Romney adviser explains willingness to break with GOP on China

Getty Images/Justin Sullivan

Mitt Romney's willingness to confront China over issues like currency manipulation, intellectual property theft and discouraging foreign competition is part of the presumptive GOP nominee's "innovative approach" to fixing the economy that differs from both Democrats and Republicans, his top policy adviser says.

In an interview airing Friday evening on Bloomberg TV's "Political Capital with Al Hunt," Romney policy director Lanhee Chen said his boss is interested in trying more than "just traditional Republican policies" to boost the country's economy.

"I think we talk about the importance of pro-growth tax policy and pro-growth regulatory policy," Chen said in the interview. "If you look at trade policy, as an example, here's a place where Governor Romney is really calling for a different approach."

Chen said a Romney administration would take "robust steps to make sure that China is a player on the international stage that plays by the rules."

Romney's position and previous statements toward China's trade policy have troubled some Republicans, including former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Chen said Romney had been in touch with Kissinger, but that "the bottom line is Governor Romney is going to do what it takes to get our economy going, including confronting China."

Asked what a Romney administration would do to help homeowners with underwater mortgages, Chen said it would not support a "short-term approach." He argued that the programs put in place by President Obama, like the Home Affordable Modification Program, have not helped large numbers of home owners as expected. Instead of such government programs, Chen argued the answer was to grow the economy.

"Ultimately that's what's going to get the housing market going again," he said in the interview, "and going to get home values rising again and going to help people who, frankly, currently underwater in their mortgages."

In talking about financial regulations, Chen reasserted Romney's desire to get rid of the Dodd-Frank law, and disputed the assertion that repealing the law would lead to "a dog-eat-dog kind of situation where there's absolutely no regulation."

"Governor Romney has made clear that we do need some regulation of derivatives trading, that we do need to have some kind of consumer protections in place, that we do need to look seriously at things we can do to ensure that the financial services industry is regulated in a reasonable way," Chen said. "But Dodd-Frank is really not the answer. And so I think we have to resist the temptation to caricature what a post-Dodd-Frank world looks like."

He also said Romney would seek to replace the Volcker rule, one part of Dodd-Frank that restricts the ability of banks to make certain kinds of speculative investments that do not benefit their customers.

[RealiteBites]

Romney's actually come out and said he supports recalibrating global trade (ie outsourcing)

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57445829-503544/romney-adviser-explains-willingness-to-break-with-gop-on-china/

I mean like Barack said the same thing 4 years ago, and flaked.

I DO think Romney's business experience DOES make a difference - BUT not because Bain was or was not a 'job creation' endeavor per se. Rather, I think the business experience matters because it shows that Romney's got a stomach for risk, and for making tough calls in the name of getting results.

That's something Barack lacked in dealing with China.

Why I know that Romney is more likely to be different and actually follow through when it comes to changing the outsourcing/trade relationship with China is that, while Barack is equally brilliant and therefore knows it's the ONLY way to right the economic ship, Romney as a business person has been conditioned to feel like the only way to measure success is by results.

And besides the Bain line of argument for Barack being off-point, I also think it's stupid for a community organizer to try and make it sound like somebody who engineered a turn-around of the Olympics has less business-savvy than him when he's got nothing to show for his 4 years in office economics-wise. All he's done is spend money - is that his plan for the next 4 years too? Obviously, yes ...

[StewieEsq]

So, Romeny's Bain experience is relevant except when you want to actually look at how it destroyed jobs for many to make profits for few. OK, way better than community organizing. Romeny's time at the Olympics? Well, if that is fair game, then we can also look at his tenure as governor of Massachusetts--taking the state DOWN in job growth during an time of economic growth. Yeah, way better than a community organizer who, despite constant GOP opposition, has managed to return the economy to steady growth--not as good as it was before GW's failed policies of the past redux destroyed the Clinton boom, but it is a start.

