A question about Clark and the software industry

[hackwriter]

I'm confused, and I hope one of the Clark supporters can fill in the blanks, because based on what I've seen, either Clark is waffling or he doesn't have a clue about the problem with outsourcing the software industry. I'm hoping I'm wrong

At the last Democratic debate, Clark appalled me by blithely waving his hand and saying, "Let India develop the software!" -- in the context of a statement about American technological innovation and retraining Americans in these new industries. I'm not even going to get INTO the fact of how many of those outsourced software developers are over 40 and all the retraining in the world won't get them hired as environmental scientists. But then I was watching C-SPAN on Friday night, and there he was, talking about the importance of keeping software development here in the U.S.

So what IS his position, anyway?

[cprise]

1. Right up until he declared his candidacy

...Clark was a lobbyist for IT corporations like Acxiom, that sell private consumer information to "Total Information Awareness". If you've heard about the secret "no-fly" blacklisting system now used at airports (they turn people away at the gate without ever telling them why), Clark had a hand in it:

http://www.why-war.com/news/2003/09/29/clarkwor.html

[OKNancy]

4. No he did not

Clark worked on another project and had nothing to do with the Jet Blue business.

As for the original poster, his policies are all over his web site. But briefly, Clark says that the jobs that are gone can't be recovered, so let's develop new areas for IT, etc, and also make tax penalties for those businesses that do send jobs overseas.

[union_maid]

2. I think he does understand

I don't really know what the remark in the debate was about. I saw it too and I have to tell you it bothered me. However, one of the reasons that I decided to support Clark was because, even before he was running officially he seemed aware of what a problem this is. He was talking about the outsourcing of high tech jobs when most of the other candidates were still talking about solutions that only addressed the manufacturing sector.

What he said on C-Span was on target and was complete with policies that amount to as much as can be done given our present system of government. I was very glad to hear what he had to say on C-Span and I'm glad that our other candidates are now talking about the issue.

[BootinUp]

3. He would change corporate tax policy to discourage outsourcing

He also says he would do something about H1B visas that bring in workers and pay them less than American workers. That they should be paid the same.

He also recognizes how easy it is for outsource these jobs because of technology itself.

I am paraphrasing from his speech at the New Hamphire Pancake Breakfast on Saturday morning. It was covered by C-Span and you can probably get a video fo the speech there at Cspan.org

[cryofan]

13. OK, I am switching from Kucinich to Clark

Clark is my guy, then. I still think Kucinich is easily the best candidate, but as I have shown in the "dean deception" threads, Dean is a stingy, welfare-state-hating Rich Boy, and I feel we must stop him. Bush is obviously one of the worst presidents we have ever had, and he also needs to be stopped.

Clark is a competent speaker, project a very presidential image, and could cripple Bush in the debates by bringing up his desertion from the Natl Guard. He apparently made overtures to the GOP, and from what I can see, that is the biggest knock on him. He was apparently rejected by them, and was even laughed at by them at some meeting, and that is a good sign.

I am also concerned about the outsourcing issue. In fact, it touches me personally, as I have a BS Computer Science degree and am unemployed (though by choice). From what I can see, Clark is coming up to speed on this issue, and I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

I still think this country needs to become a social democracy, and the best way to do that is to make the Green Party more powerful, so I will work to help the local Greens. But on the national level, I think we need to beat Bush and Dean, so Clark it is for me now.

What about a Clark-Kucinich ticket?

[BootinUp]

14. It always nice to hear

Someone has been paying attention! Welcome to the team.

Acutally when I started looking at candidates, before I really heard of Clark, I thought Kucinich was my guy. I was very impressed by the story of his Cleveland days battling the power conglomerate there. It was only when I saw he was polling low that I looked around more. I have watched most all of the debates from august on. And I have been impressed by Kucinich. Recently in another thread I rated him as my third choice which is mostly on electability. He certainly needs to play an important role in our government, and I am certain he will.

[Mairead]

5. I wonder whether Clark could have withstood

having had his career whisked out from under him when he reached colonel and told to start over again somewhere else at the bottom with no old-boy connections to help get him something cushy.

