Originally posted at 10 am.
Last night, the Democratic candidates vying to replace State Rep. Sharon Nelson (D-34), who is moving to the State Senate, took part in a quick question-and-answer session at the District’s regular meeting, which was held at the idyllic and suburban Hall at Fauntleroy in West Seattle.
The 34th District Dems (West Seattle, White Center, Burien, and Vashon and Maury Islands) are like a Council of Elders, made up of Precinct Committee Officers, government officials, and campaign manager-types (for example, I stood next to defeated Port Commission candidate and former 35th District Representative Max Vekich. And Seattle Chief Technology Officer Bill Schrier stood by the door handing out name tags). Members will make their endorsement on May 12. (They approved the endorsement rules last night, which allow the District to endorse two candidates.)
The candidates are: Mike Heavey, an aide to King Council Council Member Jan Drago; Joe Fitzgibbon, who’s been an aide to Rep. Nelson since 2007, when the now-super-star-incumbent first took office; and Marcee Stone, a legal secretary and campaign finance activist. The 34th District Dems looked on, sitting at large circular tables and sipping on beers.
At times, they didn’t appear to be paying all that much attention, and the candidate forum was sandwiched between a presentation by the local Teamsters and a couple of hours of 34th District procedural matters.
From the start, a fair share of the attention seemed to fall on Fitzgibbon. Besides being a former staffer for Rep. Nelson, whose job he’s jockeying for, Fitzgibbon’s only 23 years old.
In front of the group of mostly-grey West Seattle politicos, Fitzgibbon seemed to be doing pretty well. He got more specific than either of the other candidates on some pertinent issues. For example, Fitzgibbon pushed tax reform throughout the forum–he said he wanted to push for a high-earners income tax, and for a value-added tax, an efficient sales tax method popular in Europe, and that he wants to cut off tax breaks to groups like TransAlta.
Where Nelson focused on consumer protections and the Maury Island coal mine, Fitzgibbon wants to work on bringing transit options to the 34th District suburbs, he said after the forum. “We really have a severe transit problem out in Burien, and transit wasn’t something that was really on [Rep. Nelson's] list of priorities.”
Fitzgibbon.
There was one funny moment that highlighted Fitzgibbon’s age, sorta. Asked by Heavey, during a more light-hearted moment, what CD he was currently listening to, Fitzgibbon replied, “Soundgarden.” The answer was met from the crowd with befuddled silence.
Fitzgibbon tried to explain. “Uh, I mean, yeah. I like Superunknown.” The audience shifted its eyes back to Heavey. “Me? Oh, Uh. Paul Simon,” Heavey said. The crowd seemed assuaged.
I brought up the awkward moment with Fitzgibbon after the forum. “Oh man, not this crowd,” he said. “It’s definitely a generational thing.” Although, some ironic context: “Soundgarden was popular when I was, like, six,” he noted.
Mike Heavey, whose father served in the state legislature in the 90s, was the least quotable during the short forum, blending in with Fitzgibbon a bit, praising Rep. Hans Dunshee’s (D-44) green jobs bill.
L-R: Heavey, Fitzgibbon, and Stone.
Heavey was outspoken on one point, though—when asked about a group of new taxes that passed in Olympia this session, including taxes on beer, candy, and pop, he delievered a comment that won him a big gust of applause. “It’s shameful that we would try to tax the lower class instead of asking Microsoft to take a little in,” Heavey said. It was the loudest the crowd got for him.
Marcee Stone came out swinging, and gathered a good amount of energy early on—she kicked off her comments by saying “I am a pro-choice, pro-family planning woman who will fight for this district,” which won her an impressive wave of applause from the stingy audience. But they seemed particularly confused by a point Stone twice tried to make about confidentiality agreements between school nurses and pregnant teens, which she said could result in girls “getting sent away” (saying once, vaguely, “we need to address these cultural issues”). The point came in response to a question about youth violence.
When I caught up with Stone later to clarify what she meant, it was still hard to get a clear statement out of her. She said “this is an issue that is not getting enough attention,” which after more prodding I took to mean that Stone thinks parents should be legally allowed to get more involved with teenagers’ health decisions at school—but by then she had started talking about teen drug use instead of teen pregnancy. Stone admitted she didn’t have any legislative ideas regarding the issue; she said it was just an issue she cares about. Still, it was an issue she pushed at two different points while she was onstage with the other candidates.
