Mitt Romney Photo by Bill Coates

Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney this week paid his fourth visit to Arizona in the past 18 months, actively keeping his options open for a presidential run. He told reporters he is visiting early primary states, discussing his possible candidacy with Republican and community leaders.
Arizona Capitol Times, one of four newspapers invited to interview Mr. Romney on Nov. 12, was told that Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio would be one of his leading public supporters.
Mr. Romney has been a successful businessman and is known to most Americans as the man who saved the scandal-ridden Salt Lake City Olympics. He also grabbed headlines by standing up to the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s legalization of gay marriage. He did not run for re-election.
He told reporters he expects at least 10 Republicans to run for president in 2008, and Sen. Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee.
Mr. Romney says Republicans have strayed from the party’s core issues: fiscal responsibility, national security, competence and job creation.
Several Washington pundits have dubbed Mr. Romney the early favorite for the Republicans; others have questioned whether his Mormon faith will be a problem for his candidacy.
“I think the American people want a person of faith to lead the country,” he told The Arizona Republic. I don’t think Americans care what brand of faith someone has. They do want to know if they share values.
“Recognizing that my theology and, let’s say, a Southern Baptist theology are very different, the leaders I met with are far less concerned about the differences in theology than they are about views on major issues. As one of them said, ‘You wouldn’t be running for pastor-in-chief.’
“So while I anticipate that it will be an issue, it won’t be a factor in peoples’ decisions,” Mr. Romney said.
You’re in McCain county, where do you separate yourself from Sen. McCain on the issues≠
First of all, we’re friends. I respect him enormously. He’s an American hero and has a great record of supporting Republican candidates. So, he’d be a very fine candidate if he decides to get involved in the ’08 race.
I supported the Bush tax cuts. Originally, he did not. I’m not in favor of McCain-Feingold. The campaign finance reform provisions didn’t do what they were intended to do. There’s more money in politics and it’s more hidden, not more open.
With regards to interrogation of detainees, the president was right, and the senator was wrong on that one.
Senator McCain voted against an amendment to define marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman. He’s mistaken in that regard. We need a federal amendment to the Constitution because marriage is a status. If someone comes to Massachusetts from Arizona and is married there and returns to Arizona, they are now married. A federal amendment will preserve the institution of marriage.
On immigration, I did not support the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill. There are aspects I found to be troubling.
Back to the same-sex marriage issue. As you probably know, our Prop. 107 went down and it went far beyond, with the domestic benefits. Where are you on the public provision of benefits to unmarried couples≠
That’s something I would leave state-to-state, company-to-company as to benefits they want to provide, either to single people or married people. I also do not favor civil unions. With regards to domestic partner benefits, I would include hospital visitation rights and the like, but I do not look to expand benefits to same-sex couples.
What is it about same-sex marriage you find troubling≠
It’s not about adults; it’s about kids. The primary purpose of marriage is the development and nurturing of children, and a child’s development is enhanced by having two genders, a mother and a father. It’s something measured over generations.
You brought up immigration. Can you lay out your plans for that≠
The first thing we did in Massachusetts was to secure our southern border with Connecticut. Sorry, I’ll be serious now. I do agree it makes sense to build a fence to have a barrier between our nation and another nation. But at the same time, the only really effective deterrent against illegal immigration will be an employment verification system, with a tamper-proof card that can be verified by employers before they hire people.
I’m a big believer in legal immigration. Legal immigration brings vitality, enhanced culture, love of opportunity and a larger workforce.
Illegal immigration has the potential of being dangerous from the standpoint of those who are not our friends coming into the country, but also doesn’t allow us to determine what skills and which elements we want to have enter the country.
In terms of legal immigration, would you put a cap on how many people we would allow per year≠
Oh, yeah. You’d have a quota by country or by a region or the total number. We do that now.
Did you say you were opposed to a guest worker program≠
I would like to solve the problem of illegal entry into the country and solve the employment verification system before we expand a guest worker program. My concern about a guest worker program is we’ll end up with larger numbers than we have now. We’ll have another large group of people who don’t go home, who don’t have identification, who say they need to stay.
What do you do with those who are already here≠
For those that are already here, I would issue an employment verification card. Those who are here who have committed crimes would be deported. Those who require welfare or Medicaid or the like would have some period of time to get off those programs and if they can’t, they ultimately would be sent home as well.
How big a role would the business community play in regards to that≠
Of the 11-million [estimated illegal immigrants in the country], the majority would be getting a card, would be staying here, and employers would be able to hire them, while they’re waiting for their Green Card. I would penalize employers who hire people who did not have a card and who had not verified that card through the employment verification system.
The degree of fines and punishments would be meted out on the extent of the problems.
National debt, what do you do about that≠
Spend less. We face four major challenges as a nation, at least four. One is the Jihadists and the requirement on this country and the civilized world to help the moderate Muslims reject the extreme.
The second is the emergence of Asia as a competitor. Asia is a much tougher economic competitor than we’ve ever faced before, particularly China, India and the other regions of Asia. And our schools are not keeping up there, and our technology is not keeping up.
The third challenge, in my view, is we’re using too much oil. We as a nation must balance our energy production and energy usage.
The final challenge is we’re spending too much money, and the problem not only is in pork barrel spending and earmarks, but it’s also in entitlements. And we’re going to have to work in two parties to allow our entitlements to be able to fulfill the promises they made all of our citizens and at the same time, not break the bank.
Are those things doable≠ Absolutely. Of course they’re doable.
Financial crisis is not far from our doorstep.