For those interested when it comes to the influence of Huge Tech and billionaires on California’s future, Tom Steyer seems like the obvious choice. Steyer, a billionaire who amassed a fortune after founding Farallon Capital Management, one of the world’s largest hedge funds, left the company in 2012 to pursue philanthropy, political advocacy and climate activism, among other interests. Now he’s vying for the position among a handful of Democratic and GOP candidates hoping to advance from the June primary and win the California governorship in November.
Ahead of the midterms, I’m talking to candidates relevant to WIRED’s business: A few weeks ago, I spoke with Alex Bores, the candidate for Novel York’s 12th Congressional District whose record as a Palantir employee and stance on artificial intelligence regulation has drawn the ire of Silicon Valley-backed super PACs.
Steyer seemed like the next obvious choice for the conversation: He’s running to lead a state where issues like artificial intelligence, immigration enforcement and climate change, among other core WIRED topics, are top of mind. Steyer’s attitude during the race is also exceptional. He has been described as a “class traitor” for allegedly shunting other elites, has expressed support for California’s controversial billionaires’ tax bill – which would require everyone from Sergey Brin to Peter Thiel to either make moves into or threaten to leave the state – and has campaigned heavily on affordability, climate policy and the promise of corporate resilience. (Hopefully, as a billionaire who spent over $130 million on his gubernatorial campaign, he would be a billionaire).
As I said, for some Democratic voters, Tom Steyer seems to tick a lot of boxes. Then he starts talking.
Steyer, as politicians always do, is adept at following established rules. But the problem seems to have a line, in politics generally and in California specifically: Steyer, or whoever is elected governor in November, will be exceptionally lean. Taxing California Billionaires Without Alienating Them. Taking control of the development of artificial intelligence in the country without limiting it (or, again, alienating the billionaires who create it).
I sensed Steyer’s reluctance to concede too decisively or delve too deeply into issues, perhaps to avoid the alienation of a potential voting block. So I started wondering: Could Tom Steyer be a pro-billionaire governor who also taxes them massively? Can he rave about the “incredibly amazing” advances in artificial intelligence while simultaneously bringing the industry to rights? Can he find out the name of WIRED’s global editorial director (me) before he interviews him?
We answer the third question during the job interview. These first two will pose significant challenges to anyone elected governor of California – and I didn’t end our conversation with the belief that Steyer’s stance was particularly consistent. The minimum requirement for a California governor may be to be able to operate Google.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
KATIE DRUMMOND: Hello, Tom, thanks for joining us Great interview.
TOM STEYER: Kate [sic]Thank you for having me.
So you are a billionaire. You’ve made money in the hedge fund world. But now, over the last decade, you’ve become a climate activist. Tell us about this transformation.
When I was growing up, when I had free time, either at school or at work, I tried to go to wild places and look for outdoor work. I worked as a ranch hand, picking fruit. Before I went to business school, I spent a summer in Alaska, and I went to Alaska because I wanted to see what North America was like before the Europeans showed up.
I wanted to see animals, I wanted to see birds, I wanted to see fish, I wanted to look at Denali. I wanted to see what it was like: expansive, unpaved North America, affluent and fertile.