Stone’s pet issue, campaign finance reform (Stone just finished a run as Board President of Washington Public Campaigns, which pushes for publicly-financed political candidates), was also a note she hit throughout the night. She said during her opening remarks she wanted to “take the for-sale down from state government.”
Stone.
After the meeting, Tara Jo Heinecke, a local labor union worker and Democratic activist who is also “diversity chair” of the 34th District Dems, said she liked all the candidates but said that Stone’s message was definitely a little off-kilter.
“Neither of her issues are really concepts that are on the mind of the average voter,” said Heinecke. “I mean, HIPAA is a Federal law. [Stone's point] didn’t really seem that relevant to this race.”
Tweet
Superunknown came out when Joe Fitzgibbon was 7.
“Council of elders?” “Suburban” Hall at Fauntleroy? My ass.
You neglected to mention that there were more than 120 people in the Hall. And that we passed, with only two dissenting votes, a resolution OPPOSING Burgess' insane anti-panhandling ordinance, which for some inexplicable reason has fallen off Publicola's radar screen. Not ours.
Also, the author failed to mention Mike's poignant comments surrounding youth violence. While “Young Joe” and “Off-Kilter Marcee” struggled through the answer and Mike was able to critically analyze the problem and provide a two-pronged strategy the state needs to invest in more: prevention and intervention.
Joe's youth worries me and Marcee's lack of knowledge on the core issues makes me question her experience. After watching the forum I do agree that all candidates are strong Democrats but it was clear to me that Mike had real solutions and a vision for making the 34th District a better, more affordable, job and environmentally-friendly place live.
Ya'll have weekly meetings in the 34th? That's CRAZY!
Jobs matter and Mike Heavey gets it.
After watching the forum last night this is the conclusion that I came to. Mike realizes that “shovel-ready” jobs are ready to be had in the area but, at the same time, that they aren't a long-term fix to improving the unemployment rate. His comments on improving and investing in education programs as a long-term strategy is dead on. Also, with his background in both public and private sector he understands the critical role business has to play with the state government in creating affordable family-wage jobs.
Walking away from the 34th District meeting I saw a strong candidate in Mike Heavey — he's a sold choice for the district who is ready to head to Olympia and make a true difference in the lives of us in the 34th.
Go Heavey.
The resolution hasn't fallen off our radar screen Ivan. We wrote about it in Morning Fizz.
Jason…is that you?
I thought I was there, but I must have been in a parallel universe and saw a different forum. Chris what you describe as a “light hearted moment” was one of the more telling moments of the event. Mike Heavey's question of Joe Fitzgibbon came accross to me as a mean spirited and clumsy attempt to make Joe look too young. What did he expect for an answer Hannah Montana? Marcee Stone missed a chance to elevate this segment of the forum, only Joe asked a thoughtful question.
FYI, those won't read as much like talking points if you add some more personal touches about how you relate to Mike & his father, or perhaps other “local color” details that reinforce your presence at the forum and your identity as an individual, not just an endorsement-giving automaton. The communications coordinator must have gone over that with you before the forum in a strategy email, no?
Joe did an amazing job last night, and we couldn't ask for a better candidate in the 34th district. As was clearly demonstrated last night, despite his youth he has been down working in Olympia for months and is familiar with the key issues in his district. During economic times like these we need someone who can hit the ground running and doesn't need a learning curve.
On top of the knowledge and experience he has, Joe is young and would be representing an ever increasing age demographic in the 34th. A demographic that at present has little to no representation and can't wait the twenty years to get seated at the table.
Smart guy, smart solutions, and a new perspective; how do we not need that in Olympia?
I am a little concerned at this implied antagonism to Joe Fitzgibbon's age. As far as I can see, he has done little to warrant the criticism, which does make the concern come across as 'age-ism'.
Michael and Marcee are fine candidates and high-class people who have served the District well and would continue to do so as State Representatives.
But the cold hard fact is that Joe has more Olympia experience than both of them put together — three sessions in the pressure cooker.
Experience counts. Institutional memory counts. Personal relationships count. Knowing whom to call, whom to depend on, and whom NOT to call and NOT to depend on really count.
This is not some “insider,” “go-along-get-along” talk. This is an attempt to paint an honest picture of how our Legislature operates, and how time, and the barest minimum of wasted effort, are of the essence for any freshman.
People are entitled to their own standards when it comes to choosing one candidate from among three good Democrats. These are my standards, and Joe Fitzgibbon meets them the most.
