Loading summary
Transcript50 lines
- [00:04]
Stephen Overle
Hey, welcome back to Politico Tech.
- [00:06]
J.D. Vance
Good morning, everybody. How we doing?
- [00:09]
Stephen Overle
I'm your host, Stephen Overle, and that was Vice President J.D. vance.
- [00:13]
J.D. Vance
And it's great to be with you all, and it's great to talk about the importance of American dynamism and what our administration is going to do.
- [00:22]
Stephen Overle
Giving his second high profile text speech in just over a month. Last month, he spoke at a global AI gathering in Paris. And this time, he was in D.C. at the American Dynamism Summit, talking to a crowd of investors and entrepreneurs. Vance may be the biggest payoff yet in Silicon Valley's bet that a Trump administration would be friendly to tech. Vance spent a couple years working in Silicon Valley, and this week he said all the things tech wants to hear about blazing ahead with AI investing in manufacturing and energy, opening federal contracts to startups. The organizer of that summit is Andreessen Horowitz, a big Silicon Valley venture capital firm that's been beefing up its Washington footprint. Literally, when I visited their new offices, there were still rooms under construction. Andreessen Horwitz became the tech for Trump poster child during the election. Its founders, Mark Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, cut checks to Trump's campaign, and a few partners even landed jobs in the administration. Now they're hustling to shape his agenda. So while they were riding high off the summit, I sat down with Kathryn Boyle, who co founded the firm's American dynamism practice. Here's our conversation. Welcome to Politico Tech.
- [01:48]
Kathryn Boyle
Yes, thanks so much for having me. Great to be here.
- [01:51]
Stephen Overle
So I'm curious, in your words, can you define American dynamism for me and how you see it as counter or contrarian or different from how Silicon Valley has invested in the past?
- [02:01]
Kathryn Boyle
Sure. So the simple definition of American dynamism is companies that are building in support of the national interest and the interest of our allies. So it's a very broad category of company. Everything from aerospace, defense, national security, companies that sell directly to the federal government, but also things like transportation, energy, housing, education, all of the civic goods that government is designed to help us have. Okay, so in Silicon Valley, you would sort of structure a venture firm as you'd have your consumer team investing in companies that are selling to consumers, and then you would have your enterprise team selling to businesses. And that was sort of the classical way that venture firms sort of define themselves. We started seeing this third category of selling to government. So at Andreessen Horowitz, it was January 2022. We announced that we were forming the American Dynamism practice. And I think people were actually stunned.
- [02:47]
Stephen Overle
Why?
- [02:48]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, they were stunned, for one. It's this meme of why would you ever want to sell to the government.
- [02:52]
Stephen Overle
Right.
- [02:52]
Kathryn Boyle
So from the business standpoint, I think there were still a lot of naysayers that you can build a practice out of that, or that there were going to be enough companies that could learn to do this. But the real reason is that we said the word America. And saying the word America out loud, I think until very recently in Silicon Valley was seen as very taboo because tech is supposed to be this global thing. America. The magic of software is that it doesn't exist in the physical world.
- [03:13]
Stephen Overle
Right.
- [03:13]
Kathryn Boyle
So you can sell it anywhere. But the thing that is so interesting about American dynamism is that these companies are built specifically for America. So there really has been a sea change in Silicon Valley as to why have these engineers become so patriotic and so interested in the civic category.
- [03:29]
Stephen Overle
And is any of this a political phenomenon? I mean, if you think about, you know, the rise of America first, right. And particularly what we've heard a lot from President Trump, the founders of your firm made headlines when they donated to Trump's campaign. I mean, do you see American dynamism in your practice as a Republican phenomenon or a MAGA phenomenon in any way?
- [03:49]
Kathryn Boyle
Absolutely not. So we always say that this really started with Diux and former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, the late former Secretary of Defense, who was Secretary of Defense under the Obama administration in 2015. He started Diux in 2015 when he said it is imperative that Silicon Valley and Washington learn to work together for the benefit of the Department of Defense. If we can't get the brightest minds in the country to work on defense products, we are not going to be able to compete with China. We're not going to be able to compete with our adversaries. So that was 10 years ago. It continued under the Trump administration, the first Trump administration, where there were a lot of conversations about bringing tech into the Department of Defense. And then it continued even more, I would say, publicly in the Biden administration. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Kath Hicks was very vocal. She was very focused on bringing in what's known as the non traditionals or startups into the conversation. And so what I think is really interesting about American dynamism is that, you know, Washington, often you can't see Republicans or Democrats agreeing on anything.
