From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Interview with David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, 1998-2008 Description: Former Comptroller General David Walker (1998-2008) shares his experiences leading GAO. Released: December 2021 [ Question : ] What led you to the position of Comptroller General? [ Dave Walker : ] Well, before I became Comptroller General and head of the GAO, I had 25 years of private sector and public sector experience. I was public accounting with PricewaterhouseCoopers and Arthur Andersen, and immediately before coming to GAO, I was a partner and a global managing director for Arthur Andersen in charge of their human capital strategy practice worldwide. Prior to that, I had been head of two federal agencies. I was head of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. I was head of the Employee Benefits Security Administration at the Labor Department. And then I also served part time as a trustee of Social Security and Medicare for a five year period of time. So, good combination of public and private sector experience. As far as how I got there, actually, when I had headed the Employee Benefits Security Administration, the former chief accountant for that agency became aware that the job was open and he thought that I would be perfect for it because of my background, and he actually encouraged me to throw my hat into the ring. And I did, although at that time there were over 60 people who threw their hat in the ring, over 40 people ended up answering a very extensive questionnaire. A little over 20 people were interviewed by the key staff, and then seven people were interviewed by the Virtual Congressional Commission that's created, and I was fortunate to get the job. In fact, I found out later that I was the only person that was on the Democrats' list, the Republicans' list and President Clinton's list, but I didn't find that out until after it was all over with. [ Question : ] Did you know much about GAO? [ Walker : I knew about GAO but I had not been a connoisseur of GAO, if you will. I mean, you know, heading to federal agencies, I was on the other end of GAO, but I always had a lot of respect for GAO, their professionalism, the fact that they tried to conduct themselves in a professional, objective nonpartisan fashion. I've always believed that auditors can be a positive thing, you know, to try to help make sure that you're doing the right thing. Make recommendations for continuous improvement. And so I always had a constructive attitude with regard to GAO even before I was with GAO. [ Question : ] How has GAO's role in government evolved? [ Walker : ] Yeah, well, when I was at GAO, I tried to get the agency, I had to transform the agency and we can talk about why, because the agency was in serious trouble and a lot of people in the agency didn't understand that. But when you're downsized 40% in the five years before I came, that's called a market signal. But a lot of people in GAO didn't realize that they were in serious trouble. They also didn't realize that they were going to be downsized another 25 to 40% if I didn't turn it around and make Congress more satisfied. So as part of the transformation, when I came to GAO, I really wanted us to focus on three things. Oversight, insight and foresight. So, you know, oversight, which is the traditional role that GAO was played for many decades. Insight, you know, GAO done a little bit of work on that. You know, what works, what doesn't work, best practices, lessons learned, et cetera. And then foresight, which GAO had not done a whole lot of work on foresight, which is looking at the emerging trends and challenges facing the United States, its position in the world, as well as here at home. What are some of the things that need to be addressed before they reach crisis proportions? Because, you know, unfortunately, most politicians are pretty myopic. I mean, they're focused on the next election, and somebody has to take a longer term view. And my view was GAO was perfectly positioned to be able to do that. [ Question : ] Do you feel that you were able to get the agency moving in those areas? [ Walker : ] I think they improved with regard to oversight. I mean, one of the one of the reputations that GAO had before I came was that they were a gotcha agency. They tended to focus on what's wrong rather than what's right. So one of the things that I tried to do is to encourage constructive engagement, which is, you know, make sure you have a professional relationship. Our job is to try to help make things work better if we see things that are wrong, you know, then we need to point them out. But on the other hand, if we see things where progress has been made and that are right, we ought to acknowledge that too. So it ought to be a more balanced and constructive approach. And when you do that, you'll find that people end up cooperating with you a lot more than when they perceive you otherwise. [ Question : ] How did you help GAO keep pace with Congress's changing needs? [ Walker : ] Well, first, GAO never had a strategic plan before I was there, and I'm a big believer in leading by example and practice what you preach. And so therefore, you know, my view was since GAO was the one that were conducting the oversight, insight and foresight activities for others, they better be leading by example. They better be as good or better than any other agency that they're evaluating. And so that was one of the mantras we ended up pulling together our first strategic plan. That strategic plan was focused on the future and crossed all the boundaries in government. And then we ended up restructuring the