Technology is becoming more and more a part of mainstream life. But the journalists who have access to the 2008 presidential candidates usually aren’t prepared to talk tech, and so the candidates’ positions on digital issues are often left unexplored. We want to change that, and have been reaching out to the presidential candidates to talk one-on-one with us about the issues that are important to our readers.
Governor Mitt Romney (see his PoliticalBase profile here), a Republican candidate for president, was the first to respond, and we will be recording a podcast discussion with him in the next week. What we talk about on that podcast is largely up to TechCrunch readers.
We’re finalizing the high level questions we’ll be asking Governor Romney (and other candidates in the future). Please let us know in the comments what tech-related issues are important to you; what would you ask if you had the chance? Issues to think about:
- the role of technology in education - what role should government and technology companies have
- the growing digital divide in the U.S. and around the world
- immigration and visa issues
- the role of government in protecting personal privacy online
- Mobile spectrum allocations and ground rules
- How should the U.S. engage with China: technology, human rights and censorship issues
- the role of free markets; helping U.S. technology companies compete worldwide
Net neutrality - Intellectual property issues - copyright, patent and trademark policies
Please let us know which of these issues, or which other issues, are most important to you in the comments below. Please keep the political debates to a minimum - save it for the comments to the podcast itself. And any ad hominem attacks will be moderated. Things can get ugly on the political blogs, and I want to keep the level of discourse around these podcasts at a high level.
We’ll also be unofficially dedicating these podcasts to the DonorsChoose challenge. Education will be a big part of these discussions - do your part to help education by donating now (and we’re matching all donations).
One last note - we’re reaching out to candidates from all political parties in a nonpartisan manner. We want to hear from both sides of the aisle on these issues. We’ll be putting together a formal election policy in the near future with more details.
See all
Post
Brilliant guy, too intellectual for red states for his own good, and trying too hard to be in-sync with what passes as “”"”"conservative”"”" these days for it not to be all to evident.
Could Obama camp be on this too??
You better be lighting quick in uploading that podcast…otherwise by the time you upload he has already flip flopped on the issue.
p.s. plenty of candidates talked tect at Google
here is the link with all the candidates who visited Google:
http://youtube.com/user/AtGoogleTalks
No big surprise that Ron Paul has the most views, and the biggest support on Google campus:
Ron Paul: 304,202
Clinton: 47,995
McCain: 19,359
Edwards: 9,159
Gravel: 8,142
Richardson: 6,262
He did use to be one of the heads of Bain Capital, so he has some street cred…
But I can’t help but wonder if he switched back to supporting MySpace instead of Facebook, at the same time he switched from to pro-life from being pro-choice
I would like to see Fred do it. (there was the gratuitous link to obama hussein so i though I would link to Fred).
Is this for real?
We have U.S soldiers dying in Iraq, kids without health care, a runaway deficit, a crashed housing market, a looming recession, global warming, skyrocketing oil prices, (I could keep going)…
Is there someone out there that would actually vote for a presidential candidate based on their “tech position?”
I’d love to hear from Bill Richardson….probably the most brilliant person in the race (and that’s coming from a conservative so you know he must be good).
Mike,
I think when you touch on “Intellectual property issues - copyright, patent and trademark policies” –> you should really speak about the internationalization of the copyright, trademark and patent issues.
You need to talk about the attitudes of people towards copyright outside of America and the fact that America is really the only country that has such stringent controls - or rather - the only that enforces them ad-infinitum.
Someone who lives in China and only earns $500 a year, isn’t about to spend all of that on Microsoft Vista when they can get a $2 for the same price?
I think that internationalization issues surrounding copyright, trademark and patent are critical to the formulation of a more coherent multi-lateral policy.
Since America leads the world on suing just about everyone for everything –> how is America going to handle the torrent that will be China and India in the next 12 - 24 months ?
My 2 Cents …
faceloop - I agree those are pressing issues, but they are being covered elsewhere. Will Mitt’s position on visas for engineers affect the way I vote? It could, particularly when looking at candidates who have similar positions on other issues.
Kind of funny that all the google ads just changed to Mitt Romney related stuff.
You should do more stories on Political parties, they may have higher CPC rates! Or just do tech stories and drop in a few political names here and there……haha
Tcruncher2 - good ideas.
Mitt Romney has impressed me as a candidate and his background with Bain Capital would suggest that he gets finance and markets.
My questions: what is his position in relation to a VC tax that has been talked about recently, also taxation of capital gains: I believe some Democrats have previously floated taxing capital gains at the point of transaction as opposed to the current ability to defer the tax through reinvestment. This is one tax benefit that has helped American VC to thrive over other countries.
