Exclusive RK Interview: Drew Richardson

1.  Why, in your own words, have you decided to run for the US House of Representatives this year?  What convinced you to get involved in politics at this level?
We are faced with some of the greatest foreign and domestic challenges of my lifetime.  I strongly believe we need to change course regarding many of the policies pursued by the present administration.  My experience dealing with national security and counter-terrorism matters has largely impacted my decision to seek elective office at the federal level.

2. How do you plan to defeat Bob Goodlatte given how entrenched he is in a Republican-leaning district?  Do you believe your career in the FBI will help you connect with voters?  Will your short residence in the district and your lack of political experience hurt you?
I trust that, come this November, that common sense, a general desire for better government, and an urgent need for new leadership will outweigh past voting history for most responsible district citizens.  I do believe my background in law enforcement, forensic science, national security and counter-terrorism will resonate with independents and moderate Republicans who would like to see these areas brought to bear on relevant problems.  Although somewhat new to the district, I have spent a vast majority of my life in Virginia.  I would like to think district voters might view positively subject matter experience in the absence of any past political encumbrance.

Much, much more on the flip.
3. Why should Democratic voters in the 6th district vote for you over your opponent, Sam Rasoul?   Do you have any specific policy or ideological differences with Rasoul?
Quite simply, I believe that I am the Democratic candidate who has the best chance of unseating Congressman Goodlatte in November.  Aside from pointing out flaws in the congressman's voting record, I think relevant government or political experience will be a necessary component of any candidate's case for presenting himself as a credible alternative to an eight-term incumbent congressman.  With John McCain heading the Republican ticket, I believe national security will be a regular part of the debate for any contested federal office.  As Senator McCain correctly assesses, his political fortunes will be tied to the Iraq War.  I believe my background will not only be an asset in engaging the incumbent on such matters, but, perhaps will be of value to Governor Warner as he seeks to become Virginia's next U.S. Senator.

I am confident that any differences in policy between Mr. Rasoul and myself will pale in comparison to differences that both of us have with the incumbent.  For this reason I am confident in saying that I will support Mr. Rasoul should he win the Democratic nomination.  That having been said, there are some differences between Mr. Rasoul's positions on various policies vis-+á-vis mine.  One area that surfaced recently in a community forum involves health care.

Mr. Rasoul has indicated unequivocal support for single payer universal health care as outlined in proposed legislation H.R. 676.  Although I support universal health care and believe it to generally be sound public policy, I do not support this legislation as the sole means of reaching the goal of health care for all our citizens.

Although a good economic case can be made that a straight single payer health care program is the best solution, political reality suggests a good transition from the status quo will involve private insurance-based universal health care that will include such features as mandated coverage, the elimination of pre-existing medical conditions as a qualification basis, subsidies for low-income families and competition between public and private health care providers.  Such a plan will allow those who are satisfied with their present private insurance to keep it and will require less additional revenue than a single payer system.  I believe holding out for an all-at-once transition from the status quo to the provisions of H.R. 676 may delay, if not altogether prevent, the provision of quality health care for the millions of our citizens who do not currently enjoy such.

4. At this point, would you favor an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, a gradual exit strategy, or what?  Also, please elaborate on your statement that we "have a moral obligation" to "loosen the knot of sectarian violence before leaving" Iraq.
My objective is to see U.S. troops leave Iraq responsibly. Obviously that depends on the Iraqi people making political compromises instead of preparing for civil war. President Bush recklessly sent us into Iraq, but we cannot leave Iraq in its current position. To do so, to leave Iraq on the brink of civil war after upheaving their society and destroying their unity, would tarnish the image of the U.S. for a generation. After removing the central authority preventing religious and ethnic divisions, we must take steps to prevent the ethnic cleansing and genocide we saw in Yugoslavia.

5.  Is it acceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons, and if not, what would you advocate doing about it?
The current leadership in Iran is unstable and cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons. I do not believe the United States should take unilateral action against Iran, and I do not support the insertion of ground troops into Iran. We have allies in the region and we need to work with them to stabilize the Middle East.

