Posted on 01/13/2005 7:20:49 PM PST by alessandrofiaschi
WASHINGTON - President Bush's second inauguration will cost tens of millions of dollars — $40 million alone in private donations for the balls, parade and other invitation-only parties. With that kind of money, what could you buy?
_200 armored Humvees with the best armor for troops in Iraq.
_Vaccinations and preventive health care for 22 million children in regions devastated by the tsunami.
_A down payment on the nation's deficit, which hit a record-breaking $412 billion last year.
_Two years' salary for the Mets' new center fielder Carlos Beltran, or all of pitcher Randy Johnson's contract extension with the New York Yankees.
Weeks ago, the inauguration and its accompanying costs were considered a given, an historic ceremony with all the pomp, pageantry and celebrations that the nation had come to expect every four years.
But a recent confluence of events — the tsunami natural disaster, Bush's warning about Social Security finances and the $5 billion-a-month price tag for the war in Iraq — have many Americans now wondering why spend the money the second time around.
While the Presidential Inaugural Committee hopes to raise $40 million in private donations for the balls, parades and candlelight dinners for high-roller donors, millions of government dollars will be spent on construction of the platform and stands at the Capitol, police overtime, military personnel and the tightest security for the first post-Sept. 11 inaugural.
The questions have come from Bush supporters and opponents: Do we need to spend this money on what seems so extravagant?
New York Rep. Anthony Weiner, a Democrat, suggested inaugural parties should be scaled back, citing as a precedent Roosevelt's inauguration during World War II.
"President Roosevelt held his 1945 inaugural at the White House, making a short speech and serving guests cold chicken salad and plain pound cake," according to a letter from Weiner and Rep. Jim McDermott, voting record), D-Wash. "During World War I, President Wilson did not have any parties at his 1917 inaugural, saying that such festivities would be undignified."
Lawmakers representing the Washington area have complained to the White House about the District of Columbia not getting enough federal help to cover the estimated $17.3 million security costs of the inaugural.
Organizers of the inaugural defended the celebration.
"The inauguration of a United States president is one of America's greatest traditions, a tradition that transcends partisan politics," said Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Presidential Inaugural Committee. "Our theme is celebrating freedom and honoring service."
She cited the Commander in Chief inaugural ball that offers free tickets to service members back from Afghanistan and Iraq and their family members. That ball is one of nine; the other eight require a ticket.
"Every inaugural there's a really good reason given why you should spend whatever donors are sending in on something else," said Rich Galen, a veteran Republican activist, saying many of the complaints come from the losers of the election.
Billionaire Mark Cuban, owner of the National Basketball Association's Dallas Mavericks, voted for Bush — twice. Cuban knows a thing or two about big spending, once starring in ABC's reality TV show, "The Benefactor," in which 16 contenders tried to pass his test for success and win $1 million.
Cuban questioned spending all that money on the inaugural.
"As a country, we face huge deficits. We face a declining economy. We have service people dying. We face responsibilities to help those suffering from the ... devastation of the tsunamis," he wrote on his blog, a Web journal.
Cuban challenged Bush to set an example: "Start by canceling your inauguration parties and festivities."
___
EDITOR'S NOTE: Will Lester covers polling and politics for The Associated Press.
No dear.
Nowhere did I suggest we "poll" the military. Reread my posts. I pointed out that someone had quoted their military friends saying the Inauguration party was a positive thing.
They didn't complain when Clinton held his party. This is a celebration of our Democracy.
I guess my name "Recovering Ex Hippie" just evokes such an emotional reaction its hard to read my posts with detachment.
Get over it., or ask David Horowitz what it means.
Well, outside of the fact that most of the funding is private - lets cut to the chase about WHY we have the inaugurations. This is fund raising. This is where the party cash flow starts happening. The GOP, NRCC and NRSC need the cash flow. I haven't checked this yet but I'm pretty sure that there will be more inaugural parties this year than any other. And you better believe the President is going to be pressing some flesh and making appearances at most of them. This has little to do with real celebrating and has everything to with keeping the machine well greased.
Cost of inauguration = $40 million
Pissing off liberals by partying hardy = Priceless!
