and are now struggling to find something to hit Joe with.

      It’s a sad state of affairs when you have a first time candidate who would be the first person of color EVER elected to the legislature from the 34th, would be the first Vietnamese Legislator in Washington State history, is a solid progressive who isn’t taking any corporate PAC money, and clearly understands the issues, is getting attacked by the other side’s supporters for things that are demonstratively false.

  • Mj October 23, 2018 (11:15 am)

    Both candidates are qualified, hard working people. As a fiscal conservative neither candidate is to my liking.

    Regarding initiatives look who is paying to support the Grocery Tax, it is the soda pop industry. Soda pop needs to be taxed, it is linked to obesity, dementia and other health issues. Smokers are taxed and taxing soda is appropriate. The adds and flyers are extremely deceptive, no local agency is proposing to tax produce, meat or other more healthy type of foods. Vote no on this initiative.

  • ScubaFrog October 23, 2018 (12:45 pm)

    Voted. Full-D ticket in the drumpftk era. GO JOE by the way!

Sorry, comment time is over.