[wayneonly]

One good idea does not make a candidate a good President especially since the idea was Obama's before him. If Obama had had a Congress that was willing to work for the good of the real American people, he might have made more progress in this field. And maybe someday less government will be better but that is the main idea of the Republicans and Romney. And what business (both big and small) needs NOW in order for them to expand or invest is CUSTOMERS. NOT LOWER TAXES OR GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES, BUT CONSUMERS. Romney's idea of laying off 100,000 or more federal government employees and cutting funds to states and cutting education funding, resulting in 200,000 to 400,000 more unemployed would devastate the economy and take at least 400,000 to 600,000 out of the consumer market and eliminate them as taxpayers. Less money coming into the federal coffers and fewer consumers for business. Yes, that is a good model for expanding the economy. IF he kept his promise to curb China's unfair trade practices, maybe in 8 to 10 years we might gain half of those jobs back, but at what cost to the American people. It will take a balanced plan to get the economy back and he does not have a REAL plan.

America is crumbling, both the economy and the infrastructure. And it would benefit from a real jobs program that would put 100,000 to 200,000 unemployed workers back to work. Add 3 to 4 workers employed to support those construction jobs and you have put 1,000,000 to 1,400,000 workers back to work and created 1,400,000 to 2,000,000 consumers (including spouses and children) and at least 1,000,000 new taxpayers. That is the way to start an economic recovery and to build America's infrastructure at the same time. Then private sector (the businesses that have been "sitting" on their trillions will start investing in America and expanding the CONSUMER base and creating new taxpayers and lowering the unemployment rate. That's the way to expand the economy and reduce future deficits.

Or we can go with the Republican plan of laying off another 1,000,000 people and cutting the deficit by 1 trillion, and hoping that "trickle down" or "supply side" economy or whatever you want to call it will create jobs even though they have killed the CONSUMER market. Yup, that's a plan!!!

[hypnotoad72]

And the moment he's elected, he'll toe the line unless he notarizes every word he says, combined with swearing on a stack of Bibles and everything else.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/do-campaigns-predict-how-a-president-will-govern/250893/

Romney has flip-flopped on so many other issues, why should anyone give him a fair shake on this issue?

[nygurl1]

Why should we? He'll be told after the election, if he wins, that he is just a figurehead and to just sign here.
Like the shrub did!

[David_Tampa]

Kinda funny.....because 80% of us work in an office pushing paper. Romney and his hostile takeover, leveraged buyout, pension stealing ilk never attack an office. They attack a business that is making things. A Business that has assets other than a few desks. Elect this man I dare ya. When a Nation goes over the brink financially, the only recourse the government is to nationalize businesses that are important. Romney and his family think because they have possession of 250 million that they are beyond the scope of regular Americans.

I wonder how many European Families felt that way before WW2.

[hypnotoad72]

I don't fully see how today's economic climate compares to what led to WW2... or any other tangent therein...

[RealiteBites]

This issue is incredibly key. Everybody in the media is focused on Bain, or the Republican/Democratic talking points, but this issue right here is where it's at.

Romney and Obama are both very, very smart, so I'm sure they both know it's the only way to turn the economy around.

And isn't that what people want?

Where Romney and Barack differ I guess is in the pressure they feel to actually deliver - right here, you can actually SEE why Romney's business background makes him different from Barack - because in the for-profit business world, all that matters are numbers ... jobs and money.

And I would imagine it takes a tremendous stomach for risk to do what Romney did at Bain - that's a quality Barack doesn't have.

Romney not only wants to win the Presidency - I just realized he wants to go down in the books as good. And he wants to win a second term.

I think he'll win because people are desperate to try something new. But now I actually think he could wind up being better than Barack, and just maybe he'll wind up winning a 2nd term because he's earned it.

Interesting report!

[nygurl1]

mitty will do what his keepers want him to do!

A country cannot be run like a business! A business has ONE PERSON running it. Our government is three separate divisions! He answers to them AND us!

I don't think he took any risks at all with Bain. HE had the money. He could do whatever he wanted. And he did.
And he didn't give a dam about anything except his pockets and stashing most of it in foreign banks!

[nearl451]

Does Romney not understand who holds the purse strings?

[nygurl1]

Nope!