Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs lifelong Secret Service protection for former Presidents fiscally sound?
Title endorsed in part by:
Results so far:
| Yes | 48% | 16 votes | Total: 33 votes | |
| No | 52% | 17 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesThe question; "Is lifelong Secret Service protection for former Presidents fiscally sound?" The quick answer; "absolutely"! Living former Presidents are few in number, provide an unbelievably important and vital service to their country, and to the sitting President. They are members of an extremely unique club that I call the Presidents' Club.
Let's face reality; unique and capable in their abilities, they wouldn't have been elected to serve unless "We the People" (from the Constitution), believed that "We" as a people and as a Nation would benefit from their service. Individually, they each had unique strengths, perspective, emotion, beliefs, they brought to the Office of the President. As a former President, each is still unique and a precious resource to the sitting President.
I truly believe in my mind and my heart that each gave his all to do the absolute best job humanly possible for him, for the purpose of serving the American People to the best of his ability. That's what We would expect of Our President, nothing less! While Our President, each one received on the job training that cannot be matched nor duplicated ever because events, circumstance, decisions, and consequences of those decisions were unique to that precise moment in time. The wealth of knowledge gained as a result of all those experiences, the relationships formed and maintained with World Leaders, with Leaders of Industry and Technology, with dealing with catastrophe is priceless (beyond putting a price upon).
For these men to be available to share their knowledge in a timely and efficient manner with the sitting President when and if requested for the benefit of "We the People" is priceless (beyond putting a price upon).
In addition, these men, while serving as President had access to information that only they needed to know. That access, along with the acquired knowledge "sealed the deal"; each became a National Resource of unparalleled information vital to National safety and security. Therefore, there is absolutely a necessity for former Presidents to be protected 24 / 7. It, protecting Our former Presidents, is in the best interests of Our Nation, the best interests of the sitting President, the best interests of each and every former President, and it's the right thing to do.
The Secret Service is the agency tasked with the Protection of Presidents. It is absolutely fiscally sound to provide lifelong Secret Service protection to former Presidents because what they continue to provide to "We the People" is a wealth of knowledge, experience, information, and intelligence that is priceless (beyond putting a price upon). Plus, it's just the right thing to do! Would We want to see something happen to any of Our former Presidents, men that put Us before themselves, that made Our safety and security their primary concern? Of course We wouldn't! Protect them We must, it's the least We can do! It's a wise investment for "We the People", and that makes it fiscally sound.
Learn more about this author, Daniel G. O'Leary.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Secret service protection for former chief executives is an expensive and unreasonable cost to the American taxpayer. Not since Harry Truman have former presidents had to concern themselves with a penurious lifestyle. Today, a former president is able to generate significant wealth after his term of office is completed; they typically reap hundreds of thousands of dollars for speaking engagements and corporate board positions. Furthermore, the taxpayer is extremely generous with respect to presidential pensions. Annual pensions have increased from $25,000 in 1958 to almost $200,000 annually. In addditions to pensions, they also receive an office allowance for staff, office rents, office supplies, travel funds, telephones and free mail. In some cases, these expenses can be extremely significant: Gerald Ford spent $17,000 on stationary and pencils in his last year; Bill Clinton racked up an astounding $75,000 phone bill and travel expenses amounted to well over $50,000 a year for both President Clinton and George H.W. Bush. In fact, according to some, the best part of serving as president is the post presidency. When one considers the significant personal wealth of the formers, much of which was gained as a direct result of having served in the office, it seems unreasonable to burden the taxpayers with their personal security, let alone their personal needs.
Pete Sepp of the National Taxpayers Union questions the "exorbitant level of presidential pensions in an age where ex-presidents are gold", he goes on to say: "the presidential pension system is probably the only syatem of perks that outdoes the cushy benefits for members of congress". He concludes by saying, "In an age where ex-presidents can rake in millions of dollars, it seems pointless to guarantee them a system of extremely lavish lifetime benefits". Gone are the days of Harry Truman who said, "I could never lend myself to any transaction, however respectable, that would commercialize on the prestige and dignity of the office of the presidency."
Secret service protection is above and beyond the above mentioned expenses and is estimated to cost the taxpayer upwards of $24 million a year. In 2009, the service is charged with the protection of Presidents Carter, Bush Sr, Clinton, George Bush and their spouses. With the exception of President George Bush this protection is for their lifetimes, Bush and future former presidents will receive the protection for ten years, and after such time will be entitled to an additional one million dollars annually to provide for security. To add insult to injury, this protection is now extended to former vice-president Dick Cheney, whose net worth is reported at nearly one hundred million dollars. The protection is for a period of six months, but can be extended. The much maligned President Nixon was the only former president to refuse the protection, he determined, rightfully so, that the cost was unjustified. A Government Accountability Office report in 2001 estimated the cost of this protection from 1977 through 2000 at $370 million.
When a former president has the ability to earn in excess of a one hundred million dollars as did President Clinton from the time he left office until 2007, is there really an excuse for spending much needed tax dollars on 24/7 protection? It is time that the American public refuse to allow politicians, no matter their previous position, to pilfer from the treasury. Let them try to get by on the paltry million dollars plus a year that we afford them in pensions and benefits. There are hundreds of well respected private security firms that would be willing to provide security for a fraction of the cost of secret service protection. After all, I'm not aware of a meaningful threat on a former president in recent years. Britney Spears likely receives more threats than any former president, but of course, she's more relevant. By the way, she pays for her own protection.
Learn more about this author, John Lannefeld.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- US Leaders (Other)
- Should President Obama be given access to public school children with his lesson plan?
- Should we judge presidents by their words or by their deeds?
- Should President Obama have gone to Denmark to lobby for the 2016 Olympics in Chicago?
- Should President Obama be impeached?
- Does the US demand higher personal standards for politicians than other countries?
- Do US Congressmen behave like public servants or privileged royalty?