- [04:42]
Stephen Overle
Right.
- [04:43]
Kathryn Boyle
This is the one thing I think Republicans and Democrats really agree on. And there's lots of different terms for it. You know, under the Biden administration, he was very focused on industrial policy. Ezra Klein just had his book on the abundance agenda come out. And there's different flavors of it, there's different terms for it, but it's all the same thesis, which is we have to continue investing in the best assets in America. And a lot of that is our technological renaissance that we're having now.
- [05:04]
Stephen Overle
Why do you think there is this perception then, that especially in this last election cycle, tech in Silicon Valley shifted to the right? You know, Andreessen Horowitz has sort of been made a poster child, I think, of that kind of phenomenon?
- [05:16]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, I think it did. I mean, just empirically it did shift to the right. You saw people who were former Democrats coming out publicly and saying that for various reasons, whether it was because of the previous administration's views on certain types of tech policy. I actually think a lot we'll look back and we'll say that AI was the precipitating moment for a lot of the investors to come out in 2023 and in late 2024 and support the Trump administration. A specific reason that I think a lot of people had, that the previous administration was seen as anti tech in a lot of different sectors. And that isn't to say that Democrats are seen as anti tech. And actually Biden specifically, Ben Horowitz has talked about this. He talked about this at our conference yesterday. It was very much seen as an administration, Biden specific thing, that the policies and the EOs that were coming out of that administration were very anti tech, not that Democrats are anti tech. One of the things that we've pointed out is if you look at our political giving as an organization, we've given equally to Democrats and Republicans in congressional races. The litmus test that we have, if you want to call it a litmus test, is are you pro technology? And if you are pro technology, that's our single issue vote, as Andreessen Horowitz and Mark and Ben have talked very publicly about that. But I think, you know, when you talk to the individual investors and the famous investors who've come out to support the Trump administration, they will tell you that's why you're going to boil down to a specific thing. It was that the previous administration, specifically on things like crypto and AI, was very limiting and was inhibiting a lot of the innovation that was happening in Silicon Valley in the last several years.
- [06:40]
Stephen Overle
As someone living in this world, talking to other investors and talking to entrepreneurs, I mean, what were those conversations like? And did you even yourself find your own views Shifting or challenged by the last administration by its kind of anti tech approach, as you say.
- [06:54]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, I think you know the conversations. One thing I like to point out about investors, but also people in technology. That's very different in Washington. And we've actually been reflecting on this a lot in Silicon Valley. Mark likes to say there's a five factor test. And one of the factors that really characterizes founders is high openness, high openness to ideas, different lifestyles, different ways of living. And so it is not strange to meet people in Silicon Valley who believed one thing five years ago and believe something totally different today. Investors change their mind all the time. I actually think that that's something that is often celebrated in Silicon Valley that does not exist in Washington. You come to Washington.
- [07:28]
Stephen Overle
I'm sorry, it doesn't quite sound like the politics of our moment, really.
- [07:30]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, it also can't exist in Washington. You come to Washington as a young person and you start in Congress and you work for someone with an R or a D next to their name and you build your career as an rrd. It is very rare that people switch sides.
- [07:43]
Stephen Overle
It's team sports person.
- [07:45]
Kathryn Boyle
And it would be blowing up your career and your history if you decided to change. And so that is the. I think there's a lot of similarities in the things that Washington and Silicon Valley care about, but the differences are extreme. And so I think that's the thing. I had many conversations with people who said, oh yeah, lifelong Democrat and I'm voting for Trump, but I think that doesn't mean that they're going to be a lifelong Republican now. It doesn't mean that. It means that for a very specific reason, they changed their mind in November 2024. And I think Washington should know that about people in Silicon Valley. You haven't lost them forever. Right, Got it.
- [08:19]
Stephen Overle
So Democrats still have a chance.
- [08:21]
Kathryn Boyle
I think that was something. You know, Ben mentioned this yesterday. It's like it's the way that people made decisions. I think on this election was very much based on what they saw in the last few years. Being very pro technology, wanting to see a pro tech administration. And I think, you know, that will be how Silicon Valley views Washington going forward. I think a lot of people are going to look at what are the specific things that get done. Is technology a centerpiece of how this administration thinks? And I think that's what people are focused on.
- [08:46]
Stephen Overle
I mean, from where you sit, with the full acknowledgement, we're two months into this new administration. Are those policies playing out? Do you see? Is it easier to build a company under this administration now than it was the last administration.
