by NextGen Journal

Everywhere

October 20, 2011

On Thursday, NGJ Editor-in-Chief Connor Toohill connected with GOP Presidential candidate Jon Huntsman for an exclusive NextGen Journal interview. Questions were submitted by college students nationwide, and we posed some of the best to the former Utah Governor and U.S. Ambassador to China. A transcript of that conversation follows:

Connor: Governor Huntsman, nice to talk with you, thanks for taking the time….I wanted to start with the news from today in Libya- this question’s coming from Dan Horning at George Washington University. “You opposed U.S. intervention in Libya. Today, Qaddafi’s dead. In your mind, does the U.S. now have a role in helping the Libyan transition, or is this not related to our security interests?”

Jon Huntsman: Our security interest in Libya is to support those factions, those movements, that share our values- the values of democracy, of the markets, of human rights. And to the extent that we can aid and assist those organizations through NGO’s, non-governmental organizations, through diplomacy, through non-military means, I’m totally in favor of that.

But should it be a military priority for us to get involved in what could be a looming civil war? You’ve got to remember there are dozens of factions in Libya, and it’s still very uncertain in terms of how this all plays out- if in fact you will end up with a regime that does share our values. We hope so, and it seems that the evidence is positive at this point, but there is a role for us to play through NGO’s and through diplomacy.

Connor: Sticking with foreign policy for a second, obviously you have a great deal of experience with China. A question coming from Wade Millward at the University of Florida- “How do you see US-China relations evolving as China becomes more of an economic and global force on the world stage?”

Jon Huntsman: It will continue to be a ‘sweet-and-sour’ relationship- I say that tongue-in-cheek. It will continue to be a sweet-and-sour relationship, as it has been for 40 years. When we started this relationship 40 years ago, we were at war against one another in Vietnam, we’d fought one another in North Korea, they were in the throes of the cultural revolution, and we had zero trade and zero people exchanges.

Today, we’re collaborating on international security issues, we’ve got $400 billion in trade, the second largest economic relationship in the world and soon to become the largest; and they now have more students in the United States, studying in our universities, than any other country around the world, at 120,000 students. So you’ve got to understand that the future will hold challenges in the US-China relationship, simply because we differ ideologically, we draw from different experiences historically, we share different geography, which gives us a different worldview, we speak a different language. We have different customs and traditions. So the differences will always be there- what will be important longer-term is managing those differences, and (having) a president who understands intimately well how you deal with those differences  and how you maintain a viable relationship will be, I think, an important part of serving America’s interests in that relationship.

But, beyond just dealing with those areas of divergence, we also have to find some areas of convergence. We have to find some areas of common interest. And they increasingly should be around the areas that will infuse our bilateral relationship with shared values, as opposed to just shared interests. We’ve had shared interests for 40 years, we now need to work more and more on shared values: human rights, democratic reform, the role of the Internet in society, greater transparency in terms of military spending. Those things will all be an important part of how we make the US-China relationship ‘gel’ longer-term, and if we can do that successfully, I think we’ll have a successful future for the US-China relationship- not without its challenges certainly, but with a focus more and more on how we can collaborate to make the world a better place.

Connor: Turning to a domestic focus for a second here, you chose to boycott Tuesday night’s GOP Presidential debate. I’m curious whether you had a chance to see any clips from it, and what you thought of the debate?

Jon Huntsman: I was totally embarrassed- completely embarrassed by the lack of seriousness, the lack of focus on the issues that really matter to the American people- issues about reviving our economy and addressing joblessness were given short shrift. Our role in the world and securing our position of pre-eminence were given short-shrift. It was more game-show-like than anything else.

So was our decision right to stay in New Hampshire? Absolutely, because first and foremost our decision was based on a boycott of the Nevada caucus because of the political shenanigans that have played out in getting Nevada to leapfrog ahead in the schedule, thereby diminishing the importance of the New Hampshire primary. Which plays a critically important role, if I could just say this, a critically important role, in giving not just the people of New Hampshire but indeed the people of the United States a window onto the candidates, who they are, the issues that they represent and their vision for a better America. No other state in the early primary phase allows that to happen because of the closeness that the citizens are given to the candidates during the primary process in New Hampshire.

Connor: And speaking of New Hampshire, we had a question come in from Clint Akarmann at Stanford University. “Recently you’ve focused largely, almost entirely on New Hampshire- what factors are there that make you believe that New Hampshire is the foundation of your path to victory?”