agency to support that strategic plan and also focusing much more on outcomes rather than activities. Because a lot of the metrics when I came in, people were focused on, you know, how many reports did we issue? And you know, actually there was a culture where if the report was really thick, that was a positive thing. Even though we may not have a hearing, no press attention and nothing was ever changed. So-called chapter reports, which we got rid of during my tenure. But yeah, right. [ Question : ] How did you help federal agencies? [ Walker : ] Well, the biggest success was GAO. You know, I mean, there are a number of other agencies, we work particularly closely with Charles Rossotti at the Internal Revenue Service. He was trying to transform the IRS at that point in time. We worked with a number of agencies in a constructive manner, but my view was is while we want to help others help themselves--be able to help them understand, you know, best practices, lessons learned--that ultimately we had to lead by example. We had to be as good or better. And that was why we engaged in the major transformation that we did, which I'm happy to talk about. And that said more than anything else, and then people started looking to us differently because we were leading by example. We were practicing what we preach and therefore they would be more receptive to what we had to say with regard to constructive recommendations. [ Question : ] What is the key to that successful transformation? [ Walker : ] First, you have to end up creating a burning platform. OK, when you're engaging in transformation, whether it's the public sector, private sector, not for profit sector, you have to help people understand that we must change that, if we don't change, things are going to get worse. All right. And I knew things that other people in GAO did know because I had the results of a highly confidential survey of congressional members about what they thought of GAO, which led to GAO being downsized 40% in the five years before I was there and then having a hiring freeze for four or five years as well. And so what I had to do is to help them understand that when you got downsized 40%, that's a market signal. Yeah, there were other agencies downsized, but nobody was downsized anywhere near 40%. And then I had to, in a constructive way, help them understand that it could get worse if we didn't address some of the problems. And one of the problems was they felt that the agency had rightly or wrongly had become, you know, too gotcha oriented. They felt that they had become captive of one political party that had been in control of Congress for several decades, if you will. They didn't have enough transparency with regard to their protocols as to which jobs that they accept and not accept. And you know, what were the rules of the road and dealing with the GAO, both with regard to Congress as well as the agencies. So, you know, there were a number of things that existed and that we went about going addressing that, but it started with the strategic plan and then we ended up taking a number of steps after we developed that first ever strategic plan. [ Question : ] Can you talk about the agency's name change in 2004? [ Walker : ] Well, the General Accounting Office didn't really convey what the agency did, I mean, the agency did accounting for itself, but it didn't do accounting for anybody else. All right. And therefore, that was a challenge in trying to recruit the broad spectrum of people that we need in order to be able to accomplish our objective. I mean, it didn't hurt us in recruiting accountants, but it hurt us recruiting other types of professionals, whether it be lawyers, whether it be social scientists, PhDs and a number of different areas, actuaries, et cetera. Secondly, it also was a problem on the Hill because, you know, people said General Accounting Office. I mean, why would you want the General Accounting Office to, do, you know, an in-depth analysis of a particular policy issue or programmatic activity? I mean, this isn't about accounting, it's about effectiveness, right? It also hurt us with regard to, you know, cabinet agency, cabinet officials because they said, Well, what is the GAO coming in here doing work in this particular area? It doesn't have anything to do with financial matters or accounting matters, if you will. And so I saw that it was a problem from a number of perspectives. I didn't want to change the acronym GAO. That's really the brand. The brand is GAO.I didn't want to change that. So what I I engaged in, you know, interaction with top executives and others to say, you know, what might make sense and government we're in the government we're in the accountability business, not the accounting business. All right. And accountability includes oversight, insight, foresight and more, it's performance and accountability. And then obviously, we're in office, so we're able to go with Government Accountability Office, maintained GAO, which is, you know, which is really the brand name. And I think it was very successful. Although I will tell you there are some people in the agency didn't want to change it. But you know, change is tough. And you know, when you've had something for decades, a lot of people are reticent. [ Question : ] How were GAO's core values of Accountability, Integrity, and Reliability chosen? [ Walker : ] The way that we got to accountability, integrity, reliability is accountability reflected what we did, which is, you know, much more than auditing, you know, integrity is how we wanted to do our work - professional, objective, fact-based, nonpartisan, non-ideological and if at all possible, fair