Last week I wrote asking for reader input into the questions we would ask Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican candidate for President in 2008, in an upcoming interview. Thanks to the great feedback in the comments, we were able to put together a list of questions to use for the Romney interview, as well as future podcasts with other candidates we are scheduling now.
The interview is below. Due to time constraints with Governor Romney, however, we weren’t able to get through all of the questions. Instead of rushing, we divided the questions up into two parts; his campaign says they’ll try to schedule a follow up session. The campaign also requested that we push some specific questions for later so that he could give more thoughtful answers.
The areas we were able to cover include technology growth policies in the U.S., Internet taxes, H1B visas, venture capital tax issues (see Fred Wilson and the NYT on this issue) and renewable energy.
We were not able to cover net neutrality, the digital divide, mobile spectrum allocation issues, identity theft, China censorship or intellectual property issues on this call.
Overall, we got through a lot of material in a short amount of time. I also learned that Governor Romney is strictly a Windows guy, but he says three of his five sons are on Macs. And we get to hear what he’s listening to on his iPod these days (he does own an iPod, of course).
I want to thank Governor Romney for taking the time to do this interview, and going out on a limb somewhat. Most of the candidates are a little standoffish on bloggers - we’re seen as somewhat unpredictable at times (the political blogs are particularly nuts).
Listen to the podcast, or just read the transcript, below. For more on Governor Romney, see his official website, PoliticalBase and the Yahoo News page on Mitt Romney. As always, we are posting this interview at TalkCrunch as well.
Special Thanks to BitGravity, a new content delivery network specializing in rich media, for hosting the podcast for us. This is being linked to from Yahoo News and other sources, so we wanted to make sure that it streams quickly. Thankfully, BitGravity is making sure it just works.
Listen Now:
Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Transcript
Michael Arrington: Hello, this is Mike Arrington from TechCrunch. Today I have the privilege of getting a few minutes to talk with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney about his positions on technology related issues. Governor Romney, thank you for taking the time to talk with me today and welcome.
Governor Mitt Romney: Thank you Michael. Good to be with you.
MA: So I noticed the new Iowa and New Hampshire polls were released yesterday and that you continue to have a very large lead among republican candidates. Congratulations on that.
MR: Well, thank you. I’m pleased that the places I spend most time in I’m doing better. If it were the other way around, where I spent the least time I was doing better, I would be in trouble.
MA: I have five or six questions for you and I’d like to just jump right in. I think the first one is fairly broad. The US technology industry, of course, has been a world leader. And a lot of the growth has been through international markets, particularly over the last ten to twenty years. What would you do as president to advance these efforts?
MR: Well, first it’s important to communicate as you do to your audience that the trade and opening markets to American goods is essential. The only way America is going to remain the world’s superpower is if we can compete globally, so I want to open more markets to our goods and I will negotiate with other nations to do so. At the same time I want to make sure that our trading with other nations is done on a fair basis, and when a nation like China does not honor our intellectual property rights then we’re going to have to get serious with our Chinese friends and say guys you just can’t do that or you’re going to suffer consequences in our markets. So we’re going to have to fight to make sure that our products are protected and our technology is protected but also to not close down foreign markets, open them up, we can compete around the world.
MA: Ok, great. Let’s jump into internet taxes, some news today on that actually. The 1998 Internet Tax Freedom Act bars federal state and local governments from taxing internet access or imposing discriminatory internet only taxes. Things like bit taxes, bandwidth taxes, email taxes. It doesn’t of course prohibit states from collecting sales taxes on things like e-commerce. It was twice extended by Congress and actually was set to expire this Thursday, but last week the Senate voted to extend the ban and then this morning the house voted 402-0 to approve the bill as well for a 7 year extension. I’d just like to get your position on internet only taxes.
MR: I think the indication of the house vote indicates that most American’s are of the point of view that Internet only taxes of the type you describe are not something we want to see. I have a specific position on that issue, but I do not want to see internet only taxes as you described them or access fees or email charges and so forth. We do enough taxing in this country and let’s not add more taxes. I’d rather see the tax for innovation reduced rather than expanded.
MA: It seems like along general party lines the Republicans wanted a permanent ban and Democrats wanted something less than that and they compromised on 7 years. Do you have any particular position on whether the ban should be permanent?
