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.
This is just a cheap shot at Bush.
-PJ
Read my post #58.
It's not about the money.
It would seem that a certain poster *didn't* understand that little fact. :o)
"That's the message Micheal Savage wants to send"
Savage's real last name is Weiner. He and Anthony Weiner of New York are probably brothers or something. Savage is a fake phony fraud, a Shylock-style Jew with an irritating voice who carves his pound of flesh from the morons who listen to his vile program. Bob Grant secretly hates him.
I feel a certain sympathy for the position that the festivities be muted, in light of the fact we have soldiers in harm's way in Iraq and elsewhere. I feel that would make the President appear more statesmanlike.
I only hope that we'll be always able to find the money that our soldiers need for their service. That's more important that having an expensive event for a second mandate, isn't it?
Always remember this: there are people who are in perpetual hand-wringing angst because, somewhere, somebody is having fun.
$40 Million to show the world that we here in the US are FREE .....and that we have enough people to FORK OVER $40 MILLION DOLLARS to CELEBRATE our FREEDOM!
I know many people in the US military, including my vet husband and many members of our families, some of whom are currently serving. They are *thrilled* George Bush is our President and are thankful festivities are going to happen.
Have a good night.
Howdy, ya'll!I think the media is really trying to play up this cra* about the
cost of the Inauguration.FI don't recall this coming up in 1993 or 1997.
I just wish the festivities would take on a more moderate level of spending. I don't care if the money is donated or not. There's a lot of people who are just holding on to their jobs, our soldiers are still dying in Iraq. This is just my opinion, a little humility would go a long way in this matter.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^Thanks. I agree! See my last post, just above. :^)
Glad you raised Chelsea's Excellent World Tour Adventure. It always annoyed me that Hillary always needed to make a junket that just happened to coincide with her daughter's school breaks .. it wasn't just during the last months he was in office.
Thanks for the ping!
Alessandro really is a great guy. I didn't want folks to get the wrong idea about him. He's working on his PhD in economics. Being a conservative economist, he would naturally take a frugal stance.
Thanks for the links. I'll have to read them in more detail later.
Of course, all this money is just being dumped into the Potomac and isn't helping the service, airline or hotel industries and certainly not the D.C. economy in any way. It goes without saying that the event is not going to generate a penny of taxes that could be used for all of the other items that the private donations could've paid for.
As to the security funds that D.C. will have to pony up, the city workers will just have to retrieve it from the Potomac, because none of the visitors will be spending any money at all. It's just too bad that all those people don't just stay home and forget celebrating a hard-fought battle.
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.