and balanced, OK. And reliability is how we wanted our work to be received by the Congress, the press and even the people who we were doing work on. We wanted them to do it that way. So accountability, integrity, reliability. [ Question : ] Do you think GAO has succeeded in focusing on emerging issues? [ Walker : ] Well, I think the beginning was the 21st Century Challenges publication, which came early in the millennium and the strategic plan was in 2000 as well, where we ended up, you know, publishing that document that looked longer, broader, if you will. And that was something that helped us to be able to think about what kind of work might need to be done that we're not being asked to do because the Comptroller General has the authority to initiate its own work. You've got to be careful about what you're doing. But what I found is disproportionately where I would end up asking us to do work was in the foresight area, right? Because Congress as an institution really doesn't focus on that. And quite frankly, the executive branch is not very good at that either. All right. So I think clearly we've gotten better there. There's obviously room for continuous improvement. There always will be. But my view is, is that foresight is the one area, OK, that is not likely to get addressed unless GAO does it. [ Question : ] Can you talk about your efforts on the Fiscal Wake-up Tour? [ Walker : ] Well, you have to keep in mind that I was a practicing certified public accountant for many years. In addition to that, I was a trustee of Social Security and Medicare from 1990 to 1995, when I came in as Comptroller General, we had a surplus. We had four years in a row of surpluses. But I knew that reading financial statements of the U.S. government and understanding demographic trends and having been a trustee of Social Security and Medicare, I knew that we faced challenges beyond the horizon because of known demographic trends, rising health care costs and a bunch of other challenges that we face. And I also knew that the Congress wasn't focusing on that. And so therefore, I felt that it was important that we do that or that we help people understand some of these forces that were there, that were going to take us from surpluses to large and growing deficits unless we ended up changing course. And sure enough, in 2003, which to me was the big year of change, three things happened. We had a second round of tax cuts that we couldn't afford and that we discharged to the credit card. We invaded a sovereign nation without declaring war and just charged it to the credit card. And we ended up expanding Medicare to add prescription drugs, added $8 trillion in new unfunded obligations when Medicare was already underfunded $19 trillion, all right. So those things told me that, you know, things were just out of control, and that led me to be able to start the Fiscal Wake-up Tour and then things that I ended up doing, you know, after I left. [ Question : ] Do you think you successfully raised awareness about the debt and fiscal issues? [ Walker : ] Well, there's no question that it increased dramatically. And there was a significant amount of concern in 2010 and 2012, in part because of efforts by myself and others, you know, some of these happened after I left GAO. OK? There was an award-winning documentary called I.O.U.S.A. I published a book that fortunately turned out to be a national bestseller called Comeback America. And there were a number of efforts that took place that raised the profile. But right now, with COVID-19, you know, people are focused on what do we need to do to defeat this virus. You know, people are throwing money at problems in some cases where it makes sense, in some cases where it doesn't make sense. And we're not through this yet. There's going to be more. But what's important is to understand that COVID-19 has exacerbated the economic challenges, exacerbated our national security challenges, exacerbated our social challenges. And if anything, it should serve as a wakeup call and a call to action to start dealing with some of these structural problems that we've had for a number of years that have been made much worse by COVID-19. [ Question : ] Can you talk about some memorable audit reports? [ Walker : ] Well, I can give you some reports that I remember in particular, there were so many I mean, it's hard to narrow them down, OK? One of which, of course, is the issue we just talked about, you know, the long range fiscal outlook to try to be able to help people understand where we're headed rather than where we are and the potential risk associated with that. Another was the Postal Service. You know, I ended up modifying the High Risk list where we not only named the agency or the program or the activity we noted when Congress was part of the problem, when Congress needed to be part of the solution. And one of the ones that we did that for was the Postal Service and the Postmaster General called me and personally thanked me for putting them on the High Risk list, not because they like being on the High Risk list. But what he liked is because we noted that the Congress was part of the problem and it needed to be part of the solution. All right. Also remember testifying in Congress about the Postal Service at that time, I was using a BlackBerry. This is before 9/11. All right, where BlackBerries were issued to all members of Congress. And I remember holding up the BlackBerry and saying, this is competition to the Postal Service. A lot of people didn't even know what it was. OK. And I said, it's got something in it called email, OK. You can do electronic communications, and it's going to