6.  What is your opinion of the FISA law passed by Congress this past summer?  Should telecoms be granted retroactive immunity?  What other changes, if any, should be made to the law?
The Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act of 1978 and the system it created has worked well. Oversight is crucial to ensuring the survival and strength of our democracy. Creating exemptions and granting immunity violates the spirit of the original legislation. I am disappointed that Rep. Goodlatte continues to give the administration a blank check to conduct eavesdropping without oversight.

7. Do you believe that "waterboarding" is torture?  Should "enhanced interrogation techniques" be permitted under any circumstances?  Finally, please elaborate on your statement that "The present administration has betrayed the heritage of our founding fathers" with regard to its treatment of prisoners.
As I state on my website, waterboarding is torture. Our intelligence services secured useful information from our enemies and POWs for decades without committing atrocities, and their example should guide us. The Founding Fathers pledged  their lives, fortunes and sacred honor in order to defend our nation's viability and honor, but they never placed the honor of our country in doubt.

8. Do you support cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80% (or more) by 2050?  Would you support a revenue-neutral carbon tax on polluting industries and/or a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants?
We must bring science back into the halls of government and develop policies based on research, not rhetoric. I support steps at the national, state and local levels to reduce emissions and reduce energy usage through increased efficiency and new "green" technologies. "Cap and trade" proposals to reward clean companies and discouraging old methods of generating energy are essential if we are to move ahead and begin to reduce our impact on climate change.

9.  Do you agree with Al Gore that our nation is now facing a "constitutional crisis?"   If so, what would you advocate doing about it?
I would agree with Mr. Gore that our current president has ignored or actively sought to eliminate laws that limit his power. Our Constitution, however, is not in crisis; it is the unwillingness of our president to follow the Constitution that has endangered so many of our civil liberties. A change in leadership and a renewed commitment by Congress and the American people to defend the Constitution and our liberties should be enough to move us past this crisis of leadership and restore the trust Americans traditionally enjoyed in their government.

10. What is your position on trade issues? Do you believe that labor, environmental and human rights guarantees should be part of trade agreements?  In general, would you describe yourself as more of a "fair trade" or "free trade" person?
Trade should be fair and should benefit both countries who participate. Otherwise, why trade if our country will send jobs and money overseas in return for a weakened manufacturing sector and unsafe products? Rep. Goodlatte voted for NAFTA and free trade with China, yet has failed to protect local factories from closing and local jobs from being lost. Our country must take steps to demand a level playing field and protections for American workers. If we don't, the backbone of the middle class since World War II will be lost.

11.  Would you favor comprehensive immigration reform that provides a path to earned citizenship for people who pay a fine, learn English, and play by the rules?    In general, what is your position on immigration into this country, which you call "a nation of immigrants?"
As I state on my website, I believe we must prioritize and address each component of the immigration debate separately. Our federal government must address national security and law enforcement considerations: our laws must be enforced, the integrity of our borders must be maintained and our homeland must be secured.

Then we can look at the needs of the workplace, where immigrants have traditionally played an important role. We need an available work force that does not depress wages or take jobs from unemployed Americans.

Finally, we must honor and cherish our heritage as a nation of immigrants and as a land of opportunity and a beacon of hope. Creating a permanent underclass of non-citizens workers or closing the doors to future immigrants violates our history and our identity.

12.  How would you describe your political philosophy: liberal, Teddy Roosevelt Progressive, Mark Warner centrist, or something else?
I prefer to think of myself as a "Drew Richardson independent," but I have similarities with Senator Webb. Like the Senator, I believe we need to change our national security policy away from wars of occupation to a greater emphasis on homeland security. Also, I agree with Senator Webb that issues of economic fairness deserve renewed attention. Strengthening and enlarging the middle class will help counter the increased wealth disparity we have seen develop under President Bush and also go a long way to relieving and reducing the partisan bickering we have suffered under for decades.

Comments