John Delaney

Former congressman from Maryland
Jump to  stances on the issues
John Delaney dropped out of the presidential race on January 31, 2020. This page is no longer being updated.
Delaney, who served three terms in Congress before leaving office in January 2019, announced his presidential candidacy in 2017. He previously owned a health care company and has campaigned as a moderate, focusing on a proposal to expand access to health coverage using Obamacare and existing insurance markets rather than upending the system.
Columbia University, B.S., 1985; Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., 1988
April 16, 1963
April Delaney
Roman Catholic
Summer, Lily, Grace and Brooke
Congressman from Maryland, 2013-2019;
Executive chairman of CapitalSource, 2010-2012;
CEO/executive manager of CapitalSource, 2000-2009;
Chairman of the Board, CEO and president of HealthCare Financial Partners, 1993-1997;
Co-owner of American Home Therapies, 1990-1992


John Delaney Fast Facts
Updated 8:41 AM ET, Sun Apr 10, 2022
Here is a look at the life of John Delaney, a businessman, former US representative from Maryland and former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate. Personal Birth date: April 16, 1963 Birth place: Wood-Ridge, New Jersey Birth name: John Kevin Delaney Father: Jack Delaney, electrician Mother: Elaine (Rowe) Delaney, homemaker Marriage: April McClain-Delaney Children: Summer, Lily, Grace and Brooke Education: Columbia University, B.S., 1985; Georgetown University Law Center, J.D. 1988 Religion: Roman Catholic Other Facts Went to Columbia University on scholarships from his father's trade union, the American Legion, the VFW and the Lions Club. Delaney was one of the wealthiest members of the US Congress when he served as a representative from Maryland, according to the 2018 Roll Call Wealth of Congress analysis, which placed him as the sixth-richest, with a calculated net worth of $93 million. The youngest CEO of a publicly traded company when his first company was listed on the stock exchange. He practiced law briefly at Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge in the late 1980s, after completing law school. Timeline 1990-1992 - Co-owns and runs American Home Therapies, a health care firm, with Ethan Leder. 1993 - Co-founds HealthCare Financial Partners, a lender to health care companies, with Leder and Edward Nordberg Jr. 1993-1997 - Serves as chairman of the board, CEO and president of HealthCare Financial Partners. 2000-2009 - Co-founds and acts as CEO/executive manager of CapitalSource, a lender to small- and medium-sized businesses. 2010 -2012 - Serves as executive chairman of CapitalSource. April 6, 2012 - Resigns as executive chairman of CapitalSource after becoming the Democratic candidate in Maryland's 6th District race. January 3, 2013-January 3, 2019 - US representative from Maryland's 6th District. July 28, 2017 - Announces in a Washington Post opinion piece that he is running for president and will not run for reelection to the House of Representatives. May 29, 2018 - Delaney's book, "The Right Answer: How We Can Unify Our Divided Nation," is published. January 31, 2020 - Delaney announces that he is ending his 2020 presidential campaign. September 21, 2021 - Delaney founds Forbright Inc. and becomes executive chairman of Forbright Bank. Forbright Bank, formerly Congressional Bank, will "dedicate half its assets to financing companies, investors, and innovators driving sustainability and the shift to a low-carbon economy." Delaney purchased control of Congressional Bank in 2011.


