Quote:
Originally posted by pan6467
If we were in prosperous times and cities weren't facing financial bankruptcy, I could maybe see this. But I just think going on personal business and expecting the taxpayers to pay or the cities to pay is ridiculous.
You can't tell me Cheney couldn't come up with some "official" reason to be there.
As for the Clinton statement, perhaps he did. But did we ever hear of Gore doing this? Course during Gore's VP stretch I don't recall him doing much at all. Hell, he didn't even say much to deflect the problems Clinton was having. Was Gore ever on record about Lewinsky? Just a curious aside. Sorry thinking and typing only leads to rambling off topic.)
|
Gore was at least as bad as Clinton. Fund raising is fundraising it's done all the time.
If people really want to get into the subject you then have to weigh what towns gain from such visits. In plenty of cases they gain substantial "tourism" dollars from those attending such events. Like most things it's not as simple as that which is portrayed in the news. Hotel stays, car rentals, spending at restaurants, etc, etc, etc typically go up the day(s) preceding such gala events.
This is all pretty much a non-issue. As stated before, localities can pass local legislation requiring any events that force financial outlays by the town to be covered by parties involved prior to the events occurring. They didn't do it. No doubt they knew before now that they would incur costs yet suddenly it's a big issue? Please.