[OKNancy]

6. Oh good grief

With Clark's intellect and drive I'm sure he would have done just fine, and made 100x the money at that. He wouldn't have cried and moaned about it, but would have moved on as millions of others have and continue to do.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OKNancy]

11. You have often called me names

right-wing, DLC, and Nazi. I don't listen. I know where I stand, and what I have done. I also know from experience that losing a job can be a good thing sometimes and one can go on to bigger and better things.

There is nothing wrong with objecting about your job lose. But to continue to do nothing about it is not a political decision, it's a personal one.

[markus]

7. Clark needs to understand

that unless he public apologizes for that statement and stand, I would certainly vote for a third-party candidate over him. He basically told me F U, go get another job.

I'm 46 years old, and already on my second career. My next career move--if Clark were elected and pursued that policy--would be cart/greeter guy at Walmart.

Anyone who would suggest outsourcing our IT infrastructure overseas clearly doesn't understand the national security implications of this to be trusted as CoC, as well.

Would you accept a candidate who suggested the U.S. get out of the auto industry and focusing instead on cornering the world undercoating market?

[BootinUp]

8. Please check your facts

On Saturday as I mentioned above, he was speeking in NH at a pancake breakfast. I watched the whole thing, you can get a video here www.us4clark.com or probably view it at cspan.org

Clark said any procurements by the government that could affect security would be from American companies and American workers*, he specifically mentioned software.

Clark has never said he would promote outsourcing, quite the opposite as I stated above.

If you don't like Clark because he could have stated the problem in a better political way fine, but don't try to change the facts please.

*I edited this to make it clear he meant companies that use American workers.

[bhunt70]

10. With all due respect...

I think you misunderstand. He's not saying to send your job anywhere. He's not saying to outsource your job and he's not suggesting the US get out of the software industry (or the auto industry as you stated).

I think more than a few people have clarified this a few times already.

[TexasSissy]

12. This is a new issue that NONE of the candidates besides Clark

has addressed.

He was handed this question at one of the debates. He tackled it generally by stating his policy on keeping ALL jobs in the country (revising the tax code to do away with the current incentives to outsource, plus some other things). The moderator pressed specifically on the software to India question, to which Clark flubbed when he responded, "Look, let India do the software." And he said we'll keep everything else. He flubbed the answer, since he didn't have a specific answer on the software issue, which is a relatively new issue that none of the candidates was familiar with at that time. I bet they are, now.

The other candidates then had an opportunity to address that question. What did Dean say about the issue? Nothing. What did Kerry say? Nothing. What did Gephardt say? Nothing. The only one who added something to Clark's answer was Kucinich, who said that it's not okay for ANY jobs to be outsourced, which is the same thing that Clark said initially. Kucinich, like Clark, did not have a specific plan for the software-to-India issue.

This outsourcing of high tech jobs, and specifically software jobs to India, is a relatively new issue that apparently none of the candidates was familiar with. I am aware of it only because I saw a documentary about India.

Clark now has a specific plan on the software-to-India outsourcing, since he has apparently made himself aware of this issue, since he was handed this specific question. The hallmark of a good leader is to address problems when he becomes aware of them. None of the other candidates has a software-to-India stop outsourcing plan.

[shivaji]

15. What Clark ACTUALLY SAID about outsourcing is----

"Let computer programming jobs go to India, we here will do something else". Draw your own conclusions.

BTW goto businessweek.com for a well written article on this subject.

[Tom Rinaldo]

18. I stand corrected on the phrase

But my basic reply to the question still stands.

[SahaleArm]

20. How about more context and less ranting?

He was pointing out what will drive the next set of high-tech jobs, not that we should outsource all software jobs, a statement that was made in rhetorical defiance.

BROKAW: If you canceled NAFTA and WTO, I don't think it'll address a concern that Andy Grove, who is one of the founding geniuses that Silicon Valley, has, which is that he says by the year 2010, General Clark, in India, they'll have more people working in software and software services than we will have in this country. And he sees no evidence in either party of a public policy to address that critical component of our economic future.

