Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is reportedly opening an office in Silicon Valley. The move highlights Paul’s biggest problem of late: He is trying to convince groups with very different perspectives on key issues that he is with them — all of them. The result is intellectual muddle, factual errors and real doubts about his character.
Now that he will be in the neighborhood, Silicon Valley billionaires can feel free to pepper him with questions.
Does he agree with them and Tom Steyer about the evils of fossil fuels or does he favor domestic energy development, the Keystone XL pipeline and cutting the Environmental Protection Agency back down to size?
The Silicon Valley tycoons live in a state that recognizes gay marriage, and they run companies that have long-extended benefits to same sex couples. Does he agree with that perspective and would he urge the federal government to do the same, or does he intend to favor policies that follow his stated view that marriage should only be between a man and a woman? He has confused even those sympathetic to his message.
Does he want to restrict abortion rights? Many of these execs are big donors to abortion-rights groups.
Paul joined in the government shutdown, which is recognized as creating chaos and damaging the GOP. Would he tell his Silicon Valley audiences that he acted responsibly?
Paul said he was with the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs on immigration reform and then voted against the only immigration reform bill that could pass the Senate. Is he for increasing legal immigration or not?
Silicon Valley has discovered the benefits of the Export-Import Bank. Would Paul eliminate it?
Silicon Valley has thrived from government support, contracts and subsidies. Whether on Solyndra or Tesla, a lot of taxpayer money was spent, in many cases uneconomically, to create and sustain Silicon Valley companies that could not stand on their own. Defense contracts also provide a huge revenue stream. Will Paul maintain all that or seek to cut it out?
His ideal budget proposed reductions in spending for the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control, NASA and the Defense Department. Does he thinks the feds should be involved in funding science and basic research?
Paul is going to run into some interesting dilemmas trying to court social conservatives and social liberals, libertarians and Silicon Valley bigwigs who feed from the federal trough, and immigration reform proponents and immigration reform opponents. The problem is inherent for a libertarian trying to win a majority of the GOP base: There weren’t enough libertarians for his father to win a single primary. The solution — to try to court traditional GOP voters as well — runs into clear conflicts on fundamental issues. And the idea that Rand Paul is going to make up for losses among traditional Republicans by appealing to college students, Silicon Valley elites and minorities –all of whom differ with him on major issues — is dubious at best.
Maybe a skilled pol like Bill Clinton can pull off pandering to groups with conflicting agendas but so far Paul seems to have annoyed a whole lot of people with no evidence that he’s broadened the party’s appeal or his own.
