For the first time in a decade, there’s an open primary on both sides of the ballot for New Hampshire’s 2nd Congressional District.
Leading up to the state primary on Sept. 10, NHPR is speaking with the top candidates running in that race to learn more about where they stand on some of the biggest concerns we’ve heard from voters.
Read on for NHPR Morning Edition host Rick Ganley’s interview with Republican Vikram Mansharamani. Mansharamani is an entrepreneur and author and holds a PhD and two masters degrees from MIT.
What questions do you have for the candidates running for Congress and governor in the 2024 election? What issues do you want them to address while seeking your vote? Share your thoughts here.
Transcript
Editor's note: This transcript was lightly edited for clarity
What would you focus your attention on as a new member of Congress? What issue would you prioritize?
Well, Rick, as I run around the 2nd Congressional District and talk to voters, what I'm hearing is there are three main issues that everyone wants to talk about. It's the economy. It's the economy, and it's the economy. That's it. This is by far the single biggest issue, whether it's the inflation, whether it's the concerns about a potential recession, whether it's housing prices. It all boils down to kitchen table economics. And I think that's the biggest issue, and that's what I'd want to focus on.
Well, many of the voters we've talked to have brought that up, specifically the high cost of living here in New Hampshire, housing and inflation as well.
Well, I would also add — sorry to interrupt. I would also add energy prices. That's part of the mix here that leads to this inflationary crisis we've had —
Sure, all part of the living cost.
That's right. That's right.
Well, what kind of policies specifically would you propose or support to make the state a more affordable place to live?
Well, let's understand why we have the inflation. We have the inflation because there's been too much borrowing, too much printing, too much spending and too many handouts of money. And I think that's been a major driver of why we've had this inflation problem. So the first thing I'd say is let's stop the unnecessary spending. A good example of that —
Okay, I was going to ask for an example.
Let me give you a good example. It's been about $700 per person, per taxpayer, is the amount of the student debt bailout so far. That's something I don't think we need to be doing. Look, I paid off my college loans. I took the responsible path of saying, hey, I signed this promise to repay, and I paid it back. I don't know that we need to be paying off people's student debt just because they can't afford it. They took out a loan. They should repay a loan. So that's a quick example.
Another example on the energy front: I'm a believer in all-of-the-above energy. And that means literally all-of-the-above energy. Hydrocarbons? Sure. Solar? Great. Wind? Go at it. You want nuclear? I believe in that. The main rationale for the all-of-the-above energy approach that I want to adopt is I think it lowers prices if we have more supply of energy.
Number two, I think it actually makes the world a safer place, right? If we are producing more energy and energy prices fall, that's less money for Putin and enemies of the country. And then thirdly, and this is the part that tends to create some controversy, I actually think more hydrocarbon production in the United States will help save the environment.
You're talking about more drilling?
More drilling, more fracking, all of the above, Rick. Literally more drilling. Yes, I'm a “drill, baby, drill” candidate. I think that's a good thing, because the energy production, the hydrocarbon production in the United States is cleaner than hydrocarbon production in Indonesia, Kazakhstan, pick your country. Because we actually capture methane, we actually make sure drilling fluids are disposed of properly. If there's fracking sands, etc., we're not dumping them in, you know, water supplies that might be used for drinking, etc. So we have a cleaner production for a barrel of oil than other places in the world. So if we produce it, I think it's better for the planet.
Additional coverage from NPR: Oil and gas companies emit more climate-warming methane than EPA reports
Does that suppress, though, the development of alternative sources of energy?
Not necessarily. Look, I'm a believer that all energy is good, Rick. And what I don't like is the cross-subsidization, right? I don't want to be taxed for inefficient solar. If you live in a really sunny place — Let's say you live in the deserts of Nevada, God bless you. Put up solar. That's wonderful.
Should we end subsidies on carbon fuels?
No, I don't think we should be subsidizing any form of energy. We should let the energies make their way. Let market forces play and the best energies should win — the cheapest. Now, I say that with the idea that I'm also a believer in technological innovation. My PhD at MIT was in the field of technological innovation and entrepreneurship. I think we do need to encourage entrepreneurship. We need to actually develop industries of the future. And some of the energy industries I think of the future might include some of these small modular nuclear reactors. I think we have some possibility in fusion on a multi-decade view. So research and development dollars that's different than subsidies. I think we should support those.
Let's move on to immigration and border policy, a top concern with many voters, as you know, in the upcoming election. What's one specific immigration policy that you could point to that you'd want to support?
The way I'm describing my policy is a tall wall but a wide gate, meaning I want a secure border, zero crossings illegally, etc. But I want a welcoming immigration policy also, a welcoming legal immigration policy. My parents were both immigrants who came to this country legally. The proudest days of their lives are when they became U.S. citizens. And I think that immigration is a great thing. So, you know, if it means reforming immigration so that the legal process becomes more accessible for employers to say, hey, I have workers that want to come, let's bring them in. They're not going to get handouts. They're not going to be on the federal payroll, so to say, in terms of subsidies or or safety nets. An employer is standing up and vouching that they have a job for this individual to come into this country. This person has skills that we need, and there's a match between employer and worker. Let's do it.
So you'd be in favor of streamlining that process, making that easier, and having more workers come to the states oin a legal basis?
Yes, legal immigration is something I'm comfortable with.
New Hampshire has seen increasingly dangerous flooding events in recent years, placing financial strain on many towns and cities, as you know. How would you support those communities as these extreme weather events and flooding become more common?
[There are] lots of different ways to answer that question, Rick. First of all, you know, the declaration of an emergency status and all that stuff happens oftentimes at the state level with cooperation at the federal level. You know, FEMA needs to probably get streamlined. There's a lot of backlog of payments that are owed to folks here in New Hampshire that haven't been sort of processed. We need a better constituent service —
Towns have to pay for these things up front and try to get reimbursed months or years later.
Yeah, look, some of this is a timing issue more than a problem issue, right? Meaning you get reimbursed really later. So is there a financing structure that can be made and put in between like, hey, if there is a judgment that you are getting a payment, it just hasn't come. Maybe there's access to capital in the meantime to help people that are in need, right? I mean, if you've been adversely affected by a natural disaster for which there is FEMA money supposedly en route, then maybe there's a financing structure to allow that, you know, liquidity to come to you today.
Finally, I want to ask you, we continue to hear from voters that they are tired of the political polarization. Trust across party lines, you know this, and in Congress continues to dwindle. What about your background would qualify you to work with members of other parties to do what's best for New Hampshire?
Well, Rick, look, I think of myself as an independent thinker. My most recent book was a book called, "The Making of a Generalist." And in that book, I talk about actually talking with everyone. We need to listen more and speak less as political leaders. And what that means is hearing the other side. You know, one of the things I've prided myself on doing is diversifying my media diet. I don't just listen to, you know, what you might call just the conservative talk or news shows. I listen to all of them because I think all of us can benefit from adopting multiple perspectives. In fact, if you look back, my first book on financial bubbles was about multiple perspectives applied to financial bubbles. My second book, "Think for Yourself," was about thinking for yourself and actually hearing people you disagree with and actually learning from them. So I do think I could work together with anyone to achieve objectives on behalf of the 2nd Congressional District voters.