climate crisis
Close Accordion Pane
Delaney does not support the Green New Deal, the broad plan to address renewable-energy infrastructure and climate change proposed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, calling it as “realistic as Trump saying that Mexico is going to pay for the wall.” Instead, Delaney has introduced a $4 trillion climate plan that includes a carbon fee on emissions producers like power plants, something he proposed while in Congress. He says the fee will reduce carbon emissions by 90% by 2050. Under the plan, the fee would be returned to Americans as a “dividend” they could use to pay for education or retirement. Delaney would try to directly counteract warming by investing $5 billion annually in technology to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and he supports a $20 billion plan to develop infrastructure for carbon dioxide capture and transport. He has also proposed starting what he calls the “Climate Corps.” It would give recent high school grads job opportunities to work in low-income communities to transition them “to a green economy, work on environmentally friendly projects, and fight climate change by working on the ground,” according to his website. Delaney says that on his first day in office, he would recommit the US to the Paris climate accord, a landmark 2015 deal on global warming targets that Trump has pledged to abandon. More on Delaney’s climate crisis policy
Open Accordion Pane
Delaney has introduced a three-part “Living Wage Plan,” which would nearly double the Earned Income Tax Credit, raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and index it to inflation, and establish an eight-week paid family leave program. To pay for it, he proposes rolling back Trump’s 2017 tax cuts as well as raising the capital gains rate for high earners. He also proposes taxing corporate investment in automation that displaces workers. As a congressman, Delaney was among the Democrats who supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an 11-nation trade deal negotiated under Obama that Trump withdrew from in one of his first acts as President. That agreement, which has gone ahead without the US, was designed in part to counter Chinese influence. Delaney has said he opposes Trump’s tariff-centric approach to negotiating trade with China, which Delaney argues is harming rural America. More on Delaney’s economic policy
Open Accordion Pane
As a congressman, Delaney introduced the Early Learning Act, which would provide free, universal pre-K paid for by a surtax of 1.5% on those who make more than $500,000 a year. He supports free public community college and technical training but is not in favor of providing universal tuition-free four-year college. He’s said he wants to allow student loan borrowers to refinance or discharge loans in bankruptcy, but has called loan forgiveness proposals “ridiculous.” In July 2019, Delaney proposed a mandatory national service plan that would provide two years of free tuition at a public college or university, and up to three years of tuition for those who extend their service periods. Tuition could also be applied to vocational or technical training. More on Delaney’s education policy
gun violence
Open Accordion Pane
Delaney supports universal background checks and a ban on AR-15-style weapons and high-capacity magazines. He’s also in favor of so-called “red flag” laws, which allow families and police to petition a judge to temporarily block someone’s access to firearms if there is credible concern they might hurt themselves or others. “We live in a country where we have the Second Amendment, which I support. So that gives the American people the right to bear arms, and under the Second Amendment, they have the right to bear handguns,” he said to The New York Times in June 2019. “But I do think that’s not an unlimited right.” More on Delaney’s gun violence policy
Open Accordion Pane
Delaney has proposed enrolling all Americans in a public health insurance program he calls “BetterCare” that would replace the employer-sponsored insurance system. Individuals could opt out and receive a tax credit to buy their own policies. Americans and employers could also buy supplemental coverage from private insurers to cover additional services. Delaney would combat rising prescription drug prices by levying a 100% tax on pharmaceutical companies for the difference in the average price of a drug sold in the US vs. in other developed countries. He would also allow the federal government to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. More on Delaney’s health care policy
Open Accordion Pane
Delaney supports providing a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, including some brought to the US as children. He would look to increase the number of refugees admitted to the US to 110,000 a year, he told The Washington Post. He would also work to enhance border security through “high-tech solutions, fencing, increased security personnel” and to increase security at ports of entry. More on Delaney’s immigration policy


Opinion: American leadership is thriving abroad. It's a disturbingly different story at home
Updated 11:18 PM ET, Thu May 19, 2022
The United States has performed impressively in its efforts to counter Russia's brutal aggression against Ukraine. The combination of Russian leader Vladimir Putin's miscalculation, Ukraine's bravery and Washington's effective global leadership is reshaping the geopolitical landscape in a way that favors democracy, strengthens a NATO alliance that is now attracting new members and restores America's place as the leader of the world's democracies. Unless, that is, you look at what is happening within the United States. A White man allegedly drove more than 200 miles to a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, last week, looking to kill Black Americans, according to social media posts the suspect is believed to have made in the months leading up to the attack. He shot 13 people, killing 10. He was allegedly fueled by the racist and anti-Semitic "replacement theory," which weaponizes a normal, centuries-old pattern of migration and ethnic diversity to perpetuate the idea that White people are slowly and intentionally being replaced by minorities. Racism, anti-Semitism and a resentment of immigrants are nothing new. What is new is that in America, a land of diversity and immigrants, what used to be a fringe theory has found sympathetic voices in one of the two main political parties. As if to