significantly reduce the amount of First-Class Mail, which is where the Postal Service makes...so that's an example of foresight, right? But...if you will. Another one was Iraq. We did a comprehensive analysis of the situation in Iraq. The reconstruction efforts, standing up the government, the military situation, et cetera. And I testified right after General Petraeus. Well, keep in mind that General Petraeus is management, right? I mean, he's the one on the front line doing this, and here we are the auditor. So we're supposed to be the independent evaluators. So I gave GAO's you know, some reviews and I had members of Congress say, well, your view seems a little bit different than the General Petraeus, can you help me understand that? I said, well, yes, I can. But first, I have tremendous respect for General Petraeus. He's on the ground, on the front lines. We have people there too, by the way. But, you know, but you have to understand that General Petraeus is management. All right. Management is going to emphasize the positive and not talk about the negative if they don't have to. That's why you have GAO. All right. And so, you know, that's one. So those are a couple. There were others. But those are three that I think were noteworthy. [ Question : ] Why are peer reviews so important to GAO? [ Walker : ] Well, I think peer review is important because it's leading by example, right? I mean, you know, it's basically showing, you know, people ask the question, who audits the auditors, you know who reviews the auditors, right? And so we are audited externally. We do have peer review with regard to our work. We've always done extremely well when I was there. And as far as I know, since. We've always gotten, you know, you know, the highest, you know, unqualified opinions and limited material control weaknesses, if any, and positive results in our peer review. And I think it's important that we do that for continuous improvement. But I also think it's important that we do it for credibility. [ Question : ] Can you talk about your efforts to increase diversity and inclusion at GAO? [ Walker : ] Well, when I was Comptroller General, we created an Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness and in fact selected Ron Stroman, who now is the Deputy Postmaster General, to be head of that office. I wanted to take a very affirmative, action-oriented step in order to try to include to achieve more diversity, provide more opportunity. I didn't want a quota system, but there are a lot of affirmative things that you can do through recruiting, through training and development. And that's what we did, and we made some real progress. [ Question : ] Do you think you were successful in making GAO a "model organization"? [ Walker : ] The answer is I wanted to be a model organization from the standpoint of planning. And again, we were the first organization to do a long range strategic plan with regard to transformation. How do you transform the organization to support that plan of an organization that leads by example? That practice what it preaches. An organization that focuses on results, not activities, but results because there's not enough of government that does that, if you will. So those are the basic premises, if you will. The bottom line is if we're the ones that audit, evaluate and investigate others, we have a responsibility to be as good or better than they are. We have a responsibility to lead by example and practice what we preach. And yes, I do think that we achieved that. [ Question : ] What were your major initiatives in recruiting and retaining a first-rate workforce? [ Walker : ] Well, the two major things that I can think of with regard to recruiting is we had a very aggressive college recruiting effort. And the model was basically where I came from in public accounting had a very proactive, very aggressive college recruiting effort where we would we would designate executives who would be our primary liaison to that particular college and university. We would have presence on that college university, if you will. So we didn't just go out there to recruit and that was it. Obviously, changing our name at some point in time helped as well in that regard. The other thing that we did is I opened up the SES program to people outside of GAO. I mean, we had become too insular, frankly, and I thought it was very important that we ended up having some different perspectives, ended up bringing in some people from the outside, some of which from other government agencies that are now managing directors of major units in GAO. [ Question : ] How do you think a nonpartisan agency can be most effective in an era of extreme partisanship? [ Walker : ] I've done several tours of duty in government starting in the 1980s, and I'm still involved in government because I'm on the Defense Business Board and I'm a distinguished visiting professor at the Naval Academy. I have never seen the situation as bad as I've seen it now with regard to not only the hyper partisanship, but the great ideological divide that's occurred. I think GAO's role is more important than ever to try to be able to be fact-based, nonpartisan, non-ideological, fair and balanced, and to have constructive working relationships with those that we audit and investigate, evaluate and to have strong relationships on the Hill to try to help get things done at a time where, frankly, not much is getting done. [ Question : ] What were your greatest achievements? What would you have done differently? [ Walker : ] I think the thing I'm proudest of is how we transformed the agency, how we took it from an at risk agency that was at risk of being reduced