Jon Huntsman: It is the first primary state. It has always upended conventional wisdom because as the first primary state, as I mentioned earlier, it really is a unique set of circumstances where people are very close to the candidates, they’re able to see the candidates, to question the candidates, to bring the candidates out in terms of who they are as people and the issues they represent. In other words, you can’t get through New Hampshire without the New Hampshire citizens checking the box, so to speak. And in order to check the box, you have to do endless town hall meetings, endless house parties, VFW visits- you’ve got to do it the old-fashioned way. And that’s grass-roots, on-the-ground campaigning- which is good for the candidates, but it’s also good for the people of New Hampshire, and it’s great for the country, and whoever can manage that state successfully, as we are now doing, will be recognized more nationally, once the New Hampshire primary is over. It always happens that way- there’s drama before the New Hampshire primary, people go up and down. But once New Hampshire speaks, that is the first serious primary in this country that really does register an opinion of the candidates.

Connor: Shifting focus again quickly, the Occupy Wall Street movement has been on the forefront of the national discussion, and student loan debt and rising tuition costs have played a big role in that. Question from Joe Hoey at Temple University- “Do you have an answer for college students and recent graduates who are drowning in debt as a result of rising tuition?”

Jon Huntsman: We have to have more affordable options for higher education. We don’t all need to go to four-year institutions- there are other options.  There are other private options that could be more affordable. We need to free up the system and provide more in the way of options.

Second of all, we need to expand our economy and create more jobs. We need economic strength, that speaks to giving kids a job or economic opportunity once they get out of school, so they can get on their own feet economically, which of course is a problem today with the high level of joblessness. But getting on their feet economically and allowing them to pay back those student loans. Those student loans are particularly painful when you have an environment that doesn’t have enough in the way of jobs. So the economic package that we have put forward to create jobs, to expand the economy, one that The Wall Street Journal has come out and endorsed as the very best of all of the candidates, is exactly what is needed to get this economy back on its feet and to provide the kinds of opportunities that our young college graduates need in order for them to get moving forward, to meet their financial obligations, and to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.

Connor: And speaking of that issues of jobs and especially of youth unemployment- it was released recently that only 55% of Americans aged 16 to 29 have jobs, which is a major drop from past rates. Aside from your general economic plan, your general tax plan, your general economic policies: is there anything that you would specifically target to address this problem of youth unemployment?

Jon Huntsman: I think mentoring programs with local corporations is a very, very powerful thing as well- something that we worked a little bit with in the state of Utah when I was governor. During the summer months, for example, when you’ve got some kids who are out of school, particularly those at the high school level, you’re talking about those 15 and up. Giving them an opportunity to  be mentored and to be trained by local companies, providing them an opportunity from which they can learn and experience the real world, I think is a very, very important opportunity. It focuses the mind, it provides young kids with a real opportunity in the workplace that they wouldn’t have otherwise. So, yes, we’re going to repair the economy, we’re going to take the steps that need to be taken in order to repair what is a completely broken economy. But along with that, we can make a clarion call to the business economy, to provide additional mentoring and training and summer opportunities for young students. I think that’s a very powerful tool as well.

Connor: Shifting focus again for a second: question from Andy Kirchoff at Loyola University of Chicago. “As Utah governor, you signed, three separate pro-life bills into law. Can my generation anticipate a strongly pro-life presidency?”

Jon Huntsman: I’m pro-life, I’ve always been pro-life.  (I have) two little adopted daughters, one from China and one from India, who remind me every day of the importance of life. It is core to who I am and my worldview, and I will always fall back on that position because I think life is the centerpiece of our civilization.

 Connor: Is it something that you think should be addressed at the federal level?

Jon Huntsman: At the federal level, anything that can be done to overturn Roe v. Wade, I think would be a step in the right direction. And certainly the appointments that are made to the judiciary have an impact on that. Certainly the President using the bully pulpit has an impact on that. And all of those have federal implications, of course.

Connor: You received a lot of attention recently from a Tweet that acknowledged your belief in evolution and climate change. If you believe that climate change is a serious problem, what concrete, tangible steps would a Huntsman administration take to deal with it?