confirm the dangerous trajectory of the Republican Party, which is steadily moving away from its more reasonable ideas and leaders and embracing extremism, primary elections in several states this week showed a clear pattern. Republican voters overwhelmingly supported fierce proponents of the "Big Lie" who rejected the legitimate results of the 2020 election. In Pennsylvania, for example, voters backed Doug Mastriano, a far-right election denier who is now the Republican nominee for governor. In North Carolina, Rep. Ted Budd, who won the GOP Senate primary, shared a baseless claim about Dominion Voting Systems in a text to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in the days after the 2020 election. The country is deeply polarized. But it's not just a matter of diverging views about policy. Something else, something much more dangerous is happening. Sure, there are people in the Democratic Party who espouse views that many view as radical. And there are Republicans who are reality-based conservatives. But looking at the GOP as a whole, the fringe has become more and more the mainstream. Voters are falling in line behind people like House Republican conference chair Elise Stefanik, who has promoted the replacement theory, and far-right Fox News personality Tucker Carlson, who has referenced and drawn from the replacement conspiracy on numerous occasions as part of his apparent efforts to stoke White fear. (A day after the Buffalo shooting, Stefanik's senior adviser denied that the congresswoman "advocated for any racist position" and told the Washington Post, "Any implication or attempt to blame the heinous shooting in Buffalo on the Congresswoman is a disgusting low for the Left, their Never Trump allies and the sycophant stenographers in the media." Carlson, on the other hand, tried to distance himself from the document allegedly written by the Buffalo shooting suspect.) And Republicans are increasingly embracing the anti-democratic falsehood that the 2020 election was rigged -- a lie pushed by the party's most influential figure, former President Donald Trump. And all of this is happening while the country is awash with weapons. It's a dangerous cocktail of cultish authoritarianism, extremist ideology, readily accessible firearms and a willingness to deny inconvenient truths. Ironically, the growing threat to democracy in the United States is occurring at a moment when US foreign policy has accomplished an extraordinary, historic feat; one that among other things serves to fortify democracy around the world. This week, Finland and Sweden, two countries that had for decades sought to remain neutral on great power clashes, submitted their applications to join NATO. It's difficult to fathom just how dramatic a shift this is. It was only recently that the very survival of NATO seemed in doubt. French President Emmanuel Macron had warned about the "brain death of NATO" in 2019. Trump had disparaged the alliance as irrelevant and cast doubt on the US's commitment to mutual defense. And, according to former national security adviser John Bolton, Trump might have pulled the US out of NATO if he had won a second term. (Taylor Budowich, a spokesman for Trump, dismissed Bolton's criticism, saying the former adviser "is only happy when America is at war.") But Finland and Sweden saw what everyone else did after Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine, prompting the US to respond by warning Russia that it would face "the full force of American power" if it moved into NATO territory. It became apparent that belonging to NATO, an alliance of democracies, protects against aggressive countries with imperial designs. Despite some internal disagreements, NATO now looks stronger, more united and more necessary than it has in decades. It's easy to see how this could have gone a different way. Another president -- the previous one -- might have sat this out and rendered NATO powerless. Without Washington's diplomatic, political, financial and military support, Ukraine could now be in a much worse position; Putin could be stronger than ever, with his eye on Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and who knows where else. China could be rejoicing in its links with Moscow, revving up for an assault on Taiwan. Other world leaders, seeking to boost their standing at home, might be looking to history to reclaim lost territories. But the US led its allies in taking a stand even before Putin attacked, affirming the sovereignty of Ukraine and its territorial integrity. Even before the first Russian tank crossed into Ukraine, President Joe Biden sought to pursue an extraordinarily difficult path. His goals were to prevent Putin from conquering Ukraine; to do it without triggering a direct clash between Russia and the United States, two nuclear-armed powers; and to deny Russia a geopolitical victory. It was a needle-threading challenge of the highest order. So far, it looks like he has succeeded. Biden and his team rallied the world to Ukraine's side. They made sure NATO was united in its support of Kyiv, and they provided a massive supply of armaments that helped Ukrainian defenders push the Russians back. Three men -- Putin, Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky -- are most responsible for this turn of events. Today, Russia looks like a paper tiger, albeit a brutally destructive one. China is surely less enthusiastic about its "no limits" friendship with Russia. And the United States has regained its undisputed place as the leader of a mighty alliance of democracies. And yet, when the world looks at what is happening in the US, it sees a struggling democracy riven with violence, hate and division. This is a high point in America's global leadership, but only if you look at it with one eye closed. Mark Esper, who served as one of Trump's defense secretaries, recently noted that the greatest threat to America is not China, but the extreme partisan dysfunction in Washington. He's now calling on the GOP to divorce Trump. But Trumpism has already conquered much of the GOP. It's not just the House, the Senate and the White House that are in play in the upcoming midterm elections. It's democracy itself. If the candidates who reject election results, demonize minorities and fuel internal divisions continue to gain power in 2022 and 2024, it's very possible American democracy will not survive. And, of course, the US's position as a global beacon of freedom and a leader of the world's democracies will perish along with it.