HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama signs law giving hi...

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:47 PM

Obama signs law giving himself, Bush, Others lifetime Secret Service guard.

Former presidents have to give up rides on Air Force One. But now they don't have to give up being shadowed by the armed-and-earpieced bodyguards of the Secret Service.

President Barack Obama on Thursday signed into a law a measure giving him, George W. Bush and future former presidents and their spouses lifetime Secret Service protection, the White House announced.

The legislation, crafted by Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, rolls back a mid-1990s law that imposed a 10-year limit on Secret Service protection for former presidents. Bush would have been the first former commander in chief affected.

At the time, lawmakers who supported the measure said it would save the government millions of dollars. They also argued that former presidents could hire private security firms (as Richard Nixon did after he decided to forgo Secret Service protection in 1985).

The rest: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-signs-law-giving-himself-bush-lifetime-secret-184305122--politics.html

54 replies, 3037 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 54 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama signs law giving himself, Bush, Others lifetime Secret Service guard. (Original post)
JaneyVee Jan 2013 OP
samsingh Jan 2013 #1
JaneyVee Jan 2013 #4
RKP5637 Jan 2013 #2
gollygee Jan 2013 #3
hlthe2b Jan 2013 #5
liberal N proud Jan 2013 #12
graham4anything Jan 2013 #6
still_one Jan 2013 #7
Recursion Jan 2013 #8
jeff47 Jan 2013 #10
Crazy Combo Jan 2013 #9
Daemonaquila Jan 2013 #49
bluestateguy Jan 2013 #11
benld74 Jan 2013 #13
Paladin Jan 2013 #14
SheilaT Jan 2013 #15
sadbear Jan 2013 #16
SheilaT Jan 2013 #17
Scurrilous Jan 2013 #18
EOTE Jan 2013 #20
SheilaT Jan 2013 #26
EOTE Jan 2013 #35
Jennicut Jan 2013 #36
former9thward Jan 2013 #27
EOTE Jan 2013 #34
former9thward Jan 2013 #42
pa28 Jan 2013 #53
MADem Jan 2013 #38
ProSense Jan 2013 #25
GoCubsGo Jan 2013 #32
NCTraveler Jan 2013 #46
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #19
EOTE Jan 2013 #22
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #24
EOTE Jan 2013 #41
Waiting For Everyman Jan 2013 #21
BeeBee Jan 2013 #23
GoCubsGo Jan 2013 #30
WI_DEM Jan 2013 #28
lpbk2713 Jan 2013 #29
2Design Jan 2013 #31
Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #33
MADem Jan 2013 #37
Marrah_G Jan 2013 #39
lunatica Jan 2013 #40
jwirr Jan 2013 #43
markpkessinger Jan 2013 #44
hunter Jan 2013 #45
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #47
Motown_Johnny Jan 2013 #48
Blasphemer Jan 2013 #50
kestrel91316 Jan 2013 #51
NYC Liberal Jan 2013 #52
backscatter712 Jan 2013 #54

Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:48 PM

1. i think this is a good thing. i was worried about what would happen because of this 10 year rule

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samsingh (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:50 PM

4. I think its good as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:49 PM

2. Excellent!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:49 PM

3. Good

Honestly, crazies might still go after W in a few years, and of course they might go after Obama 8 years after he's out of office. I think this is very wise. They still need to be protected, regardless of party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:52 PM

5. I know Cheney is still getting protection... Did this get extended to VPs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:04 PM

12. Under the law that went into effect under Clinton they get 10 years

Not sure if lifetime extends to VP's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:54 PM

6. Good.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:55 PM

7. I have no problem with that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:57 PM

8. I thought they already had that?

It surprises me that this wasn't already the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:00 PM

10. They did, it got turned off during the Clinton administration, and now it's back on.

Since it passed during Clinton's time in office, W would have been the first one affected by the new law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:59 PM

9. Obama should have signed for himself, and not for Chimp.

 

Taxpayers should not have to be paying for the Chimp to have Secret Service. Just dump him in a bar and 100,000 cash, and he'll be fine right there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Crazy Combo (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:42 PM

49. Hardly!

You know how much blow costs? He'll be out in a week, and back on the streets endangering the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:01 PM

11. I support this

We need to protect all of our former presidents from nutjobs and terrorists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:07 PM

13. Gawd, it would suck to be W's SS man wouldn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benld74 (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 03:17 PM

14. Obama's Secret Service Detail Will Be In Harms Way A Lot More Than W's.


If you're just talking about which ex-president will be better company, you have a point: the guy with a functioning brain is preferable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:06 PM

15. Bad idea. Really bad idea.

All of our other former presidents seem to have managed quite nicely giving up Secret Service protection. This is just a continuation of the Imperial Presidency, and I'm disgusted to learn this.

And yeah, it may actually add a trivial amount to the cost of government, but why add anything at all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:09 PM

16. Because of that dipshit who yesterday said he's gonna kill some people...

if the government tries to take his guns.

Among others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #16)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:13 PM

17. So let's go take away all the guns instead.

We're creating a class of people who are not part of the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:15 PM

18. Eh, what?

Seeking protection from the racist trash that has made death threats against him throughout his presidency?

How imperial of him!!1!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:16 PM

20. Whaa whaa whaaaaaaaa? What other president has ever had to give up Secret Service protection?

I'm sure you'll be able to provide one. And yeah, why would we add a trivial amount to the cost of government when we have psychos everywhere who want to kill the president?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:28 PM

26. Oh. I thought there had been a ten year limit on secret service protection.

And that's what got changed.