What part of that is so hard for you to understand? The party is paid for by private donations.
I'm not talking about the parties. I am talking about the extravagant parade with grandstands etc.
My tax dollars are paying for those elaborate arrangements and the security involved in securing the route. Anything beyond the security required for the White House grounds should come from private donations. If funds to pay for the extra security isn't paid up front from private donations then the parade shouldn't be held.
Exactly.
It's not like the Clinton's used their Inaugural money to feed the homeless.
Don't fret about it too much. Republicans say they're for smaller government but they are a little less socialist than the Dems.
I am with you. I was so disgusted in 2000 that the Dems robbed Bush of his winning celebration. Again, this past year he was robbed by the media and Kerry when they refused to call Ohio and Kerry delayed his concession speech. I say spend what it takes. The grander the better and screw the Dems. If the cost of inauguration should be reduced or traditions changed it should be decided in advance of the election. Seems to me money becomes a factor only when the Republicans are doing the spending. MoveOn could spend all they wanted to but 527's were bad! Pardon Me?
Conservatives used to consider 17.5 million of my tax dollars to be a lot of money to spend. I guess Republicans aren't really as conservative as they claim to be. Maybe I've been wasting my votes and contributions for all these years.
This is a historic event, whether you want to think so or not.
This is the swearing in of the Nations CEO for the next four years. That does not rate wasting 17.5 million dollars of my hard earned tax dollars for something that is nonproductive. George Washington must be rolling in his grave.
You are in the minority.
If being fiscally Conservative is no longer part of the GOP then I'm in the wrong party. But I think you're the one who is in the minority. I hope a lot more people call their Congress critters and demand a cap on the cost of the Inaugurations. Anything over $500,000 is wasteful.
And my tax dollars should be used to pay for fund raising events? I don't think that's even legal.
I posted a correction but I haven't seen it.
Thanks for noticing my flub [more than a mistake]
Frannie
Will Lester. A liberal masquerading as an objective journalist. See, AP does have an agenda and its liberal journalists have opinions like every one else but they think the American people are too stupid to notice what they're doing, that they miss the blatant bias in opinion pieces dressed up as straightforward news stories. As for the issue at hand - so what? The Inauguration is being paid for with privately raised funds. Its one event in our nation's history in which NOT a single dollar of hard-earned taxpayers' money is being spent. Libs are seething with hatred, rage and bile at President Bush and to them its also illegitimate to have a public function in which there's no stealing from the taxpayers' wallets. And they can't be happy about a unique event which happens only in America. A peaceful assumption or re-assumption of power is rare across this world. We've been doing it successfully in America for two centuries. The Left is so psychotically worked up about President Bush that it can't be happy for the American people, for our country or for our President. They still don't get it why they lost. Go figure.
Implying that you WON'T have respect for him if he doesn't? Get real. It's just parties. If the government isn't paying for them, what does it matter to you? Besides, he's not staying up late at any of them. He and Laura went back to the White House just after midnight last time.
The parties are for those who supported the President, and they have every right to celebrate without wet blankets being thrown on them by folks who, for the most part, didn't want the President to win anyway.
Its horrible to liberals there should be a coming out party for Bush. That's what has them shouting til they're blue in the face. I love it!
They complain about American goodness. I was worried they might catch on. I'm glad to see nothing's changed. **How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Democrats**
Uh huh. You can bet you wouldn't hear a peep out of them about the cost of a Kerry Inauguration. Instead the legacy media would be blaring - "Its time to have a grand ball!"
Oh that? Its chump change. Its not like the money to protect our President is being wasted. Even the libs are not complaining about the public expenses portion of the Inaugural. Now THAT's funny!
President Bush should agree and since DC loves making laws they should pass a new one. From here on out the people of America shall not celebrate the election of a new President in any manner that exceeds the price of a tailgate party at a football game (Professional or college game of course).
We should stop having "balls" and make the limp wristed pantie wearing sodomite loving liberals have one big picnic on the Whitehouse lawn. BYO of course.
Confiscate all that money and spend it one of the libs' pet projects. There, I feel so much better already. <sarcasm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.