Condoleezza Rice prefers an experienced Republican presidential nominee
A conversation with Condoleezza Rice
By David Siders
Published: Monday, Jan. 9, 2012 - 12:00 am | Page 1D
Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a professor at Stanford University, was on the telephone last week as the Republican presidential caucuses got under way in Iowa. She answered questions about the presidential race and about California politics, where she is part of a group advocating tax changes. Following are excerpts of that conversation:
>Do you have somebody you would like to see win (the Republican primary)?I have not endorsed in the primary, and I've felt that primary seasons are good for having everyone kind of run around the track and see where people stand and how they do. I've always believed that our system is probably a good one for testing people's mettle. So, I'm watching carefully. I'll obviously support the nominee.
>There's no candidate that you wouldn't prefer to President Obama?I will vote for the Republican nominee. But I think we've got people who are very sound, have a lot of experience. There's a lot of experience in this field, whether it's Mitt Romney, who's, you know, been a governor, or Jon Huntsman, who's been a governor, or for that matter a couple of senators. Of course Newt Gingrich was speaker of the house, so there's a lot of experience in this field.
What about you? You're again among those being rumored as a potential vice presidential candidate. Do you have any interest?
I do not. I love being a university professor. I've done my public service. I'm a policy person, not a politician, and they really are two different breeds. I've had my chance to do foreign policy, which is my domain, at the highest level, and it doesn't get any better than secretary of state, really, in that regard.
>Do you have any thoughts about what the Republican Party in California could do to regain some of its voter registration losses and become more relevant?I think that there has to be broader outreach to minorities, and I think there particularly has to be broader outreach to the Hispanic community. And there, I'm very much on record as being one who believes that comprehensive immigration reform is a necessity, that some of the harsher things that are said about immigration are both shortsighted and ultimately, in the long term, will undo one of the great strengths of the United States. So I would start with better policies on immigration.
>In California, do you think the state was right to adopt its version of the Dream Act?Well, I think immigration policy is federal policy. I'm not very supportive of states trying to have immigration policies on their own, whether it's Arizona or California or Alabama. Immigration is, you know, there are not that many things that are reserved to the federal government, but who gets into the United States and what constitutes legal status in the United States, that ought to be a federal issue.
>And do you view the Dream Act and its implications for students who are here as an immigration policy?I consider it as part of the immigration policy, yes. Look, I'm probably favorably disposed to many of the elements that the Dream Act tried to bring into play. It's just that I more believe that we need comprehensive reform, and I think when we try to do it piecemeal, it just gets very hard.
>Do you have an assessment overall of Gov. (Jerry) Brown's performance in his first year?It's been a tough year, and that's not surprising. But you know, he's my governor, too, and I hope he's going to be able to do something about what I think California's biggest problem is, which is job loss through the exodus of business and industry in California. And you do that not through higher taxes, but I would hope he'll do something about the corporate tax rate. I hope he'll do something about our deficit. We have to keep investing in K-12 education, and I find myself very concerned about what's happening to the University of California system.
>The Think Long Committee, which you're part of, is proposing a ballot measure that would raise tax revenue.It's a measure that has a number of elements to it, including starting to try to cut marginal rates for everybody. So it's not just a tax raising measure. It has associated tax reform with it, and I was probably more favorable toward the tax reform, but you need, probably at this point, you need some kind of compromise.
>Do you think that if there are too many of these tax measures on the ballot, that that could be problematic?I think the California ballot is confusing enough. Every time I vote in California, and the whole referendum process, I really have my reservations about it. Because I tell you, I think I'm an informed voter, and I sometimes have to read the measures six or seven times, and then sometimes I still don't understand them. So, I worry about the complexity of the California ballot, yes.
>What do you make of his (Brown's) tax proposal?I don't want to comment. Again, I have certain principles that I'm looking for here. No. 1, tell me how you're going to cut spending. No. 2, tell me how you're going to cut the corporate tax rate so that California's not losing jobs. No. 3, tell me - then - how you're going to balance revenue and expenditure, but in that order.
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/09/4172081/a-conversation-with-condoleezza.html#storylink=cpy
Peter Dow of Rice for President Group adds.
Well there could be no republican nominee as experienced as Condi herself. Isn't time we had a better breed of person elected to the highest office?
Even as a "policy person", Condi is very much admired by the public and polls have shown that voters would vote for a Condoleezza Rice ticket even if she is a "policy person" or a "different breed" to most politicians.
Rice for President Yahoo Group
Condi videos on YouTube
The Condoleezza Rice forum in the For Freedom Forums
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]