On IP where does he stand in relation to the Sonny Bono bill, prohibitive legislation that has removed items from the public domain, a move that benefits only a few whilst denying everyone else. Should copyright be indefinite or does he believe in a reasonable expiry date?
Also obviously net neutrality, for or against, and why
I’d be interested in their stance on Net Neutrality. With all this recent discussion about Comcast filtering certain types of traffic, I think it’s an interesting issue to bring up.
I’m still pretty curious why he thought it was a good idea to strap his dog’s crate to the top of his car and then drive on the freeway.
I would like to know where these candidates stand on the issue of online security for minors. I think that conservatives tend to use sexual predators and social networks as a fear tactic and I wouldn’t vote for anyone who took that approach. Nevertheless, there are sexual predators online and this is an issue that any candidate should understand and be prepared to discuss.
And faceloop, do you think we should ignore the digital divide simply because there are other serious issues? The digital divide is an enormous economic issue that will further stratify our society in terms of class, and by default race, if we do not address it. It is an issue that is “for real.” I agree, technology is not the most salient basis by which to choose a candidate, but does that make it extraneous? I for one am glad for the chance to examine a candidate from different perspectives rather than the banal abortion/health care/war in Iraq perspective that we always get.
Why, Faceloop of Comment 6…
Tech IS one of the main engines of the U.S. economy, so you cannot ignore it. No presidential candidate can. You cannot extract any of those issues you list from technology, as it is such an integral part of modern American life. The terrorist attacks and war in Iraq are all assaults on our way of life, and our technological edge is the source of much envy around the world. You cannot be a modern day President and not have a plan to keep the U.S. at the technological forefront.
Regarding global warming, the problem cannot be sorted with today’s technology but will have to be solved with the innovation of tomorrow.
I, for one, would look at a Presidential candidate’s technological plank come decision time.
Surprising that Romney is the first to respond. Since Al Gore created the internet, I figured it would be someone from his camp?..
I like this guy, well as much as I can like any politician.
But, given the choice of Hellary and anybody, I’ll take anybody!
First and foremost let me tell you that this podcast is a great idea. Hopefully we’ll see more candidates joining the debate.
I like Romney. I like where he stands in terms of immigration and labor enforcement. Too bad I can’t vote (I’m not an US citizen).
Romney is just a prettier Bush. Before we get to technology, he needs to answer Constitutional questions correctly.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/.....ervatives/
Am no “feminist”, but truly, Mr. Faux Ballmer…your wit sparkles!
It’s been over 100 years since women have had the right to vote, and fifty years since the birth of feminism. Sounds like you are setting back the cause…oh…150 years?..
Agnieszka - wait, does that mean that if a person doesn’t support Hillary they are against women’s rights?
As a former CEO of Bain, it would be interesting to hear his views on the venture capital space? I’d also be like to hear his thoughts on stuff like the use of stock options, the roll of tech in the general economy, and his views on the impact of the private equity on market risk.
Does leave space for one to assume…if someone knocks ‘Hellery’ without addressing specific issues as to why he is against a particular candidate.
As a startup founder, here’s what I care about:
- visas
- capital gains
- getting the cell phone carriers sorted out so that we can compete
I’d be very interesting in hearing from Dr. Ron Paul. Of all the candidates, I feel he would create the best global environment for Technology. Every other major candidate in one way or another favors big Government, and ‘control’ over things. Dr. Paul is the only one that strongly favors the marketplace.
Most other industries in this country over the history have been ruined when legislators get their hands in them. No candidates should be talking about whether or not net neutrality or anything similar should or should not be passed - they should be discussing the role in Government in our lives - and the right answer is that Limited Government in all ways is what would be best.
Dr. Paul would ensure that a legislation such as Net Neutrality does NOT pass, and would let the free market determine the right answer. Let there be competition. If Comcast wants to filter certain content, let a competitor take away their market share. What we must fear is the lobbyists and the politicians who get bought by them.
Over all the Technology industry has done so well over the past couple of decades only because the Government hasn’t gotten it’s hands into it - YET. Lets make sure that we keep it that way.
Once again, I’d love to hear from Dr. Paul in these podcasts.
As a web developer who worked on Romney’s campaign I would love to see Romney’s stance on internet security issues. Particularly the whole “one-id-card-fits-all” database floating around capitol hill.
#27 - ah, the national id card, good issue.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2007.....tional-id/
@ Agnieszka: Depending on the State a woman lived in, she may have had the right to vote since before the founding of the United States. The 1920 amendment standardized these rights across all the States but did not necessarily grant any rights that did not already exist (though in some States it did) — a common misperception. For example, in a few States there was only one voting right per household, which was abolished by that amendment.