- [09:00]
Kathryn Boyle
So I'm extremely hopeful, and a lot of the reasons I'm hopeful is because things that I've never seen before are happening. So I'll give you a couple examples. The president's address, the inaugural address, he mentioned the wonder of the split atom, the fact that we created a phone that has all of the world's information in the palm of our hands. I mean, the rhetoric that he used around technology being the font of American dynamism and American exceptionalism, that was in the inaugural address. It wasn't there in 2016. So to me, yes, we're two months in. Sometimes it takes a lot of time to get things done in Washington. But two months in, I think we're seeing that as a focal point of this administration in a way that we didn't in the previous administration or in the 2016 administration.
- [09:38]
Stephen Overle
Do you think that Silicon Valley's influence.
- [09:40]
Kathryn Boyle
I think it is a recognition that tech is an important part of how we are going to achieve greatness in this country. It is the centerpiece of how businesses are built. So I think, you know, I'm hopeful because I've seen the rhetoric change. I mean, the other thing that, you know, for my world, I spent a lot of time on aerospace and defense, and it was incredibly important to see Secretary Hegseth talking about the need for startups to be able to compete with the primes. I had never seen a secretary at their confirmation hearing talk about the fact that technology is going to be a focal point of getting the best tech into the hands of the war fighter. That is a perspective that you usually hear in back rooms. And so in some ways, I think the rhetoric that came in the very early days of this administration, we'll see it play out. But the rhetoric is a change from previous administrations, and I think that gives hope to a lot of people in Silicon Valley.
- [10:28]
Stephen Overle
I often hear from folks in industry that what they want more than anything from Washington is predictability. Right? They want stability. And with, you know, tariff policies, for instance, and, you know, tax policies, immigration policies in these first two months, it does not feel, I think, to a lot of people like they have stability or predictability. I mean, do you hear that from your companies? Is that something you worry about?
- [10:49]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, I would disagree with predictability being the things that everybody wants. I think they want competition. I think the thing that is most important to little tech and the thing that is most important to companies that are selling to the DoD is to make sure that these hundred year old companies that have had a chokehold on the dod, the primes, these five companies, we have free and fair competitions with companies that are coming up with next generation AI that can get into the hands of the warfighter as quickly as possible. And so from my vantage point, that is the most important thing that we need to see. We need to see speed, we need to see competition, and we need to see policies that allow these companies to compete with the companies that have been operating, operating in Washington day in day out, lobbying on the Hill every day and making sure that they get to sell the same 30 year old technology to the DOD. And we have much better products that.
- [11:32]
Stephen Overle
We had your American Dynamism Summit this week and Vice President J.D. vance was the headliner. I thought he gave a very fascinating speech. One of the points he sort of made was talking about this perceived tension between populists and techno optimists. Right.
- [11:46]
J.D. Vance
And what I propose is that each group, our workers, the populace on the one hand, the tech optimists on the other, have been failed by this government. Not just the government of the last administration, but the government in some ways of the last 40 years.
- [12:02]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, you know, his speech was so, it was so incredible on many points, but I think the thing that he pointed out that is probably the most memorable everyone should go back and hear or read the speech was he talked about being in a room in Silicon.
- [12:13]
J.D. Vance
Valley and I remember one of the tech CEOs who was there that, you know, CEO, you would know his name if I mentioned it. He was the CEO of a multibillion dollar company. He said, well, I'm actually not worried about the loss of purpose when people lose their jobs. And I said, okay, well what do you think is going to replace that sense of purpose? And he said, digital, fully immersive gaming. And then my wife texted me underneath the table and said, we have to get the hell out of here. These people are effing crazy.
- [12:44]
Kathryn Boyle
I've been in those rooms too. And there are very small minority of people in Silicon Valley. And it's a very faddish thing, but it does. And I'd say the thing that is most refreshing about the American dynamism movement, about what he spoke about yesterday. He talked about a manufacturing renaissance and he did this in Paris as well. He talked about the fact that workers should be at the center of AI policy. Like the point of these companies isn't to replace the American worker. It is a tool that is going to make us better, that is going to make Things more efficient it is. Technology should always be a tool in service of the worker. And so I was really moved by his speech. I mean, he quoted at one point John Paul II talking about work being virtuous. And I think that is very much in line with the American dynamism spirit, which is that we do have to reshore, we have to bring manufacturing back to this country. Technology can support that. We should bring software into these factories that have the best and biggest factories in the world. And we should empower the American worker to have these jobs.