I still don't think it should be forever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #26)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:36 PM

35. There was, but it never had a chance to go into effect.

Bush would have been the first to have to give his up. And psychotics carry a grudge for a very long time. If there was ever a person who should have lifetime protection, regardless of whether I share their ideologies or not, it's the president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #26)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:39 PM

36. It used to be for life until 1997.

Then Congress changed it. This has nothing to do with any imperial presidency. The amount of threats toward Presidents seems to b getting worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:29 PM

27. The OP says Nixon gave up his.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #27)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:35 PM

34. He didn't have to. He voluntarily gave it up so he could hire his own protection. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #34)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:50 PM

42. Maybe we should do a means test.

If they are rich let them hire their security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #42)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 07:51 PM

53. Absolutely. This is the right answer. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:44 PM

38. That was my question, too--the only one I know who gave it up did it voluntarily.

Nixon didn't want government people in his house, so he hired his own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:26 PM

25. What are you talking about?

"All of our other former presidents seem to have managed quite nicely giving up Secret Service protection."

Bill Clinton and all the Presidents before him still have Secret Service protection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:33 PM

32. All?

Only Nixon gave up his protection. The rest had it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:09 PM

46. If I read this correctly, all Presidents since 1901 have been afforded a lifetime off SS detail.

Nixon personally requested no SS after a certain period. Clinton would have been the first to have fallen under the 10 year rule.

Are you really disgusted that Carter has gotten a lifetime of SS detail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:15 PM

19. How is this a bad thing? Deranged people have been trying to kill this black man ever since he

announced his candidacy. Good thing!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #19)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:17 PM

22. Those who believe this is a bad thing (at least at DU) are in a very small minority. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:24 PM

24. Hello, fellow Marylander.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #24)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:49 PM

41. Hello to you as well. Go Ravens!

Although I also spent a significant time in Wisconsin, so this year I'm hoping for a Packers/Ravens Superbowl.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:17 PM

21. Good.

They should have this. There usually aren't that many ex-presidents alive at a time anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:18 PM

23. I don't have a problem with this at all. I thought it was odd when they changed it. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeeBee (Reply #23)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:32 PM

30. Not that odd if you look back at the times.

It was Gingrich's "Contract on America" era. Congress was almost as nutty then as they are now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:31 PM

28. Excellent!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:32 PM

29. Chimpy will need lifetime protection.




He ruined so many lives that it would be understandable for many to want to get even.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:32 PM

31. I thought they wanted to cut spending - they are already rich and can pay for their own

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:34 PM

33. I would have hated to have seen any of our ex-presidents assassinated.

Violence against politicians is nothing new, keeping it from happening is a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:41 PM

37. It's a new world, and I agree--we should "revert back" to providing lifetime security.

This now-restored old paradigm allows a president to just retire if he'd like, and have a measure of safety. Otherwise, the former leader has to pay a team, and that is not cheap, which means he (or she) would have to work, to get out on the speaking circuit, write that book, get involved in commercial practices, just to be able to afford to pay his (or her) protectors a decent wage. The presidential retirement is a really fine payday, but it isn't enough to pay for a team of round-the-clock protectors.

Also, it's another venue for very young, or very old, secret service members. Some older guys, especially, can't keep up with a world leader on the international stage, but they can keep up with a retired one. Some younger guys need a little training in the field before they go on to the Big Show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:47 PM

39. I think this is a good thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:49 PM

40. Unfortunately it's a necessity in this modern world

I'm glad they extended it to be for life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:53 PM

43. I think this is needed in today's world. I do not think the threats to him and others are going to

end any time soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:56 PM

44. I have no problem with this, regardless of which former president it happens to be n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:58 PM

45. I imagine there is a lot of desk work involved, sorting the real threats from the blowhard threats.

Private security firms wouldn't have easy access to Secret Service records and this might make them less effective.

Worse, private security firms wouldn't be accountable to anyone but the former President, and this would not be a good thing if this former President was involved in criminal enterprises.

Lifetime Secret Service protections for former Presidents is very a reasonable use of our taxes.

I'd feel much less secure as a citizen if I saw former presidents hiring their own private military security forces, especially the rotten former presidents.

The Secret Service is accountable to the current government, not the former president. A private police force is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:21 PM

47. HR347 makes it a federal crime to protest where secret service are present. No protesting Bush!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:23 PM

48. This is a good thing.

No bitching here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 06:25 PM

50. It never should have been changed

The Nixon example shows that former POTUS can opt out if he or she chooses but it should always be available to them. Some may need lifetime protection less than others but it's impossible to predict the future events that would impact the necessity of this protection. Both Bush and Obama are examples of Presidents who will need protection beyond the 10 year point. They both are/will be high profile targets for international and domestic terrorists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 07:46 PM

51. GOOD, I always felt this law was passed for the specific purpose of making it easier for

future former DEMOCRATIC presidents to be murdered by RW fascists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 07:50 PM

52. I support this 100%.

Even a former president is an extremely high-value target, and they remain so for the rest of their life no matter what else they do. No way they can change that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 07:53 PM

54. Unfortunately, Pres. Obama's gonna need that protection.

There are so many violent crazies out there. The Secret Service already has its hands full dealing with death threats against Pres. Obama and potential assassination plots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread