Another former General? 53 trillion reasons why I'm working with him

Did you know that in the years since World War II, Democrats and Republicans have held the White House for roughly the same number of years (34 for Republicans and 28 for Dems), and yet the Republicans have racked up SEVEN TIMES AS MUCH DEBT?  Surprised? Well... keep reading, and you'll see why I’m so charged about this effort...

Over the years, you've heard me rant about a range of subjects here, from ActForLove.org to stem cell research, to other just plain silly stuff.   But my first foray here in Kosland came back in 2003, when I was driving the DraftWesleyClark.com effort.  So I guess it's only fitting that I'm here again to extol the virtues of another former general – one who is also not afraid to tell it like it is.  

In this case, I'm talking about the former Comptroller General, David Walker.  For those who aren't familiar with this position, it's the nation's top auditor and the head of the Government Accountability Office.  

Now, if your mind started to wander when you saw, "top auditor," I urge you to keep reading.  There’s 53 trillion reasons why what he's now doing is critical to our nation – and why (from my partisan perspective) it is absolutely critical that progressives jump into this battle with both feet.  

Dave was appointed by President Clinton to the position back in 1998.  Given that it's a 15-year term, his tenure extended into the Bush administration – and that's where a lot of folks in the progressive community might have first heard of Dave.  If the name sounds vaguely familiar, here's why:

--> Back in 2002, Dave was the one who sued Dick Cheney to try to force the release of the secret records of his energy task force.

--> Later on in President Bush's term, as the deficit returned and spiraled out of control, Dave was the guy who spoke out against such irrational policies on 60 Minutes, CNN, and a variety of other places.

--> Dave is the guy who decried the Pentagon over and over again, publicly, for its "atrocious financial management."

--> Dave is also the guy who came up with the number, "$53 trillion," i.e., the amount of "IOU's" that the government has committed to for the future, above and beyond the money it will actually have.  

Now, if you think this might have caused some controversy, you're right.   He was slammed – big time.   It didn't matter that Dave was presenting the facts in a non-partisan way; Washington is rarely a "fact-based community."  And it didn't matter that Dave, though a Clinton appointee, had worked with presidents of both parties in the past.  He was still slammed, and slammed hard for trying to get Washington to face up to 53 trillion very inconvenient truths.

As a result, Dave decided to leave his post a few months ago, and head up a new organization devoted entirely to these issues, the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.   This foundation is launching as we speak, with a commitment to spend $1 billion to force Washington to take steps to fix this problem.    And I am happy as hell to be working with Dave on this effort, because I think that there may be no other challenge out there with a greater potential to render America's future "FUBAR."

Now, let me step back for a second.  And let me stress that while my company and I are working with the Peterson Foundation, the views expressed now reflect solely my own, and no one else's.  (The Peterson Foundation is non-partisan, unlike me, so I am doing this post on my own time).  So that caveat aside, as a fellow Kossack, I can guess what's going through your head.  All too often, when we in the progressive community hear things like "entitlements" and "deficit" and "fiscal responsibility," we instinctively get our guard up, and jump into a defensive position, ready for the attack from the wingnuts.

It's time to go on the offensive.  We Democrats ARE the party of fiscal responsibility.   Once again, in the years since World War II, Democrats and Republicans have held the White House for roughly the same number of years (34 for Republicans and 28 for Dems), and yet the Republicans have racked up SEVEN TIMES AS MUCH DEBT.  (source: Whitehouse.gov)

We've known for years that Democrats were the party of national security, and now we are finally starting to have the cojones to say it.  Well, it's high time for us to say the same about fiscal security as well.  

I'll be talking about this cause a lot in coming months, because I think it's not only a critical one for our nation, it's a winning one for our party.   I urge you to learn more at www.PGPF.org, and to embrace this cause in coming months and years.  

Comments and questions are welcome, but let me start by anticipating a few:

Q:  "Wait, Pete Peterson is a Republican and a billionaire!  He must be evil! Evil, I tell ya!!!"

A:  "Yes, and like Warren Buffett, any billionaire who is pushing economic policies that would almost certainly result in higher taxes for him, well, that billionaire is okay by me.  As far as the Republican part, well hell, even a broken clock is right twice a day.  Besides, I used to be one too, so hey, maybe I can work on him over time..."  

Q:  "Isn't this just a scam to destroy Social Security?"  

A:  "No.  As Dave has pointed out, Social Security isn't going to disappear, and will still be there – just at the cost of many other programs.  Also, he's noted that is only a small part of the gap. Frankly, if you want to destroy Social Security, then the best thing to do is stick your head in the sand, and ignore the $53 trillion problem.   That will ensure that those hell-bent on full privatization will have an excuse to push their agenda.

Q:  "Why not just cut pork?  Why not just cut corporate corruption?"    
A:  "$53 trillion = nearly a quarter million bridges to nowhere.  A pork-ectomy alone ain't gonna do it."

Q:  "I really hate your blog ads."
A:  "Well, if you'd just suck it up and pay for a DK subscription, you wouldn't have to see them."

Q:  "What about pie?  You have not addressed pie!"    
A:  "As far as I know, Dave is pro-pie."

 
Update:
A few folks have commented on the PGPF ads, so I just wanted to pass along this note from Dave Walker:

One of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation's many recent online ads has gotten some unexpected attention -- an ad with a headline that said, "Up Yours, Baby Boomers". We wanted the ad to draw attention; however, we did not intend to insult anyone. In fact, several of us at the Foundation, including myself, are "baby boomers".  And all of us at the Foundation support inter-generational equity and finding bipartisan means of achieving it. The point of the ad was to note that from fiscal and environmental perspectives, the baby-boom generation is currently on a path that will not leave the country better off and better positioned for younger and future generations. While this is a fact-based conclusion as illustrated by the government data we have compiled on our website, www.pgpf.org, given the offense that some have taken at the ad's headline, we have taken it offline.