Home / Blogs

Note to John McCain: Technology Matters

One would think that, in 2008, the significance of the Internet and information technology would be universally acknowledged. That makes the recent news from the Presidential campaign a bit shocking. After ignoring technology issues for the past year, John McCain is poised to announce his great insight: tech policy isn’t worthy of attention from the President of the United States.

This is what I draw from the announcement that former FCC Chairman Michael Powell is drafting a technology plan for McCain, to be released shortly. The McCain campaign will promote it as an overdue response to the comprehensive technology agenda that Obama unveiled eight months ago. I’m sure they will position long-standing Republican ideas like cutting the capital gains tax and promoting “market forces” to encourage broadband deployment as maverick proposals. What concerns me most is what the McCain plan apparently leaves out: strong views on the crucial issues that Obama’s plan covers. Immigration reform and free trade are worthy goals. They aren’t a technology agenda.

I like Michael Powell. I really do. He’s extremely smart and open-minded, he was a dedicated public servant, and he did some wonderful things at the FCC, especially on spectrum policy. Yet Powell always had a curious blind spot about how FCC decisions affected the world outside the agency. His infamous quip comparing the Digital Divide to the “Mercedes divide” is a good example. Even when he had the policies right (as on requiring “line sharing” for broadband access), he couldn’t always get them adopted, because the FCC doesn’t operate in a sealed box. It’s a component—an important component—of the larger policy and political apparatus of the federal government. With the McCain plan, Powell is making the same mistake.

In an interview last week, Powell asserts that issues like Network Neutrality in Obama’s agenda are “in the weeds,” because “[a] lot of the FCC’s issues aren’t ‘president of the United States’ issues.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Reasonable minds can differ over the right policies to preserve the open Internet, promote next-generation broadband, safeguard online privacy, and create a connected digital democracy. Supporters of Obama (like me) can think he made a mistake in his handling of the FISA telecom immunity legislation (as I do). The absolute worst approach is to label these as insignificant technical matters that the President need not address. That’s been the mindset, with disastrous results, the past eight years.

As chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, John McCain was exposed to a wide range of tech policy issues. On the other hand, he admits he’s “computer illiterate.” Ask yourself how you’d feel about working for a corporation where the CEO doesn’t know how to use a computer. No matter how smart, someone who can’t open a web page, type a letter on a word processor, or compose an email message, is going to be fundamentally out of touch with the daily experience of every member of the knowledge economy.

The only saving grace would be if McCain’s technology advisors could overcome his personal ignorance. As I’ve been saying for a long time, no President can oversee the details of every important issue, so the people around him or her are critical. The roster of Obama’s tech advisory group (which I’m proud to be part of) is nothing short of amazing. It includes a shockingly high percentage of the best academics, entrepreneurs, executives, and investors I’ve encountered during my 15 years in the tech world. And tech-oriented advisors are at the very heart of the campaign. McCain has supporters like Michael Powell and former HP CEO Carly Fiorina who understand these issues, but what’s the point if their message is that technology doesn’t matter? When the tech-savvy advisors reinforce the “do nothing” instincts of a tech-illiterate leader, the result is, well, what we got with the Bush Administration: the US falling behind other countries on both broadband deployment and competition, individual rights violated because the government hasn’t established rules of the road, and the Internet’s magnificent innovation engine in jeopardy.

Obama’s tech policies aren’t perfect, and McCain’s wouldn’t be all bad. Still, the choice matters. It matters a lot. The cynicism out there, even from those who agree with Obama on the issues, scares me more than anything. People think that politicians can’t be trusted to do anything other than reward their cronies and contributors, and they think government’s only effect in markets is to screw them up. Does anyone remember how eight years ago we had a trillion-dollar budget surplus, and the rest of the world looked in awe at the economic growth and innovation unleashed by our Internet industry? We can have that again, and much more, but only if we recognize how much technology matters in the global economy of the 21st century. Obama gets it; McCain doesn’t.

By Kevin Werbach, Professor at the Wharton School and Organizer of the Supernova Conference

Filed Under


The next US President is likely to be remembered for a technology issue presently ignored. John Curran  –  Jul 19, 2008 1:06 PM

The next President of the United States will be at the helm when the current supply of IPv4 addresses runs out, and all of the carriers, ISPs, and hosting firms have to switch to IPv6 to connect to customers. The potential for disruption to the high-tech economic engine is enormous, there are significant public policy and foreign relation aspects, and yet the Internet IPv6 transition presently receives no consideration on either candidate’s technology agenda.


John -- what specifically should Kevin Werbach  –  Jul 20, 2008 2:15 PM

John -- what specifically should the next Administration (or individual US government agencies) do to address the IPv6 transition?

Kevin - We've reached the John Curran  –  Jul 20, 2008 3:00 PM

Kevin - We've reached the point in time where US agencies need to make their public-facing websites and public-facing email servers reachable via IPv6. This is a relatively straightforward task, but requires time for planning and implementation if it is to be accomplished in a responsible and secure manner. It is also important that the Administration establish a point in time beyond which funding for various Internet connectivity initiatives (e.g. rural connectivity, educational connectivity) is only provided for those Internet services which provide access to both IPv4-reachable and IPv6-reachable Internet resources (as opposed to only IPv4 resources which is the situation today). The two steps above would insure that the Administration is moving along with industry in IPv6 deployment, and not hindering those ISP's and organizations that are doing the right thing by aggressively moving forward with IPv6 deployment. There are certainly other actions that the Administration could take to hasten IPv6 adoption (as has been done in other countries), but such actions quickly move us into a political and philosophical discussion regarding market vs regulated technology adoption and therefore represent a policy area requiring significant public discourse. /John

Good article. I have something to add! Steve Hunt  –  Jul 19, 2008 10:32 PM

Thanks for this article.  Adelstein said recently in an interview with Robert McChesney that the FCC oversees 1/6th of the US economy.  To think that a potential President of The United States could turn his nose at that is very odd.  I advise EVERYONE to buy serious puts on stocks like Google if he wins!  Anyway, I was stunned at your kind words towards Powell, then I saw you are on Obama’s advisory board and quickly realized nobody wants to be the next Samantha Power.  I have no problem with that.  Let the people say what Powell is, which is a man with only the interests of big business and a beyond myopic view of the world.

Michael Powell Kevin Werbach  –  Jul 20, 2008 2:24 PM

Steve -- the comments about Powell were genuine. I had the pleasure of working at the FCC when he was a Commissioner, and speaking with him several times as Chairman. Your assessment of him is unfair. It's true, though, that the Obama campaign is emphasizing the quaint notion that you can disagree with someone's policies without trying to personally destroy them. That goes to the cynicism I mentioned.

reply Steve Hunt  –  Jul 20, 2008 3:12 PM

That is fair enough. I do of course recall the "Uncle Joe" phenomena from the history books! Anyway, lets just beat these guys and forget about all the nastiness. If they win, let the "fun" begin. Keep up the good work, glad I discovered this blog.

Comment Title:

  Notify me of follow-up comments

We encourage you to post comments and engage in discussions that advance this post through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can report it using the link at the end of each comment. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of CircleID. For more information on our comment policy, see Codes of Conduct.

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet



IPv4 Markets

Sponsored byIPv4.Global

Brand Protection

Sponsored byCSC

New TLDs

Sponsored byRadix

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign


Sponsored byDNIB.com

Threat Intelligence

Sponsored byWhoisXML API


Sponsored byVerisign