in size even more than it had already been reduced in size to one that clearly was a world class organization that led by example that practiced what it preached, that the Congress started investing in, rather than cutting, that achieved the objectives that I outlined before about what we're trying to achieve in the transformation, that was focused on continuous improvement. You know, there are a lot of things that go into that, but that's the thing I'm most proud of. And I think the second thing would be the second goal that I had was to help to transform the International Accountability Organization. I mean, we pulled together the first strategic plan for INTOSAI. There were a number of major changes that were made there. We laid the groundwork for the the current effort where a number of multilateral institutions are helping to fund continuous improvement for, you know, for supreme audit institutions around the world, and we're trying to help make that a reality. So I think those are the things that I'm most proud of. As far as would I do anything differently? Only one thing, the most controversial thing that I did during my tenure as Comptroller General was the Band II split. OK. I absolutely, positively believe that that was necessary because when one looks at the data and I'm a data driven person, there was a negative correlation between the level of responsibility and performance and pay. A negative correlation. All right. And that is not right. That is not equitable. That is not affordable. That is not sustainable. What I would have done differently is I wouldn't have done it as fast and I would have provided more transition time. I had to move it up because quite candidly, it was pretty evident there was going to be a change in control in Congress. And given that fact, we may never have been able to do it to begin with. But importantly, before I left, I cut a deal with the Congress for more transition relief, recognizing that I thought there needed to be more than we originally provided. And it's my understanding that things are a lot better now. [ Question : ] Why did you leave before the end of your 15-year term? [ Walker : ] I fully intended to stay there the entire 15 years because I love the job, I love the agency. You know, I still believe it's the best job I've ever had. OK. But I had three goals and objectives when I became Comptroller General-one, to make GAO a model agency that practiced what it preached, that led by example and helped others to improve. Secondly, to transform the international community and frankly, the domestic community as well, accountability and community along that same lines. And then third, to try to help facilitate making a down payment on the huge fiscal imbalance the country had and to hopefully gain momentum to make more progress over time. The first two were achieved. The third one, it was evident that I wasn't going to be able to do it as Comptroller General because you can talk about the problems, but you're not allowed to talk about solutions. I didn't want to put the agency at risk, and Pete Peterson recruited me to head his foundation, which I did along with other things after I left GAO. But you know, I love GAO and, you know, being Comptroller General of the United States is probably the height of my career. [ Question : ] Looking ahead, what are your thoughts on how GAO can better meet Congress's needs? [ Walker : ] I think GAO needs to be forward deployed. I'm not sure what the situation is now, but given how difficult the situation is on the Hill, you need to be more forward deployed than ever with regard to congressional relations. Secondly, GAO needs to be, do as many congressional hearings as possible, and part of that is being, being forward deployed. OK. I mean, when you forward report and you have relationships and you not only can help the Congress, you know, respond to what they want and give them ideas of things that could be helpful and constructive to do. And that's part of what the strategic plan is all about, right? I mean, you help Congress decide what they want to request and then you help the Comptroller General decide what other work needs to be done that otherwise is not being requested. And so I think those are two of the big things that, you know, that need to be done. [ Question : ] What does "forward-deployed" mean in terms of GAO? [ Walker : ] Very active engagement on the Hill, very visible presence on the Hill, you know, trying to work with the Congress, you know, not only to solicit what they want done, but give them ideas on what needs to be done, providing information that can be helpful for constructive hearings, to can be considered for legislation. I mean, very active, I mean, I was much more proactive in that regard, OK, than some of my predecessors were. I can't comment on recent times. [ Question : ] What have you been up to since you left GAO? [ Walker : ] Yeah, I've been fortunate. I'm in a couple of halls of fame, I've gotten some awards from, you know, a couple of heads of state, you know, and a couple cabinet secretaries, stuff like that. But you know, what I've been doing is I've run to not for profit organizations that are focused on fiscal responsibility and government transformation. The Peter G. Peterson Foundation, The Comeback America initiative. I've published one book, which fortunately was a national bestseller, Comeback America, in 2010. I'm about ready to publish another book, called, America in 2040: Still a Superpower? That will come out, hopefully in October of 2020. I've been a professor at the Naval Academy, teaching the economics of national security. I'm on the Defense Business