It is no accident that several of the most out-front “liberal,” “progressive,” or whatever you want to call it, House members have endorsed Joe. THEY know what it takes to function effectively in Olympia, and THEY don't need anyone serving with them who can't or won't pull their weight. There's simply too much work to be done, and for a part-time Legislature, never enough time to do it well.
These are Joe's endorsers: Marko Liias, Kevin Ven de Wege, Christine Rolfes, Dave Upthegrove, Geoff Simpson, Brendan Williams, Tami Green, and — the best for last — Sharon Nelson. That counts for the most in my book. And there will be more to come.
If these House members represent the kind of leadership we want in Olympia — and they sure as hell represent what *I* want — then we should be supporting who they support, and that is Joe Fitzgibbon.
Hey 34ther, I automatically read the question as an attempt to add some levity. Thanks for your perspective, though–that wasn't something I picked up on.
That is the most thoughtful comment I have ever seen you write. If I lived in the 34th, that may have made me support Joe.
I don't disagree that experience matters. However, who's experiencing are you talking about — Joe's or Sharon's?
Joe spent a large amount of time at the last night (both in his introduction as a candidate and during the forum) touting all the work that Sharon Nelson has done for the district. At one time, I started questioning if he was running or campaign for Sharon…
Having served as a Legislative Aide myself, and having many friends who do so as well, I can tell you that the experience that comes from that position is limited — such that I wouldn't feel comfortable supporting a candidate with that as his/her only knowledge.
This coupled with his youthful age just make me wonder if he is REALLY ready for the job.
Maybe then you should have asked Sharon what she had Joe do. It was a hell of a lot more than most legislative aides do. She has told me that she relied on him for a lot of important work, and I have worked with Joe enough in Olympia to know the level he was operating at. Ask Sharon. Don't just take my word for it. She won't lie to you.
I do agree, though, that Joe spent too much time talking about what Sharon had done and not enough about what he had done. I doubt we'll hear that again.
The age of informed consent in our state is 13 (a state law, not HIPAA). I support young people of that age being able to meet with their doctor privately and discussing whatever they like. It’s a state law.
I did not talk about parental notification laws. I did not talk about confidentiality agreements between school nurses and students.
I talked to the reporter after the event and he asked me for clarification. My whole point begins and ends with young people who are chronic substance abusers and become severely addicted and are in need of treatment. In our state, a parent has an incredibly complex legal battle on their hands securing treatment for their child if the child refuses. Some parents resort to tricking their children into going to another state where they can then legally admit them to a treatment program for longer periods of time than they are allowed to here. I understand the sound reasoning behind the age of informed consent as it prevents young people from being put-away by their parents. Much like the parents of my generation who could legally send their young pregnant daughters off to have their out-of-wedlock babies away from home even if their daughter refused. Essentially to save themselves the embarrassment and scandal. Obviously, not in the best interests of the girl. Hence, we have an informed consent age that protects young people from suffering legal abuse by the hands of their parents.
I suggested that it would be good to start looking at this policy to essentially keep parents from “shipping” their addicted children out of state where the age of informed consent laws are different. I specifically said it would be a good idea to put together a round table of young people, caregivers, parents and school counselors to look at the age of informed consent as concerns addicted children. Is an addicted 13-year-old able to make the decision to keep themselves out of treatment if the parents, school counselors, and doctor think differently?
It would be amazingly COLD for Sharon not to endorse a guy who has worked for her for three years-regardless of what his qualifications are compared to the other candidates. I don't think that should be a key indicator-nor should endorsements by other legislators who know Joe from Olympia, but may not know others in the race. @34thdistrictrace is right. LAs do an important job receiving info from constituents, scheduling meetings for the legislator and handling constituent challenges/requests. LAs rarely work policy issues beyond knowing the talking points developed by caucus staff on the big issues and knowing the info developed by their legislator on the issues that are a priority for that legislator. Joe, like Mike and Marcee should be challenged to identify their work on priority issues for the district-not their boss's work on issues that were a priority for the boss..
What experience, other than being a legislative aide for Jan Drago (for three months) does Mike Heavey have?
More importantly perhaps, is that Joe had the good taste and prescience to be listening to Soundgarden on the day the reunion was announced.
And really Mike…Paul Simon???
If folks want to be so quick to dismiss Joe's Olympia experience, then perhaps they need to visit Burien. It's nearby!