- [13:37]
Stephen Overle
Again, the part of it that I guess I struggle to wrap my head around is the idea that globalization has been somehow bad for tech and innovation. Because when I covering this a long time, when I think of companies like Apple and Nvidia, I mean global supply chains have powered their business. You know, you have Meta or Google or Amazon that have global customer and user bases. To me, it just, there seemed to be like a disconnect there. This idea that immigration or globalization have not been good for tech or for VCs who invest in them.
- [14:06]
Kathryn Boyle
Well, I would encourage everyone to read a speech. But I think the thing that was interesting to us and exciting to us that he really called out and this does, you know, this isn't part of the globalization. I mean, in some ways it's part of the globalization conversation, but it's always been treated as different by Washington. The defense industrial base is an American thing, right? It is very specific. The people who are allowed to work in defense, right? Like, you know, not everyone who's in this country is allowed to even work on certain defense products. And so the thing that I thought was super interesting that he called out that we very much believe is that you cannot have a vibrant defense industrial base without investing in manufacturing. And a lot of people like to divorce those things. And I think that that was such an important part of what he was in that speech, which is that we have to reshore, we have to invest in manufacturing. We're weaker if we're outsourcing all of our manufacturing to other countries, especially in a defense context, because if we do, God forbid, have to produce for war, we will not be ready.
- [15:01]
Stephen Overle
And so when you invest then in companies, I mean, do you say, you know, you have to build in America, you have to hire Americans? Like, does that extend into your investment strategy?
- [15:10]
Kathryn Boyle
No, I mean, we don't have any sort of, you know, you have to build here or you have to. We invest in the best companies and we trust our founders to make the best decisions. But There are laws that say only green card holders or only U.S. citizens can work on certain products because these are classified programs. There are explicit laws that the US Government has around who can work on, on different products. It also matters too, what states you build in. You know, it's like the, the locations you're building in, not only from a talent perspective, but from, you know, which places are going to be most supportive and give you the best incentives to build factories. You know, there's states that are a lot more welcoming to this type of innovation than others. So those are questions that an early stage founder, you know, people, you know, three guys on a napkin, like building a product, they have to think about those things much, much earlier. And that's actually why we started the practice, because these are questions that if you're, you know, first job coming out of a dorm room, you're probably not thinking about itar.
- [15:59]
Stephen Overle
Right. The other topic I took away from Vance's speech and this made, I think, a lot of the headlines, was some of his comments on immigration and this idea of, you know, industry being sort of addicted to cheap labor. One of the things I've often heard from folks in Silicon Valley is how immigration powers a lot of Silicon Valley. A lot of entrepreneurs are immigrants themselves or first generation. Is there a disconnect there in sort of how we're talking about immigration right now and the way that it impacts our economy?
- [16:27]
Kathryn Boyle
I don't think he was denigrating immigration or saying that immigrants can't build great companies. We have, you know, immigration is so important to, you know, many facets of how things are built in Silicon Valley. And I'd say, like, there's a lot of great immigrant founders in our portfolio. So I don't think he was denigrating immigrants, but I think the focus of his talk was really, again, this manufacturing renaissance. It was more focused on how do we bring technology to the heartland, how do we bring it to places so that we can build in the physical world? And again, that's the American dynamism thesis. Our focus is on building technology companies and the national interest in making sure that we're bringing the best technologies to government and to the sectors that we invest in.
- [17:04]
Stephen Overle
Got it? Yeah. My takeaway from his comments on immigration was just that by outsourcing jobs or by giving jobs to immigrants who have come to the US that that sort of distracts in some ways from innovation, that companies now compete more on cost than they do on fresh ideas.
- [17:19]
Kathryn Boyle
I think the thing about the American dynamism practice is that we're investing in companies that are supporting the national interest. We're investing in the things that the DOD needs, that America needs. That is the focus of the practice.
- [17:32]
Stephen Overle
Catherine, thanks for being here on Politico Tech.
- [17:34]
Kathryn Boyle
Thank you so much for having me.
- [17:37]
Stephen Overle
That's all for today's Politico Tech. If you enjoy Politico Tech, please subscribe and recommend it to a friend or colleague. And for more tech news, subscribe to our newsletters, Digital Future Daily and Morning Tech. Music in our show comes from the mysterious Breakmaster Cylinder. Our managing producer is Annie Reiss. Philip Frobos helped produce today's episode. I'm Stephen Overleigh. See you back here on Monday.