That said, I have no idea what Hillary has to do with women’s rights. Honestly, she reads as a thinly veiled sociopath, so I would prefer many other people over her on that basis alone. Fully half (including myself) of the executive staff in my high-tech venture is female, but that doesn’t blind me to the gross shortcomings of Clinton as an individual. I’m not even a Republican, I simply don’t like Hillary.
With all the coverage of the RIAA and Music Industry on here, it’d be great to know what he thinks about copyright and trademark issues.
Also, I’d love to hear him comment on the idea of internet taxes (which eBay I believe is lobbying hard against).
These issues strike me as compelling ones for a blog like TC to bring up in a podcast with a presidential candidate. One of the ones that I find increasingly scary though is, “the role of technology in education - what role should government and technology companies have”. To be clear, it is the second part of that, the government’s role in education WRT technology. The internet and mobile media has dramatically changed the way I, and many of my friends, learn these days. Thanks to schools like MIT, Stanford, Duke, Yale, and others, I now have the luxury of downloading coursework directly from these schools, or can just go to iTunes U and download any number of lectures for free! This is a very good thing and I hope that more institutions follow the trend. However, what happens if the government gets involved? Will there be regulations as to what might be appropriate content? Might that Stanford class on human sexuality be a bit too racy for conservative legislators? (I can picture it now, republican senator grandstanding, reading from Miller’s Sexus, or perhaps quoting a lecture about orgasms from Naomi Wolf, saying “This is how our tax dollars are being spent?!”). Worse, I can see that same senator arguing that creationism deserves equal presence alongside evolution in order to get any tax breaks and such from the government. Now, I know this sounds one-sided and perhaps a bit paranoid, but the same arguments could be made from the right. The internet provides a great forum for learning (as well as wasting time and copious amounts of porn), but I am deeply concerned about the government’s role in anything having to do with education regulation and technology. I say just make sure that public and private institutions alike continue to have tax breaks, and let them decide what and how to distribute their materials without any fear of reprisal from the government.
Michael,
Why do the usual and you choose all the questions (granted, you may choose one from a user if you like it, but it is all your call). Why not allow the community wisdom to emerge to decide at least some of them, as we are doing here: http://www.askthenextpresident.com. Otherwise, it is just the same top-down stuff, which is not bad, but not very creative either.
I have four issues I am interested in hearing about.
1. Net Neutrality Please. Would love to hear his position on that.
2. Also, the US’s role is preserving and managing the internet, and how this balances with other countries desires to reduce our dominating influence.
3. And the current battle for the last bit of broadband spectrum, it would be interested to hear his position on that issue.
4. I would also like to hear this thoughts on how long the internet is to be exempt from taxes, as I believe this is already changing on a state by state basis. Any other thoughts on taxes and the internet would be appreciated as well.
Thanks,
Tim McCormack
iRent2u.com - the Online Rental Marketplace
Ron Paul is an interesting candidate.
He’s a man who has a lot of admirable Jeffersonian talking points, but I wonder if he has the philosophical muster to back them up. He reminds me of a child - taking the core of a great idea and applying it nonsensically to every situation. I don’t know that he has thought through these things beyond the level of ‘people good - government bad.’
I’ve heard him described as a crazy old man. Sometimes I consider voting for this crazy old man simply to shock the political system and make to it more evident to the political consultants that there is a desire for true Libertarian reforms. But it’s hard to deny that he’s a crazy old man.
Dear Alias Dictus Tyrant…or shall I call you Nero? Do your talents include psychiatry as well?
Thank you for your relevant insight, btw. Still, I have more interest in a candidate’s stance on issues than personality.
And so I look forward to the podcast with anticipation. G’night.
ELECTRONIC VOTING
The way things are currently set up, can the results of electronic voting be trusted? What is preventing the results from being manipulated? What could be done to bring about more confidence in the robustness of electronic voting?
I here Steven Colbert is running for president. I think you should get in contact with his camp ASAP.
No one has mentioned what I think is one of the most important current tech issues: AT&T and Verizon’s warrantless internet wiretapping for the NSA. I would like to know if Romney supports the organizations’ actions and if he believes the telcos deserve immunity for their actions, a proposal which has recently surfaced in Congress.
More information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N.....ontroversy
and here:
http://www.eff.org/cases/att
Michael,
thanks. Please ask him something like below…
“Do you think US should ease Green card process for H1B and F1/J1(student/scholar) visa holders who are educated and can contribute significantly in US economy ? What what you do if answer is ‘Yes’ to the first question? ”
“Should we focus more on immigration policies for legal aliens(H1B, F1, J1) than immigration policies for illegal immigrants? “
Great idea Mike! This is exactly the type of initiative we need to introduce some diversity of opinion and innovation into the stale media coverage we normally get.
