Mitch Daniels probably won’t run for president, but what if he did?

On Feb. 23, when Gov. Mitch Daniels opened a crack in the door on a possible 2012 presidential run, he didn’t lay out
many specifics about potential planks in his national platform. At least not to the Washington Post, which broke
the political story online.  

daniels-mitch-mug Daniels

Daniels, a Republican, had previously dismissed all local and national speculation about his interest in running for president.
He told the Post he might consider it in 12 to 18 months, if no other candidate shines the spotlight on the issue
closest to his heart: fiscal responsibility.

But in a separate interview with Barrons, published in a Feb. 22 story titled, “Reviving the U.S. without
tax hikes,” Daniels gave far more detail about how he’d apply his approach to state government at the federal
level.

Daniels told Barrons that cuts aren’t enough to balance the U.S. budget because the national deficit, at 10
percent of gross domestic product, is too deep. But slashing spending would clearly be a priority for Daniels, whose nickname
was “the Blade” when he ran the Office of Management and Budget for President George W. Bush.

He’d likely start with the bank industry bailout. Daniels told Barrons that President Obama’s administration
and Congress ought to immediately cancel the Troubled Asset Relief, or TARP, program and the $787 billion stimulus, then return
all unused funds from the programs to the Treasury. Daniels said this would show America is serious about deficit reduction,
and would help keep interest rates low.

Daniels also wants to reform the Social Security system.

“We need a new compact that preserves all of the old promises, but makes a newer, affordable compact with younger citizens,”
he told Barrons.

On the controversial issue of health care reform, Daniels told the financial publication his fix would prioritize individual
responsibility, encouraged with individual tax credits for purchasing insurance coverage: “We won’t have cost
containment until all of us are cost containers.”

Daniels also told Barron’s the U.S. must reconsider—and possibly scale back—its international
commitments, including its military ones, based on what it can afford.

“It has been important to the world—everything America has done; but America is going to have to still be here
and be able to afford to do some things,” Daniels said “So I am not suggesting anything specific, only when you
do the math, you are going to have to do, at least temporarily, some unwelcome things. There is a big debate right now about
space. I am just thrilled about the frontier aspects of that, but you know it may just have to wait a generation. I’d
hate that outcome, but it may come to that.”

Energy policy is another area Daniels considers ripe for reform. He told Barrons the United States needs to promote
all sources of domestic energy, including new nuclear plants, offshore oil and gas, and green power such as wind and ethanol.
He framed his position in terms of the negative consequences of continued U.S. reliance on Middle Eastern oil.

“This is a matter of survivability,” Daniels told Barrons. “We are paying the worst persons in
the world for their oil and gas.”

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: IBJ is now using a new comment system. Your Disqus account will no longer work on the IBJ site. Instead, you can leave a comment on stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Past comments are not currently showing up on stories, but they will be added in the coming weeks. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets in {{ count_down }} days.