Jon Huntsman: Number one, I would work toward some sort of recognition of common scientific benchmarks between the major emitters. So right now, the United States is looking at different science than, say, they are in China or India. So in order to rally around common solutions, you’ve got to be reading from a common text, and that isn’t the case today.

Number two, moving toward energy independence and using more natural gas, which is what I’m calling for in our plan for energy independence, would have a significant impact on the whole emissions situation. We have natural gas in great abundance, we can use it more in transportation, we can use it more in power & electricity, and we can use it more in manufacturing. If we were to begin converting more and  more usage in those three sectors over to natural gas, that would be the most significant immediate impact that we could have on emissions.

Connor: And to those who say that we can’t achieve substantive results without some form of a price on carbon: what’s your response to that?

Jon Huntsman: I would say that we would be hurting ourselves by unilaterally disarming. If we’re going to charge a price on carbon, when the Chinese are not going to recognize the same science and therefore not going to use the same tools, then we are unilaterally disarming and hurting our job-creators at a time when we can least afford to be doing so.

Connor: Question from Jordan Weibel at the University of Wisconsin-Madison: “What do you see as the underlying causes to the political polarization that we are seeing right now?”

Jon Huntsman: Lack of leadership. (We need) a President who is willing to step out from behind the teleprompter and move this country forward based on a real vision, a real vision that addresses, I think,  the greatest source of the divide in our nation today, and that is joblessness. We underestimate the extent to which 15 million of our country’s men and women, and millions more beyond them who are so dispirited that they’ve just given up on even trying to find a job- I think we underestimate the suffering that takes place within families, within neighborhoods, and within communities because people lack the dignity of a job. And that increases the angst, the anxiety about tomorrow, which puts additional pressure on families and creates a situation that this nation should begin to remedy as soon as possible.

And I believe as soon as the joblessness situation is addressed,  I believe that that’s going to go a long way in fixing the divide that currently exists in this country.  It’s about leadership.

Connor: A couple final questions here- one coming from Alex Wirth at Harvard University: “As President, you would have the ability to issue executive orders to create federal advisory councils. Would you consider using this power to create a Presidential Youth Advisory Council, made up entirely of young people, to advise you and your administration on youth policy?”

Jon Huntsman: We don’t need new advisory councils, we just need to draw upon the good men and women who are out there, ready to help. With young, college-aged kids in my own family, I can’t help but be in touch with young people and the issues that impact young people. And as I did as Governor, I will make them an important part of what it is I do as President. I will seek their advice and input. I will seek their direction. I will seek their good thinking, realizing full well that what we are doing is simply preparing this nation to be passed on to your generation. What we are doing is somehow fixing this national security problem called debt, which if we don’t remedy (it), is going to shipwreck your generation. Everything we do has implications for your generation. So interaction with the ‘next generation’ is critically important- whether or not we need an advisory committee to do that, I think it’s just common sense to do it.

Connor: And you’ve talked often of how destructive deficits and debt are for our generation. As President, would you be open to tax reform that raises revenues as part of a larger deficit reduction plan, or does it need to be all spending cuts?

Jon Huntsman: Well, as a matter of fact, I’m calling for raising revenue in my own tax proposal- raising revenue by phasing out loopholes and deductions, corporate welfare and subsidies, and taking those revenues and re-investing those back into the tax code. (That) allows us to lower the rate, which then makes our economy that much more competitive- both domestically, allowing a more level playing field for our creative class and our entrepreneurs, but also allowing us for the first time since 1986 to begin to break out in terms of our position in the world and create a more competitive environment for global economic competition.

Connor: Two final things, here: your name has been thrown out by some as a possible independent candidate (or someone)with a lot of momentum for a third-party bid. If it does not work in New Hampshire, with movements growing like Americans Elect, is an independent or third-party bid something you would ever consider?

Jon Huntsman: Highly unlikely. I’ve always been a Republican, I remain a Republican, and I believe I’m going to win as a Republican.

Connor: And finally, Governor, the most important question we have here. Saturday, we’ve got one of the biggest rivalries in college football, USC at Notre Dame- who’s your pick?

Jon Huntsman: I’ve gotta say USC because I was raised in Southern California, and I’ve got to stay true to my roots.

This is the first in a series of NextGen Journal Candidate Interviews- be sure to stay tuned, and follow along on Facebook and and on Twitter. 

join the conversation

facebook

most viewed

most recent