MR: Well I think it makes more sense to make it permanent. I think the Democrats recognized that if they do it every 7 years then they can go out and get contributions from companies that care and then vote for it every 7 years. It’s an old political ploy which is bring it back for a vote regularly and go back and hit people up for contributions…
MA: I didn’t think of it that way, that’s interesting. Let’s jump into visas, probably the most politically, one of the most sensitive issues in Silicon Valley at least. The H1B in particular, allows US employers to temporarily seek help from skilled foreigners, they have to have the equivalent of a US bachelor’s degree to qualify. We used to give, in the late 90s, 100-150k a year, there’s at least demand for 200k a year. In the last couple of years, the US quota for that has been brought down to 65k, and that was last year and this year. A lot of Silicon Valley startups and large companies in particular are saying it’s really hurting them with their hiring. Proponents of the program say it helps U.S. businesses stay competitive and it helps avoid outsourcing. It also brings some of the worlds best and brightest to the U.S. Quite a few of the most successful entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley started off as H1B visa holders. The other side says it can take jobs away from US citizens and lowers wages. What’s your position on H1B in general?
MR: I like H1B visas. I like the idea of the best and brightest in the world coming here. I’d rather have them come here permanently rather than come and go, but I believe our visa program is designed to help us solve gaps in our employment pool. Where there are individuals who have skills that we do not have in abundance here, I’d like to bring them here and contribute to our economy. Ultimately we’re in a competitive battle with the rest of the world; a battle where we need to stay the most powerful nation in the world. And the only way our nation stays ahead forever is with superior technology and innovation. And if we need additional folks who have skills that can contribute to our country then by all means lets welcome them in and if we see that our kids are not competing in certain areas lets help our kinds understand what they need to become competitive.
MA: Do you think the quota should be increased? Do you think their should be no quota? Should we let in everyone that is qualified?
MR: I would like to see us increase the number of people who receive an H1B visa and can provide skills and experience that we may not have. As to the exact number in my view that would follow a review of a number of things. Number 1: What’s the overall economy doing? What’s happening to the size of our workforce. Number 2: What’s happening to our own capacity in the jobs that are being requested. Number 3: What are the demands from our employers? How many additional folks do they need? You’d have to do an assessment of that on a regular basis, but my overall view is we need more H1B visas, not less.
MA: There’s an issue we talk about quite a bit in Silicon Valley about how venture capital is taxed. Venture capital is clearly the lifeblood of Silicon Valley that allows startups to form and grow without worrying about initial capital needs. Without that capital most public technology companies in the U.S. today would probably not exist or be in a much different form. one of the benefits of venture capital is the way they get their gains on their funds is they only pay capital gains on that carries interest even though they’re not investing their own money they’re only investing their limited partners money. It’s clearly a big incentive to be a successful venture capitalist because they’re taxed the capital gains rate. The capital gains rate is far below normal income tax rate. Congress in late spring looked at the issue to see if change is needed. Some prominent Venture Capitalists, Fred Wilson being one of them, came out and said they’re being taxed too low today and they should be paying normal income tax rates on what is effectively income. I have two questions for you, first what is your position on capital gains rate in general?
MR: I don’t believe that we should increase our capital gains tax rate. My view is in fact that for people earning 200k or less, we should eliminate the cap gains tax, the dividends tax, and the tax on interest altogether. I’d like Americans to save their money, and not get taxed on their savings. And with regard to carried interest associated with venture capital, real estate, private equity, I do not believe in raising taxes. And it is a capital gain because those individuals do make an investment, it’s a small investment, but they make an investment of their own capital and I would treat capital gains as capital gains instead of trying to re-categorize them as normal income.
MA: One more question and then I actually have a fun question. On renewable energy, strictly speaking we’re talking about science now and not just the internet and the areas I cover, it is a big area, an important area. My question is, what would you do to encourage U.S. innovation into renewable and sustainable energy sources?
MR: Well, first of all, as I mentioned a moment ago, the way a nation like ours stays ahead permanently from other nations is having superior technology and innovation and one of those areas that is certainly going to be true in relates to energy and I would like to see the federal government substantially increase its investment in basic science and basic research related to energy efficiency, energy production, energy distribution, and I will substantially increase funding in those areas . I will also work on public product partnerships to put in place coal to liquid capacity, potentially even nuclear power plants, and if you will, prime the pump again to get nuclear power plants online and under construction again in this country. I believe that we’re going to have to become to partner to encourage the development of these additional sources of energy, at the same time I want to create incentives for individuals and businesses to become more energy efficient. When I was governor for instance I said anybody who buys a car that is a high mileage vehicle, whether it’s a hybrid or not, I would waive the sales tax and the annual excise tax. Let’s give people more incentives to get fuel efficient vehicles.
