The Inauguration is Decadent and Depraved
With the unemployment rate climbing higher and higher, public morale falling lower and lower, and everyone in the country thinking about the current economy situation here in America, Obama is planning on doing everything he can to make the situation better – including a reported $150 million blowout Inauguration celebration, the most expensive in US history.
The figure is based on compiled estimates, so the range is fairly fluid, ranging (depending on the news source) between $40-150 million. The figure to worry about, however, is $130.24 million: the money that Congress, the District of Columbia, the State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia have either asked the federal government for or have already put aside, and all of it comes from taxpayers.
The other problem that I see is another figure: the amount will be spent on parties, balls and celebrations. With performances by Beyonce, Mary J. Blige, Bono, Garth Brooks, Sheryl Crow, Renee Fleming, Josh Groban, Herbie Hancock, Heather Headley, John Legend, Jennifer Nettles, John Mellencamp, Usher, Shakira, Bruce Springsteen, James Taylor, will.i.am and Stevie Wonder, the day will be an all-out extravaganza – and that’s just for the Inauguration Kick-off event on January 18th.
Getting these artists to appear for just about anything is difficult and expensive, let alone something that actually matters. However, even presuming that these artists are benevolent enough to come free of cost, there are still no less than 10 Inaugural Balls, complete with VIP guest lists, musical performances, champagne on ice and a menu based on Abraham Lincoln’s favorite dishes. What the taxpayers and campaign donors will eat, however, is the cost of this extraordinary four-day bender (and perhaps, I’m sorry to say, our words).
Granted, these parties, balls and celebrations will not all be on the taxpayer dollar – in fact, most will not be. Most of the taxpayer money will be used for security and other expenses, while donors will pay for most of the celebrations. However, it is not the dollar amount of these that scares me, but rather the mentality: excessive spending on excessive security, all on the taxpayer dollar, and inordinate amounts on a profligate party to make Public Servant #1 feel welcome (apparently, 53% of the electorate’s vote, the $400,000 per year paycheck, the house, the car, the private jet, the private security, and executive privilege combined was simply not enough).
Do we really need this kind of spending at a time like this? Is this is the new symbol of American government: spending money we don’t have on things we don’t need – $130 million in taxes that could have gone to buying textbooks for schools, lowering the cost of health care, fixing our infrastructure, ensuring domestic tranquility, etc? Moreover, why couldn’t the $40 million in donations raised by the Presidential Inauguration Committee go into the market, or into buying American-made products to boost our economy?
In these tough economic times, Obama’s choice to throw such a lavish, masturbatory celebration is hardly the change for America he so often mentioned. In direct conflict with his promise to end “business as usual in Washington,” the Inauguration screams “let them eat cake” more than “change has come to America.”
I saw this post via my google reader & clicked on it to disagree with your piece. However, I found it remarkably ironic that every visable ad [the large one on the top right is not showing for me] was something related to Obama and in some cases the inauguration. But don’t worry, I will not soil your soul by clicking on one of the links and forcing you to personally profit from something you so clearly disdain.
The 10 balls are not the most ever held, I believe I read earlier that Reagan had more.
Just like the public attendance at the train stops today, there are these large events because people want to attend and participate. If taxpayers want to be a part of the process, are they not entitled? Everything from the HBO free broadcast of the celebration tomorrow to the Neighborhood Ball for me is consistent and representative of Obama’s reminders this election is not about him, but about those who participated, volunteered and voted.
If you disagree with President Elect Obama’s policies and positions, you should freely share them. However, you weaken your position with personal attacks like “masturbatory celebration.” To suggest that it is screams of “let them eat cake” suggests a lack of understanding of the contetxt of the quote.
When you laid out logical argument, while I personally disagreed with you, I could at least respect your opinion and appreciate the validity of some of your concerns.
All the best to you.
RuthDFW,
I am not actually against Obama (I actually voted for him…), but rather against this mentality we have developed over the years of grossly inappropriate spending practices.
I do think that this is a masturbatory event (as every Inauguration has been), and I’m fully aware of the meaning of “Let them eat cake,” by which, of course, I am indicating that while the American citizen continues to struggle economically, the government feels free to spend $130 million in tax dollars to welcome in the Commander-In-Chief – to which I say, in the same spirit, “vive la Revolution!”
It is completely valid that the American public is invited to the event – if you are going, travel safely. However, my issue was not that the government seemed closed off, but rather that it was guilty of derelict spending practices that have plagued our government for years.
I really do hope that this is the last we will see of this kind of decision-making from Obama – there is hope in his call to close Guantanamo – but I fear that it is too much a part of our system now.
I’m glad we still have the freedom in this country for you and I to respectfully disagree. Thanks for your continued support of We The People Politics, and take care.
Sean, thanks your follow-up comments provided better context, even though I still disagree.
No, I elected to watch the events from the comfort of my couch in Dallas. A part of me wanted to attend but was realistic enough to know I could not possibly stand for that long & not a crowd person.
As to the money spent, look at this way, the DC economy is receiving a brief “stimulus” bonus.
Sean, even though I did not vote for Obama, I can appreciate the historical event that is his inauguration. However, I completely agree with your assessment of this excessive spending in our current economic state, and it is refreshing to see someone who voted for him look at his actions in an unbiased and fair way, as most of his following seem to be blindly bound up in an “Obama can do no wrong” mind set. Regardless of how much people who participated may want to celebrate, this is not leading America by example.
And by the way, I didn’t know you were writing for any political sites…congrats!
This inauguration is truly historic. But with our unemployment rate spiking to its highest point in years i dont think that an extravagent blowout is the way to show that your ready to change. Just as the artical suggests, if every one of the 10 or so parties is privately hosted that still doesnt cover the cost of the government employees. You have secret service, fbi, nsa, cst, and tons of other organizations with the multi letter abreviations which we will never even know about, recieving triple time and hazard pay to protect the president while hes out galavanting across DC. And not to mention the government contracted services such as sdic and blackwater who are on deployment pay to provide hammer and hazmat teams accross the dc area just in case. Than the extreme cost to the states as well with fire, police, and ems all recieving max overtime to standby. We have made history with the election, and election based on change, and we should make history by tuning down this inauguration to change the way we as americans have come accustomed to living outside of our means.