From my side, I’d be curious to hear his stance on the immigration and visa issues: I was an engineer trained in a US university, worked in tech in NYC, but then eventually left the country because I got tired of fighting all the roadblocks the govt had laid out in front of us just because my passport was not the right color. While I would love to go back to the US, I’m perfectly happy building my tech entrepreneurial life here in Europe. Will things change in the US? I know there are thousands of people in my situation who hope it will.
Shafqat
http://blog.newscred.com
Skip ALL the issues you mentioned and ask him FLAT out about the current AT&T/Verizon illegal wiretapping and pending government immunity.
If he’s for immunity then ask him how he would feel about legislation requiring non-classified all communication by government official to be made public.
After all it’s only the 4th amendment we’re talking about here.
#40..We feel same..Please ask your friends in similar situation to post their requests here..
I would be interested in hearing about why neither Mr. Romney, nor most of the Republican candidates, will be able to attend the “YouTube debate” in November. I have my own suspicions, and your interview probably isn’t the place to raise those. But there is a legitimate journalistic question there, one that likely interests TechCrunch readers.
Does all this means that TechCrunch is an Republican blog?
@35: My specialty, to the extent that I have one, is cognitive science and behavior analytics, but I should disclose that my proper education is in chemical engineering. My current venture is based on new technology not related to any of the above history — I’m a polymath.
Stances on the issues are moderated by personality and character, because of all of these “stances” are the easiest to modify. Hillary will happily be just about anything her audience wants her to be at the moment, and she does it very naturally. That is a valuable skill in some settings, but not something I’d want in a president. Politicians are smarmy used-car salesmen, but at least you know what that means in the big picture. I would prefer none of the above when it really comes down to it, but a greasy low-rent salesman is likely to do less damage than an overtly power-hungry sociopath.
Naturally, what I would really like is a principled individual to take part in these elections, both those are hard to come by in the political process. Ironically, even though I disagree with him on many issues, Ron Paul is almost certainly the most principled candidate running. I may not agree with him, but he clearly understands the difference between his preferences and the obligations of political office, and his political actions have been consistently within the Constitution for a very long time. Which is more than I can say about just about anyone else in Congress. I respect Ron Paul for his principle, even when I disagree with him, because you know he will follow the Constitution even when it is not politically expedient. We’ll be voting for other people, of course, but it would do us well to have someone that understands both economics (something Ron Paul is kind of poor at in truth) and the Constitution, neither of which describes Hillary Clinton. It is nothing personal about her, she is simply a horrific person as a candidate for US president.
And this is another reason why TechCrunch is brilliant. Thanks for doing this. If anyone from the Giuliani camp is reading this… please get Rudy to do a podcast. I’m strongly leaning Giuliani, but the world of tech is a hugely important issue. Just because Washington, D.C., and the media rarely talk about technology, doesn’t mean it’s not important. If anything, they speak loudly, but we’ve got the votes.
Regarding important issues… I’m shocked no one has yet seconded the China questions. China has declared war on western search engines– how would the candidates deal with this? How about (ironically enough, given China’s other limitations on freedoms) their aggressive pushing of many technologies, while various interest groups in America are pulling us back? (As Duncan Riley pointed out, “It’s also interesting as an observer to note that web development is more free in a communist country than the US.”)
Those are some good, hard questions that TC has already raised recently– and the rest of the media sure isn’t raising them. Ask these questions!
@ Abbu:
did you read all of the post?
“One last note - we’re reaching out to candidates from all political parties in a nonpartisan manner. We want to hear from both sides of the aisle on these issues.”
I would like to hear his position on the overall Internet “economy”, and if he thinks we could be experiencing another Internet bubble. Baidu at $320, Google at $640, Blue Nile at $85, VMware at $100, etc. all trading at 100+ p/e multiples, while the average p/e of the S&P 500 is around 16. Not to mention VC investments that are still on the rise.
As the founder of Bain Capital — one of the largest private equity firms in the world — he is by far the most knowledgeable candidate in the area of finance.
Damn damn damn! TechCrunch used to be one of my few remaining politics-free havens. Now that TechCrunch has fallen, it’s down to icanhascheezburger.com.
China is holding their currency at low prices. One of the fundamentals of the US and its trade parters agreements is free floating currency.
In the short run it keeps the cost of Chinese goods down and allows China to win more business.
In the long run it creates a larger dependency on China, trade deficits, but most importantly it creates unfair competition with other Asian countries and the rest of the world (which cannot devalue their money/keep the value of their money low and will not be able to compete with China on price)
(Not to mention that the average Chinese worker cannot afford to leave China to go on vacation)
With China creating and unbalanced trade surplus they are in the dominating position with the world trade markets moving forward as they are able to build up a surplus of money. Some believe it is best to force China to float their currency now rather than 10-20 years from now, when they control more of the world trade.
What does Romney believe is the best strategy with China?