There's a reason he's endorsed by most of the Burien City Council, he's a leader on transportation issues, and he's currently serving as the Chair of the Planning Commission — and it's not just because they think young people are swell.
LA's do know policy issues beyond knowing talking points. LA's are often the face of an office to constituents and know the issues facing a district inside and out. the relationships built with time and knowing who to ask for what and how to get things done definitely count for something in olympia. the learning curve does matter when talking about the biggest recession, biggest budget cuts, biggest votes.
Joe Fitzgibbon is active in his community, knows his district, knows olympia, and is from a part of the district that has been pretty under represented thus far. Like Micky says…he's a leader on transpo issues and is a commissioner.
We want our legislators to know the issues, know their constituency, and take the right votes. Joe is the whole package.
I have worked with many people in olympia in my time as an LA, as a anti-poverty advocate, and as a community organizer, and joe is one of my favorite people by far. Articulate, sharp, and personable- joe is someone I often bounce policy ideas off of.
I read in a previous post that someone doesn't think that LA's know policy. LA's know policy. LA's help make decisions. LA's know their districts inside and out. LA's become representatives. LA's become Lobbyists. LA's become policy staff. how? because LA's know policy!
This article focused on his age and it was really really shocking and saddening to me that for many people it takes away from all of the qualities that make him the most qualified candidate-BY FAR-in this race. besides the blatant ageism, I'm wondering why only one person has noted that it would be an ASSET to our community that we finally get this perspective representing a district that covers a very very diverse demographic.
We all know, that in olympia in the next couple years, we'll need a strong representative that will be another superstar like eileen and sharon. Joe is it.
LAs “rarely work policy issues?” Seriously? A general statement like that is meaningless in this particular case. My experience is quite different from yours. I have learned which LAs “work policy issues” and which do not.
Joe works policy. If I hadn't been persuaded of that after working with him for three sessions I wouldn't be saying it, and I wouldn't be supporting him.
Ask the enviro lobbyists if Joe “works policy.” Ask the ferry advocates. Ask the bicycle lobby. Don't just take my word for it.
Between now and the August primary, people in the 34th will learn that Joe's knowledge and experience make him the top candidate in this field.
Did anyone else notice that the above “talking point” was lifted almost directly off of Joe's website?
http://joefitzgibbon.com/index.php?page=display...
It just another illustration that Mike is piggybacking off Joe's experience and depth of knowledge of the issues.
I think it is great to have such fine candidates. However, after listening to everyone Mike has my vote. I think we would be lucky to have him represent our district.
I *still* don't understand if you're in favor of or against parents being able to commit children to substance abuse programs.
And I simply can't believe that convening the roundtable you describe is anywhere near enough of a top priority of what you would do as a legislator that it has come up, been mischaracterized, and you've had to attempt to re-explain it this early in the campaign.
Seriously, this issue is so close to the top of your list and this is the best you can explain it?
go mike!!
I too noticed that Joe praised his boss Sharon Nelson effusively, repeatedly and at surprising length – with her sitting right there. He must've said “Sharon” 20 times.
To me, he was identifying himself so obviously as Nelson's protege that I wondered whether he may go wherever Sharon leads, if he had the job, rather than think and act independently.
This may or may not be the case – and almost everyone needs a mentor when starting their career – but I was surprised that the candidate wouldn't realize how it sounded.
The other candidates are smart and they're good Democrats, but I support Marcee Stone, a person of integrity, experience and confidence who I feel got slighted somewhat by Publicola in the above article. She knows how Olympia works after years of leading Washington Public Campaigns: negotiating with state legislators, public campaign advocates and policy wonks, of researching money-in-politics issues, and representing the district at the party at the state party level.
I am a 34th Dem PCO, and I have not been contacted by Heavey about his campaign. The only thing I know about him is what I heard at the meeting.
No. I post under ObamaNerd and/or JasonB exclusively. Pretty sure Publicola can confirm IP addresses to that effect. Plus I find that comment to be pretty distasteful.
Myabe you should read it again slowly.
I agree, thanks. Publicola will always side with the young kids then the “elders”. Gee, I wonder why?
Let him run for the mayor of Burien then. West Seattle needs someone that knows about the needs of WEst Seattle too.
Chris wrote a very biased article and she didn't even stay for the whole meeting. She could learn alot from the “elders” as she likes to call anyone older then her.
Hey, maki. Just to be clear, I stayed at the meeting until well after the forum. Also, I'm a guy.