Board. I'm involved in a number of other organizations, you know, No Labels, National Academy of Public Administration, Rotary International, Sons of the American Revolution. So I'm keeping pretty busy. [ Question : ] How has Congress's view of GAO changed over the years? [ Walker : ] When I was selected as Comptroller General, Congress wanted a change agent and they got a change agent. They were not happy. They were happy when I left, not because I left. They didn't want me to leave, but they were happy with where GAO was at the time that I left. OK. And what they were looking for was somebody who could end up staying the course and promoting continuous improvement. And Gene Dodaro was absolutely the right person. He was deserving from the beginning. He was my full partner in the changes that we made while I was there. And fortunately, he was selected and he was the first career person to be selected, and he may be the only career person that ever gets selected. [ Question : ] Can you talk about the GAO restructuring that you spearheaded? [ Walker : ] With regard to the restructuring, after we did the strategic plan, we took a look at the organization. We eliminated a number of field offices that were no longer necessary, given you know, transportation and technological change had taken place. We eliminated a layer of management. We reduced the number of units from 35 to 13. We focused much more attention horizontally and externally, and we became much more results-oriented with regard to what we were trying to achieve. And in doing that modified our institutional and individual performance measurement reward system to support the strategic plan, the core values and the desired outcomes. [ Question : ] Can you talk about the famous federal suit against Vice President Cheney over records access? [ Walker : ] Well, first, I don't like suing anybody. I don't like being sued either, and fortunately, I haven't been. But that was a very serious situation. Basically, Vice President Cheney created the National Energy Policy Development Group, a task force in the White House. He detailed people from different departments and agencies. And he didn't want any transparency or accountability for what they did. I saw that, as you know, something that could lead to massive abuse over time. If you can do it for energy, then you can do it for taxes, you can do it for health care, you can do it for the environment, whatever. We tried on a number of occasions to reach reasoned and reasonable compromise, I went on the Hill and talked to the majority leader of the Senate who tried to broker a deal. The Vice President was intransigent. I didn't want to sue, but I felt that I needed to send a signal. I did. You know, the district court, I think, improperly dismissed it for lack of standing, but we won in the court of public opinion. We didn't have a problem after that. And it's my understanding, talking to Gene that several years thereafter, we actually got legislation that made it clear that the Comptroller General did have the right to sue. I think that should absolutely be a last resort. I hope it never happens again. But you need to have that tool in the toolbox for people to take you seriously, especially when one party controls the Senate, the House and the White House, no matter which party that might be. [ Question : ] Can you give some examples of when you applied GAO's core values to your work? [ Walker : ] You know, there were several occasions where I had to personally apply our core values with top level officials in the government, one of which of course, was the Cheney situation, which we've already talked about. But there were two others when we were first pulling together our protocols, which are very important. I met with the top leadership on both sides of the aisle at both ends of the Hill to explain to them what we were proposing to do, why we were proposing to do it, and the rough outline of what those protocols would be. Everybody but one person, the minority leader of the Senate, agreed that we needed it. He strongly opposed it. I listened to him carefully and what his reasoning was. And I seriously considered it. But in the end, we adopted it because he didn't have good reasons not to. And there was overwhelming support. The second was the Speaker of the House of Representatives asked us to do work dealing with college athletics and wanted to know whether or not you know, a particular piece of legislation had had an adverse impact on men's athletics, men's sports. But he didn't want to know whether or not it had a positive impact on women's sports. And so I personally had to go up there and tell him, Mr. Speaker, we're more than happy to do the work, but we're going to have to do the work both on the adverse impact on men's athletics, if any, and the positive impact on women's, because if we don't do that, we'll be violating our core values. We're not going to violate our core values because the value of GAO would be diminished tremendously if we did. And he understood, and that's what we did. [ Question : ] How do you balance forward-deployment with the need to say no sometimes? [ Walker : ] You have to have a reason for saying no. And one of the good things about core values is they are positive beliefs and they are institutional boundaries, and it's very difficult to be able to overcome, you know, an argument, you know, in other words, if we stick to those core values, if we stick to our protocols, if we stick to, you know, things that are out there that we've solicited input on before we finalized. If we stick to that, we will stand the test of time and we will overcome any reasonable arguments.