You might not be the only one who thinks a raise would be nice — the Secret Service has requested an extra $9.5 million bucks to finish the job of protecting the presidential candidates. I know, everyone wants more money, right? Well this request seems pretty legit.
This campaign has been like no other in its length and trips abroad. That effort adds up. Not to mention changes like Obama's decision to accept the Democratic nomination at Denver's open-air, 76,000-seat stadium instead of easier policed 20,000-seat Pepsi Center, where the rest of the convention takes place.
Then there's the length of service; Obama requested and received Secret Service protection in May — of 2007. That's the earliest the agency (who started the practice candidates in 1968) has ever started tailing a candidate. McCain got his protection April 27 this year. Even though the Secret Service Agency budgeted more than $30 million above 2004 levels, it's still not enough. Congress is currently considering the request for more money.
So here's the question in my mind: is it the responsibility of the taxpayers to fund unlimited security to the campaigns? Should there be a set amount, above which if a candidate wants to make decisions like heading abroad or speaking in a stadium, the campaign has to pay?