CLARK: Well, I'm very concerned about exactly what Andy Grove has said, and canceling NAFTA and WTO will not solve the problem.

We have to have the right policies to create jobs in America, and to have companies that are hiring in this country stay in this country and not outsource.

So here is what I'll do: When I am president, the first thing I will have is $100 billion job creation program. Then we'll go and look at the tax code. We'll take away any incentives for companies that want to outsource or leave the country. And we'll have incentives for companies to create jobs in here.

But we need to go beyond all of that. We really need a national goals program. Software was great, the technology and the information revolution was great, but there are a lot of technologies out there. We've got great scientists in this country. We need to set some national goals. We have the mechanisms to do it, put the research money in to basic and applied research and let those inventions and discoveries come out in intellectual property that we can use in this country to create employment.

Energy and environmental engineering are two very fertile areas for the growth of American jobs.

CLARK: We want to be ahead of the software revolution. Let them do the software in India; we'll do other things in this country.

We can do that. All it takes is leadership.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. There have been some good replies already

TexasSissy had a great one. Some talking points. Anyone who would be tempted to take Clark's ad lib comment spoken during a live debate question and answer segment, "Let India develop the software" literally, should take a deep metaphoric breath and take a closer look at both the issue and at Clark. First, "Let India develop the softwar" is and was not presented as a proactive policy position. It was rhetorical defiance. In hindsight it can be seen how the choice of words had the potential to backfire on Clark, sure. That is why it is important to recognize where and when Clark spoke them, as TexasSissy points out. "Let India develop..." was Clark's equivalent gaff, so to speak, as Bush's "Bring it on." Same type of attempt to project supreme confidence in Americas ability to handle the best attempts of our adversaries to defeat us. Of course in Bush's case our adversaries are firing live rounds and killing our men and women so the metaphor there really does "bomb".

To take Clark's improvised words and spin them into a quasi official approval of American jobs going to India is more than a stretch. I can see why someone hearing that comment might have a red light of concern go off for them. Fine, that is not an unreasonable response, but don't jump to negative conclusions, look into it further. Start with the rest of Clark's reply to that question. I don't have a transcript but I remember he went on to say that America's economic future depends on our country continuing to push the cutting edge of technological innovation, that it is is something that no one anywhere else in the World does as well as America. Clark, even in that live 60 second debate sound bite, went on to say that he would make sure that America's tax codes no longer rewarded companies for outsourcing jobs, to the contrary he would make sure our tax codes provided incentives for companies to keep jobs in America and create new ones here.

Clark was trying to make a sophisticated point, which was impossible to do in that debate. Clark learned from that experience by the way. He has gotten much better at not trying to teach economics or foreign policy in 45 second segments. His growth curve as a candidate who never before ran a political campaign is astonishing, but I digress. The point Clark was making, one I have heard him speak to at greater length in more conducive formats, is that the internet and the information age now allows a smart guy with a phone and a personal computer in a backwards area of India to play on a level playing field with an American in Silicon Valley. It used to be that developing countries needed to spend billions of dollars and decades to develop the type of infra structure (ports, railroads, highway systems, electric power grids, research centers, etc, etc,) needed to sustain world class technological production. That is not now true for software, and wishing it weren't so ain't gonna change anything.

In that recent New Hampshire appearance Clark did make a firm committment that under his Administration the U.S. government would by any and all software that has national security implications from domestic sources. He justified that position, even in the face of potentially much cheaper software sources overseas, by citing the potential of back door traps being hidden in software codes written from overseas sources, which would be easier to safeguard against with American firms. Clark will ramp up government funding for technological research in all fields. As you know that will always include development of new software because software facilites all current technological breadk throughs. There is much more to be read about Clark's postions on technology and the outsourcing of American jobs, please look into it before rushing to a negative conclusion over a 5 word phrase.

[TeacherCreature]

17. his position is whatever will get him the nomination

If he could have run as a republican he would be running as one. He democratic party credentials are a mile wide and half an inch deep.

[maddezmom]

19. where does you candidate stand on outsourcing?

:)