MA: Here’s a more politically sensitive question. Based on current science which I know is still forming, do you think carbon emissions should be taxed?
MR: I’m not looking at a carbon emissions tax. No, instead I’m not looking at increasing taxes, but instead findings ways to develop new technology and encourage efficiency, but that’s not the course which I’ve laid out at this point.
MA: I guess that brings us to the most important question I have to ask you, which is…Governor Romney, Mac or PC?
MR: I have a PC. My sons have a Mac and swear by it, but I have a couple PC’s.
MA: So one of your sons is on Mac, or most of them are?
MR: 3 out of the 5 boys I believe are on Macs, and they swear by them, but I’m a creature of habit, I’ve got my PC.
MA: I’ve got to say I’m slightly disappointed and that’s going to hurt you in Silicon Valley (laughs), but at least it will help you in Texas where Dell is. Do you have an iPod?
MR: I do.
MA: Of course you have an IPod! What’s on it? What are you listening to right now, what sort of albums have you downloaded or listened to?
MR: What I typically download is country music as well as 1960’s music. I’m a baby boomer, so the Beatles and the Stones and some of the old groups from the 1960’s are my favorites, I listen to them and I listen to country. I might have some inspirational music as well, but those are the highlights for me.
MA: Governor Romney, thank you very much for your time.
MR: Good to be with you. Thanks Michael.





Solid interview and cool concept (a tech blog interviewing presidential candidates). Thanks, Mike!
Thanks for the interview Michael. So he is with no internet taxes, no emission taxes and in favor of H1B visas. Awesome!
One Supporter here..
He is having a PC & iPOD too. Cool..
http://www.techtalkz.com/
He sounded like he was trying to say what the TC audience wanted to hear, but I guess that’s politics for you. If he meant what he said, he seems like a very electable candidate. Thanks for the insightful interview, Michael.
These guys will say anything to get elected. When push comes to shove it’s the House, Senate, and the Administration they appoint that do the REAL decision making. Puppets.
All candidates should be required to start last.fm pages
I agree with the comment # 3.
There is a Digg Clone website about the Election at http://www.ielection08.com.
Interesting questions asked by MA. Very informative.
http://www.meetingflex.com
Social Networking + Video
“My view is in fact that for people earning 200k or less, we should eliminate the cap gains tax, the dividends tax, and the tax on interest altogether.”
That’s a really good idea.
Good interview, Michael. I found the bit about the Democrats’ handling of the internet tax issue really interesting.
I grew up visionary with Web 3.0. I can see new Google, new facebook, and new economy. Here are three most powerful rival men —
Mitt Romney
Fred Thompson
Ron Paul
As long they support Web 3.0, troops, health care, and disability**. Very important.
Here are systems we failed.
1. U.S health care
2. Putting too much state education test - It’s killing kids
3. The fastest growing fat Americans & massive fats.
4. President need to crack down racism, discrimination, defamatory.
5. Block annoying drug pill advertisement on TV.
6. Mortgage
7. Block sales of illegal firearms.
8. Troops fighting wrong ideas. Conflict of interests.
9. people couldn’t find job they have college degree.
10. U.S president forgot to kick mike arrington’s butt
Nice interview! I, too liked the bit about getting rid of capital gains taxes, etc, for people making under 200k. Nobody can say this policy benefits the rich - that’s for sure. H1B visas too - he seems very consistent on this message. Also, I was oblivious to the idea of pushing out a vote every 7 years as a fundraiser - amazing insight. Sounds like someone who knows the game. Solid interview - I’m surprised at how well he answered those questions - think Mitt has my vote.
Interesting interview. I’ve been following all of the GOP candidates, and it just seems to me like Mitt Romney’s style would be the most attractive to the technical crowd. He loves data, and actually has the brains to understand what technical people are talking about. His venture capital experience is definitely part of that realm of business, also. Cutting taxes is what I love to hear!
