"Another Park, Another Sunday"

“Another Park, Another Sunday
It's dark and empty thanks to you
I got to get myself together
But it's hard to do”

--The Doobie Brothers

I’ve been watching the political talk shows for most of my adult life. By1989, when I was in my mid-20’s, my Sunday morning routine began by awakening in my nice, new yuppie-ish apartment in Stamford, jumping on my motorcycle or in my company-issued Ford Taurus, and heading to the deli for the enormous Sunday New York Times and a Ham, Egg and Cheese Bagel Sandwich. I returned home, made a Bloody Mary with plenty of horseradish and Tabasco, turned on the TV and got settled in for my  debriefing of the world’s important events courtesy of my friends Tim, Bob, David, George, Sam, Cokie, and the members of John McLaughlin’s Group.

And there was plenty happening in 1989: The Tiananmen Square protests, the fall of the Berlin wall and Eastern European communism, the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan, America invaded Panama and signed a historic free trade pact with Canada, Hurricane Hugo devastated the South Carolina Coast, Pete Rose was banned from baseball for life, the First Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini died, the Dalai Lama won the Nobel Peace Prize, and Geraldo Rivera got his nose busted by an angry, chair throwing guest.

But thank God for all of those distractions—at the very least, they helped to temporarily take my mind off the fact that my mother was losing (and would ultimately lose) her valiant battle with cancer in that very busy year.

The Sunday morning shows have always fascinated me. While I think I was first attracted to them because of a simple interest in the news of the day and world events, I grew later to appreciate them as being much more than that. There was and remains no better summary method of seeing how those in Washington not only view the world, but what they are doing (or not doing) to influence it and our country’s condition.

There also was what would become a practical advantage to watching the shows. I got to see some very powerful, very eloquent people exchange their divergent and frequently conflicting beliefs, civilly for the most part, with a talented debate partner or two, a skeptical press, and an interested audience. Their artful exchanges were and are something to behold, and I marvel still at how effective some of these folks are at the art of discussion and debate. 

Agree or not, like them or not, ya’ gotta say one thing about those American politicians who can speak well and communicate effectively; they sure can be persuasive. After all, how else could they have been able to say what they’ve been saying and do what they’ve been doing for the last, oh, 60-plus years and not only have us believe it, but kept us quite literally voting for more. In fact, we continue to hold them in such high regard that we still name our streets, parks, airports and buildings after them, vote them in year after year after year, and when they die, speak glowingly about their selfless commitment to public service with reverence and adoration.

Now THAT’S salesmanship.

And few were better at all this than the late Senator Robert C. Byrd, a Democrat from West Virginia who, according to Wikipedia, has over 50 places named for him. Take a look at the list. It's truly remarkable, and to me more than a little depressing.

The late Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV)

So no, never mind that Byrd, once a committed leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and our other entrusted servants were unforgivably negligent as our grandparents, parents, and those of my vintage weren’t minding the store. Let’s just ignore the fact, I guess, that apparently our representatives in Washington simply did not have the intellect, foresight, character or courage to prevent us from being in the place we now find ourselves: saddled with the smothering burden of an enormous debt and other commitments that will be virtually impossible to repay.

How bad is it? Well, by my admittedly simplistic math, each and every one of us, every man, woman and American child, owes our government and its creditors (Read: China) approximately $329, 525.

Not every household. Not every taxpayer. Not every adult. When the Big Hat gets passed around, and it stops at you, you should be prepared to toss in your $329K share of that $101.5 Trillion-and-growing bill. Got a spouse and two kids? That’ll be $1.3 million for the four of you,thank you very much.

And how much do I remember hearing about the oncoming financial Tsunami bearing down on us while sipping my Bloody and watching the Sunday shows in the 80’s, 90’s and 00’s?

Very little.

To his credit (and the outrage of those of us who didn't want to hear it), after his 2004 election and thus free from bondage of reelection concerns, President George W. Bush tried to address part of the problem: Social Security’s long term viability. Often referred to as “The Third Rail of American Politics”, no politician hoping to remain everybody’s friend wanted to anger us by admitting a dirty little truth—that little if any of the money we spent a lifetime entrusting to the U.S. Government, with its Full Faith and Credit security, to invest for us until we retired will be there when we go to collect.  

President Bush’s idea was to allow Americans to put at least part of their Social Security contribution into something other than the government’s fiscal Black Hole. The theory was that by allowing workers to “Privatize” at least some of their Social Security dollars by allowing them to invest it where the returns were typically higher (the Stock Markets primarily…like a 401K) we’d see a greater rate of return (profit) than we would by just having the more capable, more financially astute United States Government hold and “invest” it for us. 

The problem? Taking that money out of its insatiable coffers would mean less for the government to spend elsewhere until it was time for us to retire—a wholly unappealing notion to not only our current President and those of like political mind, but even among the most fiscally Conservative, even Draconian Americans. Sure, they say, cut the spending over there, but stay the hell away from my Sacred Cows.

Indeed. Who among us wants their own favorite government program or service cut, right?

There was another big problem with W’s plan: the stock markets are inherently risky. While historically the return has been higher over the long term, any drop in the markets may mean that a dollar intended to be waiting for us when we retire could be worth not more, but something substantially less than a dollar when we go to put it in our wallets right next to our AARP cards. 

Now we can’t have that uncertainty, can we?

For these reasons and a whole host of others, Bush’s plan withered on the vine. I could be wrong, but something tells me that he and his administration knew the plan had no chance of going anywhere—American’s were not ready then, nor are we now, to face the ugly arithmetic.

Our reluctance to do so and our leaders willingness to enable our delusions was there again last Sunday morning for all to see.Two of the most powerful leaders in Washington, one Democrat and one Republican, were on Fox News Sunday engaging in the type of duel I used to enjoy, arguing over the what should be the appropriate level of spending cuts in President Obama’s proposed $3.7 Trillion dollar spending budget (your share, by the way, is $12,000--about $5,000 of which the government won’t have and will need to borrow for you on your behalf). This is an especially interested debate as the inability to reach an agreement may well mean that the wobbly wheels of government come to a sudden, screeching halt.

The guests were powerful and influential Senators: Dick Durbin (D-IL), the second highest ranking Democrat, and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) the highest ranking Republican. How much did they courageously suggest the spending be cut?

Durbin finally got around to saying that $10 Billion “pushed this (the cuts) to the limit”, and McConnell seemed proud in suggesting something six times larger, $60 Billion.

Big numbers. At least until you consider their relative size: $6 Billion represents a meager .16% of the President’s proposed budget, and $60 Billion is 1.6%. So how much of your aforementioned $12,000 share of this year’s budget are the Senators talking about cutting?

Somewhere between $19.20 and $192.00 for every American Citizen.

Thanks, Guys. Once again and still, Washington inspires me with her remarkable work, and makes me hardly able to wait until next Sunday morning’s fun. 

Meanwhile, I guess somebody somewhere should start making plans for a Richard J. “Dick” Durbin Park in Chicago, and a new federally subsidized terminal in Louisville’s airport that perhaps should be renamed for Addison Mitchell "Mitch" McConnell, Jr.

Who's going to pay for them? Oh, no big deal--just put it on our tab.

Hmmm…

Another Park, Another Sunday. And another Bloody Mary, too, please.