Of Bush-bashing and the cost of presidential visits
By Art Morris Jr.
I would like to respond to the opinion letter by Rich Panter, “A wasteful visit from Bush” on July 22, and Michael Luttrell’s “Estimating the costs of Bush visit” on July 23, both examples of the “Everything Bush does is bad” doctrine.
President Bush is just that: the freely-elected president of the greatest nation on earth. As president, he has the right to travel as he wishes and yes, wherever he wishes. The president gets paid a paltry $400k per year, 30 times less than many big oil CEOs. As a member of the Air Force, I was selected to deploy on two presidential support missions. Before this, I had no idea what it took to move the most powerful person in the world. It takes weeks, if not months of planning for a visit. Teams go in weeks before the president arrives to make preparations and sometimes weeks to depart and debrief. Would it be fair for the president to only travel when the liberals deemed it okey-dokey to do so? Should he have to go beg for the keys to the car? Of course not — he’s the president. This brings me to the main point of my letter.
Perhaps Mr. Panter and Mr. Luttrell were too young and ineligible to vote when President Clinton was in office. If not, I’m sure that they would be equally upset by all the visits President Clinton made to the Bay Area during his terms in office. Since I was stationed at Travis Air Force Base I witnessed many Air Force One visits. The joke went: “Clinton’s back in town; he must be running low on money.” Anyway, I did five minutes’ worth of research on his visits and what I found is most interesting. Please enjoy the following tidbits of published news documenting some official presidential travel to California and abroad.
“This report discusses the costs of President Clinton’s 1998 trips to Africa, Chile, and China and executive branch accounting procedures for such expenses. GAO did not look at the travel costs of past presidents because the records were not readily available. Presidential travel abroad requires planning, coordination and logistical and personnel support. The estimated costs of the president’s trips to Africa, Chile and China were at least $42.8 million, $10.5 million, and $18.8 million, respectively. The largest costs consisted of (1) operating the president’s plane and aircraft; (2) travel expenses, including lodging; and (3) telecommunications, vehicle, and other equipment rentals and purchases in the countries visited. The executive branch lacks a single system to account for the cost of presidential travel overseas, and the agencies involved used various methods to account for expenses. The State Department routinely accounts for travel, equipment rental, and other costs to support presidential travel. Other agencies that incurred costs in support of the Africa, Chile, and China trips also had records on their costs.” From GAO Report, “Presidential Travel: Costs and Accounting for President’s 1998 Trips to China, Chile, and Africa.” Sept. 21, 1999.
“Fresh from his triumphant brokering of a Mideast peace accord, President Clinton seized upon his renewed clout and fundraising muscle yesterday to fire up California Democrats a week before Election Day. From Hollywood to San Francisco, Clinton basked in praise during a flurry of weekend appearances that raised $2 million for incumbent U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer and state Democrats.” Carla Marinucci, Chronicle political writer, Oct. 26, 1998.
“President Clinton is certain to claim credit for the good news as he returns to California today for the 29th visit of his presidency, his last before Tuesday’s election.” Marc Sandalow, Chronicle Washington Bureau, Oct. 31, 1996.
“The president’s ninth official trip to California was closely watched for any signs that he would express a preference regarding his support for candidates in the Oct. 7 recall, an all-consuming political drama that has overshadowed even the 2004 presidential race in recent weeks.” Carla Marinucci, Chronicle political writer, Aug. 15, 2003.
This equates to an average of three visits per year for President Bush in his first three years compared to 7.25 visits per year for President Clinton’s first term. You don’t have to be Stephen Hawking to figure out who “wasted” more taxpayers’ money on trips to the Golden State.
(Morris lives in Napa.)
All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on Napavalleyregister.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines,
click here.
kevin wrote on Aug 13, 2008 4:51 AM:
"One, two, three, four. Pick your pants up off the floor!"
Good times! "
funnyme wrote on Aug 13, 2008 5:35 AM:
I can hear the libs whining already :~ "
greysack wrote on Aug 13, 2008 7:39 AM:
nightwatchman wrote on Aug 13, 2008 8:18 AM:
I'm sure this crowd didn't complain at all about Clinton's trips. Although I shouldn't make assumptions about your priorities since you count philandering as a worse sin than killing innocent people. "
Dwayne wrote on Aug 13, 2008 8:29 AM:
Thanks, Art...... "
plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 13, 2008 9:14 AM:
freeport56 wrote on Aug 13, 2008 10:30 AM:
DeeDee Meyers:"So, you know, he's like "This is funny. Oh, this is great." So I think John puts something on the AP that said that Clinton had gotten his hair cut. Well somebody called the FAA or something. Some unnamed source at the FAA said, "Yeah, delayed aircraft," which became "delayed aircraft all over the country" which never was really true. And so did I think I had a big problem? The president got his hair cut on Air Force One. What's the problem with that? Okay. It's not a great idea maybe to have this sort of high priced Beverly Hills coiffure. We just won a populist campaign, not a great idea. But it's not the end of the world. I mean who cares?"
Frontline Interview with DeeDee Myers "
antipc wrote on Aug 13, 2008 10:34 AM:
PPF,
Do you hire out for gophers? My pasture is full of them & my cats are worthless. You will have to bring you own clubs. "
wipemedown wrote on Aug 13, 2008 12:22 PM:
a teacher wrote on Aug 13, 2008 12:55 PM:
What I find amusing is how so many right wing rants start off railing against "bush haters" and proceed straight to "clinton bashing".
Hypocrite: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings "
hear ye wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:05 PM:
I never had a problem with Bush coming here. That would indeed be hypocritical "
plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:11 PM:
I do not consider it one little bit hypocritical to volley the badminton back to the other side, and I will happily continue to do so. If you don't like it, look to yourselves first.
Here's something else to chew on: Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi make Dennis Hastert and Newt Gingrich look like super heroes. "
hear ye wrote on Aug 13, 2008 1:59 PM:
plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 13, 2008 3:25 PM:
I mainly threw that comment about Reid and Pelosi out there because it is true and it is time for some good old fashioned congressional bashing for a change. Now there's a group of folks who richly deserve it, both sides, up and down the aisle, past and present nogoodniks (a technical term from the cold war, for those of you born after the Reagan era). Congress has not received its fair share of criticism, and in general they have more effect on our everyday lives than the president does.
Ladies and gentlemen, start your hammers! "
a teacher wrote on Aug 13, 2008 3:36 PM:
Hear Ye wrote on Aug 13, 2008 5:54 PM:
Dwayne wrote on Aug 13, 2008 7:55 PM:
Right on, Toots...!!! "
diehard4ever wrote on Aug 13, 2008 9:43 PM:
As long as you don't try to turn the White House into a Pink Pond :) "
plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 13, 2008 9:47 PM:
We are like dogs barking through the fence, but one dog can't just stop and walk away. It's no fun for the other dog to just bark at nothing (although I have heard more solitary barkers than I would like - and I love dogs).
Holy cats! I just had an awful thought - what if we all started agreeing on everything? After a week half of us would be gone, within a month only Ruff would be left (multiple puns intended) to bark. "
russ wrote on Aug 14, 2008 7:49 PM:
Don't worry, as long as we have Ruff to bash, us NEO-CONS will be here. "