|
 |
 |
A Governor's Tech
Crusade
page 6: High Tech and
Politics
High Tech and
Politics
How well do you think the high-tech industry understands
how to deal with lawmakers? There's criticism that they're
fairly naive and focused on a single issue and think they can
resolve it without other parties. And then there's also a point of
view that what they're doing is the right way to do it: Let's stop
with all these mixed agendas. Let's deal with issues independently
and separately instead of mixing them up. You deal with a lot of
these folks. What's your assessment of their involvement, savviness
and effectiveness in working with you and other lawmakers? There's
always a sense of impatience [with high-tech executives and
employees]. It's like every day they're stretching the limits, and
they move, and they move quickly - there's a lot of flexibility and
there's a lot of networking, but they're also fiercely competitive.
My sense is that there is probably some very legitimate frustration
with people in the technology community, as there is with people in
the business community, just with regard to the grinding slowness of
the political process. This is tongue-in-cheek, but there are a lot
of things I wish I could do by executive order! You know?
So I think you've got to look at
government as a customer, as a student, and as a potential
regulator--as someone that can really stick a piece of wood in
your spokes.
|
For a while at least, for the folks in Silicon Valley, the
approach was to ignore government. They can't afford to do that.
The attitude was, "Yeah, the government's clueless, they're
never going to get it. They're so slow, by the time they figure it
out we'll have already gone to something else." But it's clear now
that they need to deal with government, and it's not clear they know
how. Maybe they have to slow down to meet government halfway.
That's a fine thing to say. I'd look at government in a couple of
different ways. First of all, government potentially is a huge
customer. Right? We're a huge customer.
Second, I think there has to be an education process. I want to
be respectful. There's a language within the industry and a
mentality--there's that fierce competitiveness within this industry
that I'm not sure too many legislators or too many government
officials truly appreciate, understand, even at a modest level. I
don't think they understand in a competitive way what high tech can
do for them to improve their services.
So I think you've got to look at government as a customer, as a
student, and as a potential regulator-- as someone that can really
stick a piece of wood in your spokes.
We've got some of the finest research institutions in the world,
global and visionary and very much open to the new kind of
partnership that we are evolving, as is evidenced by Digital
Greenhouse, Lightning Manufacturing. And we've got--stay
tuned--we've got a couple more coming down the pike.
I get enthused about this, and my enthusiasm and passion are
real. It is based on intuition: I just see it. I feel it. I watch my
kids use Internet and it makes so much sense. And that's why--as I
try to picture the Pennsylvania that I want--we've got to be
connected globally. That's why we've got 17 offices. And that's why
you have to infuse government with technology. That's it. It's not a
trend, baby. It's the here; it's the now. And it's just going to get
better. We play catch-up an awful lot, but we're charging right
ahead.
|
|
|
