U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:24 PM
 
29,984 posts, read 40,471,758 times
Reputation: 12800

Advertisements

And guess who gets to pay for it? The American taxpayers!

I know the Secret Service exists to protect our highest level elected officials. But, I'm quite certain they do not exist for the official receiving taxpayer funded protection to financially profit from it.

Biden collects rent from Secret Service - Washington Times


Quote:
The U.S. Secret Service does more than protect Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. — the agency also pays him rent.

Since April, Mr. Biden has collected more than $13,000 from the agency charged with protecting him and his family for use of a rental cottage adjacent to the waterfront home he owns in a Wilmington, Del., suburb.

Mr. Biden, listed not as vice president in federal purchasing documents but as a “vendor,” is eligible for up to $66,000 by the time the government contract expires in the fall of 2013, the records show.

Last edited by lifelongMOgal; 08-01-2011 at 01:50 PM.. Reason: typo
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:26 PM
 
Location: State of Being
35,883 posts, read 71,730,023 times
Reputation: 22620
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
And guess who gets to pay for it? The American taxpayers!

I know the Sectret Service exists to protect our highest level elected officials. But, I'm quite certain they do not exist for the official receiving taxpayer funded protection to financially profit from it.

Biden collects rent from Secret Service - Washington Times
He should be providing free rent and board for them instead of charging them, lol. I mean - no one is charging Biden for the services the SS provides to him and his family . . .but I would suspect it is all legal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:28 PM
 
Location: On Top
12,387 posts, read 12,471,796 times
Reputation: 4027
Yes we should all expect our bosses to pay our rent....great idea!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Neither here nor there
14,810 posts, read 15,206,697 times
Reputation: 32973
Milking the taxpayer to enrich themselves is a national pastime. It probably knows no political boundaries and while this is apparently not illegal, nevertheless, it crosses an ethical line.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:32 PM
 
11,922 posts, read 13,887,951 times
Reputation: 8003
This is a sticky one isn't it?

So, whenever the Secret Service has to guard an official, they rent a property nearby that person for their "command center" so to speak. Prior to 2010, they rented a home a few miles away from Biden and paid rent to whoever owned THAT property.

Biden's mother passed away and the property adjacent to him became vacant. He informed the Secret Service that it was vacant and available. They declined. He moved another tenant in for a year and charged that tenant $2,200 per month rent. That tenant vacated and the Secret Service approached Biden about renting his place. It was agreed, the Secret Service was charged market value for the rent, as anyone else would do if they were renting it out.

So, I'm wondering what the hullabaloo is about. Is it the fact that the Secret Service should just be renting someone else's place so they can have a command center not owned by the VP, even though it's probably a heck of a lot more convenient?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:34 PM
 
29,984 posts, read 40,471,758 times
Reputation: 12800
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
He should be providing free rent and board for them instead of charging them, lol. I mean - no one is charging Biden for the services the SS provides to him and his family . . .but I would suspect it is all legal.
Frankly, perhaps we should be charging these official a percentage of their salary for just that. Let them make the choice of how much security they wish to fund out of pocket. It would immediately cut the luxury trips Michelle takes the girls and a dozen of her close friends on (Paris, Spain, S. Africa....)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
This is a sticky one isn't it?

So, whenever the Secret Service has to guard an official, they rent a property nearby that person for their "command center" so to speak. Prior to 2010, they rented a home a few miles away from Biden and paid rent to whoever owned THAT property.

Biden's mother passed away and the property adjacent to him became vacant. He informed the Secret Service that it was vacant and available. They declined. He moved another tenant in for a year and charged that tenant $2,200 per month rent. That tenant vacated and the Secret Service approached Biden about renting his place. It was agreed, the Secret Service was charged market value for the rent, as anyone else would do if they were renting it out.

So, I'm wondering what the hullabaloo is about. Is it the fact that the Secret Service should just be renting someone else's place so they can have a command center not owned by the VP, even though it's probably a heck of a lot more convenient?
You do not see the conflict of interest in a member of the Executive Branch personally profiting from a taxpayer funded service to protect their sorry backside? Really?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:38 PM
 
11,922 posts, read 13,887,951 times
Reputation: 8003
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Frankly, perhaps we should be charging these official a percentage of their salary for just that. Let them make the choice of how much security they wish to fund out of pocket. It would immediately cut the luxury trips Michelle takes the girls and a dozen of her close friends on (Paris, Spain, S. Africa....)
Just get this little law changed and, yep, we can do that:

Quote:
Protection for the President and Vice President of the United States is mandatory. All other individuals entitled to Secret Service protection may decline security if they choose.
www.secretservice.gov
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:40 PM
 
Location: State of Being
35,883 posts, read 71,730,023 times
Reputation: 22620
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
This is a sticky one isn't it?

So, whenever the Secret Service has to guard an official, they rent a property nearby that person for their "command center" so to speak. Prior to 2010, they rented a home a few miles away from Biden and paid rent to whoever owned THAT property.

Biden's mother passed away and the property adjacent to him became vacant. He informed the Secret Service that it was vacant and available. They declined. He moved another tenant in for a year and charged that tenant $2,200 per month rent. That tenant vacated and the Secret Service approached Biden about renting his place. It was agreed, the Secret Service was charged market value for the rent, as anyone else would do if they were renting it out.

So, I'm wondering what the hullabaloo is about. Is it the fact that the Secret Service should just be renting someone else's place so they can have a command center not owned by the VP, even though it's probably a heck of a lot more convenient?
Totally understand what you are saying but it just looks bad, since Biden is not paying for the SS services, but instead is getting revenue b/c the nature of the job requires SS to be in close proximity.

Folks would probably not have said anything if he had been willing to sacrifice the rent and just charge the SS for utilities or whatever the taxes are on that property. Just looks greedy on his part - to accept "free" services and then charge rent so that agents can perform their duty.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:41 PM
 
29,984 posts, read 40,471,758 times
Reputation: 12800
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
Just get this little law changed and, yep, we can do that:


www.secretservice.gov
The thread topic is not challenging the validity of providing Secret Service. It is challenging the validity of the individual being protected financially profiting from that service. Get it yet?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-01-2011, 12:43 PM
 
25,626 posts, read 33,842,493 times
Reputation: 23198
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Frankly, perhaps we should be charging these official a percentage of their salary for just that. Let them make the choice of how much security they wish to fund out of pocket. It would immediately cut the luxury trips Michelle takes the girls and a dozen of her close friends on (Paris, Spain, S. Africa....)



You do not see the conflict of interest in a member of the Executive Branch personally profiting from a taxpayer funded service to protect their sorry backside? Really?
I am betting John Adams would **** a cow over the crap that goes on with America's Government Aristocracy.

What a double wide with bunk beds cant be a command center?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:09 PM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top