I’m going to agree with Generic_Guy and say that I really liked the bit about the way the Democrats handle the internet tax.
Multiple places in the transcript improperly used the word “were” instead of the contraction “we’re”.
Mitt Robot says whatever he needs to say to whomever he is speaking with. Have you seen all the flip flop videos of him just from the last couple of years? He has literally changed sides on almost every issue out there. You can’t trust a word that comes out of his mouth. Just ask the folks in his home state…they overwhelmingly don’t support him and would not elect him. He did the rug pull to them a few years ago.
Great concept Mike! Do a few more candidates from both parties, as well as the smaller parties that have people running. I was quite surprised to see this on TechCrunch, but you know - it’s probably one of the best places for them to reach out to another public they are ignoring - unless you are on MySpace and swear by it!
Rex
Whoa… for a political candidate like Mitt to say what he said, I applaud him.
However, being an incredibly liberal, immature, single-minded student in college, I couldn’t vote for him.
thanks Mike
Thanks, wordproofer. i think we fixed all those missing apostrophes now.
The idea of no capital gains taxes for people making under 200k sounds really good, but mega rich people generally don’t have any/little earned income. Steve jobs salary is $1, I am sure Buffet is similar. It would benefit those people a lot more then you or I.
I just read that Buffet paid 17% in tax, his secretary paid something like 28%.
This turned out even better than I expected. Congratulations to TC for pulling this off. Who’s next?
@Chris That is because Buffet is paying the majority of his taxes on cap gains which is around 15%, his assistant is paying most of her taxes on regular income which would be closer to 30% depending on what she makes. Cutting cap gains tax for people making under 200k wouldn’t change taxes for the super rich at all.
Mike are you going to have any Dems on? I’d love to see Obama and Biden but you can spare us Hillary….the scariest costume i saw last night
In reply to #3 Boon:
I’ve followed Romney very closely for a long time now and everything he has stated in the interview I have heard him say elsewhere with a non “TC” crowd. It was all familiar and not specifically tailored for this interview. The only new thing I learned was that he is a PC man, though I would have guessed it.
I am puzzled, why would it hurt him in Silicon Valley to not have a Mac? Makes it sounds like Silicon Valley folks are all Mac snobs. I tried out Mac for a whole year and decided to go back to Windows.
@22….your url is planetromney.com…you aren’t exactly an unbiased person.
Mitt did a great job, definitely a smart move to add incentives for saving rather than the current savings tax penalties.
http://www.newlycorporate.com
Thanks for doing this- niche interviews are really interesting. They help you get an idea how the candidate thinks (even when they don’t know an issue as deeply as other ones).
intellectual property patents should have been up there on that list. I know its a complex issue, but it cripples U.S. innovation.
Both Michael and Mitt did a get job… Move over Anderson Copper!
Great Job, Sorry
@24,
I never said I was unbiased. In fact, I stated that I follow him quite closely. Thank you however for mentioning planetromney.org [smile] It’s a great place to follow the Romney news. BTW, the tech crowd might be interested to note the it runs on Ubuntu/Apache/Python/Django.
Hey - if you’re curious to see where Mitt’s campaign contributions are coming from - check PoliticalBase’s “Follow the Money” map at: http://www.politicalbase.com/money/search/
Michael, cheers to you for a great interview concept & great execution on the interview itself. I look forward to seeing more candidates participate in the Arrington Forum!
Romney is dangerous. He has said he wants to “double Guantanamo Bay”
Great interview Michael! I really hope you can get more candidates, from both sides, to do interviews as well!
Yes, I think people should know where Mitt Romney stands on technology, and also that he can commit to a blog interview but had scheduling conflicts for participating in a televised republican debate hosted by journalists of color - the All-American Presidential forums on PBS hosted by Tavis Smiley.
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/taviss.....video.html
The four republican candidates that did not show up were: Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and John McCain.
“There is a pattern here,” Smiley told the Huffington Post. “When you tell every black and brown request that you get throughout the primary process that ‘no, there’s a scheduling problem.’ That’s a pattern… Are we really supposed to believe that all four of these guys couldn’t make it because of scheduling?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....64744.html
@35 - Jerome,
I can’t speak for the other candidates but I know exactly why Romney couldn’t attend the debate on Sept. 27.
Sept, 27 is the exact date when the Romney campaign had 40+ local call-a-thons happening across the nation called ‘Rally for Romney’ events. Literally thousands of people were organized to attend those, months of planning went into them. Romney had a long night of business and conference calls to support those who were helping on his behalf. These events were scheduled back in July, LONG before the debate was scheduled. Could he help that they planned the debate the same time as his “Rally for Romney” events? It was completely out of his hands.
The problem with scheduling this event was the date they chose to do it. The last few days leading up to the end of a fundraising quarter (Sept. 30) is not the time to do it. That is crunch time for the candidates. I don’t think the candidates would have attended, no matter who hosted the forum. They would have been wise to hold the debate a week later if they wanted full attendance.
JS: Romney did not run for reelection as a state governor. He was elected governor of MA in 2002 and chose not to run again in 2006. MA is a pretty liberal state so his win in 2002 wasn’t exactly a cakewalk.
It will be really interesting to see if any more presidential candidates accept your offer. My guess is no. The risk is so high and the gain is so little, and frankly, to discuss these issues, requires a pretty high I.Q. further adding to the high risk.
I would liked to have seen more probing on the effect of immigration on workers’ salaries; I understand the view of most here on that, but there is nothing wrong with playing Devil’s Advocate. In fact, I personally like to see a politician get thrown a curve ball by someone who agrees with a particular stance. It’s a friendly, respectful manuever that challenges him and forces him to to explain his answer more in depth, if he is even able to do so.
BTW, I found this when I was wondering about Fred Thompson’s implosion at Intrade (it relates to Mitt and finance; via FreeRepublic thread “Thompson Tanking in Futures Markets”):
“You can probably make a lot of money at the expense of idiots in this sort of thing. Bet Mitt is betting against himself…” posted by JohnnyZ
“That wouldn’t be apparent from Mitt’s recent numbers, as Romney is doing quite well, trading most recently at 29.3%, and up 2.4% today. If Mitt was betting against himself his numbers would be going down, not up.” posted by Plutarch
“Are you slow?” posted by JohnnyZ
Good interview, your questions were great. His answers did seem tailor-made for the tech/VC crowd, but why shouldn’t they? This is as close to a hometown crowd as he’s gonna get.
Mitt Romney may come off as trying to hard to be Reagan-esque, but in my opinion the best candidate for the Republicans. In order to keep my comment in accordance with this interview, I would say I am impressed on his positions that he voiced.
@36 - Nate Gunderson,
Thanks for the information, but I’m still not voting for him. Somehow Ron Paul seems to always be available and willing to participate in events such as youtube, appearances in student’s dorm rooms, and signing trivial things like the American Freedom Agenda freedom pledge:
http://www.americanfreedomagen.....pledge.htm
In the spirit of full disclosure and equal time, why do you offer the same access to other candidates such as:
Rudy Guiliani http://www.joinrudy2008.com
Ron Paul http://www.ronpaul2008.com
John McCain http://www.johnmccain.com
And my the way, why no questions on his Mormon belief and how that impacts his decisions on true science and stem cell research
Mac v PC - Are you kidding me
^ which Romney refused to sign.
Ric,
Are you really that bigotted. Pull your head out.
There, there Jon. Ric’s not bigotted, just ignorant.
Romney is not conservative (anti gun, didn’t work to lower taxes and socialist debacles in Massachusetts) and he is pro-war.
Ron Paul, 2008.
As Tech Crunch readers try to grapple with energy issues, they might find it helpful learn what nuclear power is really like day-to-day, as it is far different than the portrayals (positive or negative) by politicians such as Mr. Romney and the press. Even most “experts” cited in the media are outsiders.
I’ve worked in the US nuclear industry for over two decades and saw a need for a book that would provide some perspective - and hopefully be entertaining as well. The result is “Rad Decision”, available at no cost to readers at http://RadDecison.blogspot.com , and is also in paperback. It covers the good and the bad of atomic fission - and there’s plenty of both, as there is with all energy sources.
Stewart Brand, noted environmentalist and founder of The Whole Earth Catalog has said: “I’d like to see Rad Decision widely read.”
Great interview…thank you.
Great guy but he doesn’t stand a chance against Hillary. And I can’t wait for Chinagate II and the quadrupling of the China - US trade deficit. Thanks Bill!
Wow, no idea how you landed that interview, but amazing job Michael, it was extremely interesting. Keep it up!