April 4, 2008
No Secret Service Protection For McCain
Washington Post: GOP Candidate Must Request Such Protection And Has Not Done So
-
Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., left, signs an autograph after delivering a speech at the Cecil Field FCCJ Aviation Hanger 14 in Jacksonville, Fla., Thursday, April 3, 2008, during his Service to America campaign tour. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)
-
Photo Essay John McCain Some call him a hero, some a maverick. Will Americans call him Mr. President?
-
Timeline McCain's Quest Mileposts in the Arizona senator's race for the GOP nomination and the presidency.
Weeks after clinching the Republican presidential nomination, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) still has no Secret Service protection and has not requested it, the head of the agency told Congress yesterday.
Director Mark Sullivan said the Secret Service does not provide agents, metal detectors, vehicles or other security measures to candidates until they ask for them. McCain's Democratic rivals, Sens. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton have round-the-clock Secret Service coverage.
"Statutorily he is not required to take protection," Sullivan said of McCain, in response to several questions from Rep. Ciro D. Rodriguez (D-Tex.) and Rep. Harold Rogers (R-Ky.). "As far as an actual request, we have not gotten one. We have no involvement at this point."
Rodriguez said he assumed that McCain's status as the presumptive Republican nominee required enhanced security and was surprised that McCain is allowed to campaign in large crowds without Secret Service protection.
"I just assumed that even if someone doesn't ask, that there are certain other levels of protection that are out there," said Rodriguez, who attended yesterday's hearing of the House Appropriations subcommittee on homeland security. "I just assumed that we would normally just do that automatically. . . . He's the nominee of the Republican Party, and we ought to have some levels of protection."
Obama began receiving protection in May 2007, 18 months before the election. Clinton already had protection because she is a former first lady.
Steve Schmidt, a senior McCain adviser, would not discuss the senator's security measures. Another top McCain aide said the campaign is "very unhappy" with Sullivan and wishes "he would have asked to answer [the lawmakers' questions] in a closed session."
White House spokesman Tony Fratto also declined to comment, saying: "We will let the Secret Service answer those questions. They obviously take their protective mission seriously." Jim Mackin, a Secret Service spokesman, declined to comment on why Sullivan made the disclosure in a public hearing.
McCain's choice not to request Secret Service protection has been mentioned on some blogs and was the subject of an article in the Arizona Republic newspaper. But it has not been reported by most news organizations, in part because of requests from his aides not to draw attention to the situation.
McCain does have private bodyguards who accompany him to events. When he travels on charter planes, reporters and staffers are screened by private security each time they board.
On one recent flight in Mississippi, a bomb-sniffing dog swept through the press bus before reporters were allowed to board McCain's Jet Blue charter.
But that level of security pales in comparison with the protection at Clinton and Obama campaign events, where Secret Service agents always are very visible, shadowing the Democratic candidates even when they are at rope lines with voters.
McCain, a former Navy pilot who spent 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, has long nurtured a tough-guy image. He has derided the Secret Service protection as "a waste of taxpayer money" and proudly proclaimed that he would reject the enhanced security as long as he could.
"It's my intention, if we win this nomination, to reject Secret Service. . . . Why do I need it?" he told reporters in mid-November, as he campaigned in New Hampshire. "The day that the Secret Service can assure me that if we're driving in the motorcade and there's a guy on a rooftop with a rifle, that they can stop that guy, then I'll say 'fine,' " he said. "But the day they tell me, 'Well, we can't guarantee it,' then, fine, I'll take my chances."
Former Secret Service agent Andrew O'Connell, who helped protect Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, said McCain is taking an unnecessary risk.
"I don't think it's a wise move," said O'Connell, now a managing director of Fortress Global Investigations, a New York-based security firm. "John McCain may believe that he's not as polarizing a figure as Hillary or Obama, but that's not the point. . . . The primary motivator of would-be assassins is not the dislike of the candidate. It's wanting to go out in a big way and make a name for yourself."
Once a candidate is elected president, he or she has no choice but to accept Secret Service protection. Until then, it must be requested. Since it became clear that McCain would be the GOP nominee, his advisers have become increasingly concerned about his safety and have urged reporters not to mention the lack of Secret Service protection.
Once a candidate requests protection, the decision about whether he will receive it falls to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. Chertoff is aided by a five-member advisory panel that includes the House speaker and minority leader, the Senate majority and minority leaders and an at-large member, who this year is the House sergeant-at-arms.
To be eligible, candidates must reach certain thresholds in fundraising and in the polls, and must belong to recognized political parties, Sullivan told lawmakers.
The Secret Service is spending about $38,000 per candidate per day, Sullivan said, and at the height of campaign season later this year expects to spend $44,000 per candidate each day. The agency has protected candidates at more than 1,000 campaign venues and has put 550,000 people through magnetometers and metal detectors, he said.
In a remarkably active election campaign, the Secret Service's budget for candidate protection is $85.3 million for fiscal 2008. For fiscal 2009, which begins Oct. 1, it is $41 million.
"This is going to be the costliest campaign in the Secret Service's history," said Rep. David E. Price (D-N.C.), the subcommittee chairman.
Washington Post Staff researcher Rena Kirsch contributed to this report.
By Michael D. Shear and Christopher Lee
© 2008 The Washington Post Company
More From Politics
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 61 CommentsSorry parrot, the difference b/w dems & ''repugs'' is we take care of ourselves. Have 4 close friends directly affected by Katrina and they got NO help from the Fed(big Suprise). (As an aside, the lesson I learned was the govt types just take care of themselves.) Lean on the government and you''ll end up falling down most every time.
What''''s the matter parrot, have a home you can''''t afford either? Need a handout?
Posted by thgdriver at 02:09 PM : Apr 04, 2008
No - just watching your backs .... since we''re all in this together and not just those losing their jobs or going through stuff. IMO, the basic difference between most people and today''s Repugs is that, most others are human and Repugs don''t care till it happens to them. Think some of those people affected by Katrina, whose homes were paid for and such, are still diehard Repugs after what they do know now. Cheers!
Posted by trishab4
Thats a good idea. He will keep his own people too I would think.
Thanks!!
More tax and spend, every time she and Obama open their mouths it costs me more in taxes. Ya gotta laugh to keep your sanity with those two!
You have Assassinated and killers spelled wrong, I don''''t give a damm but gwagener has set himself up as spell and grammar cop here. Look out!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by thgdriver at 01:27 PM : Apr 04, 2008
-here''s a good link for all that. Being a US president is a, risky, dangerous job... LOL!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidential_assassination_attempts
What''s the matter parrot, have a home you can''t afford either? Need a handout?
Kerry and his rich wife Heinz could have easily did the same in 04 but were to buried in greed.
"I don''t think it''s a wise move," said O''Connell, "John McCain may believe that he''s not as polarizing a figure as Hillary or Obama, but that''s not the point. . . . The primary motivator of would-be assassins is not the dislike of the candidate. It''s wanting to go out in a big way and make a name for yourself."
I think this just proves how Irrelevant he feels he is, in all this POTUS buisness. Why else would he refuse something so basic - could he really be Senile ??
Hillary wants to send everybody''s offspring to college on my dollar. I put my kids through college the dimwitocrats can do the same.
It will be one social program after the other on my tax dollar. Who''s surprised when you listen to them say " Everything is free, even the home you could not afford in the first place".
Kerry backed Obama and slammed a knife into John Edwards back so deep its surprising he was not arrested by the secret service. LOL.
so, why waste tax payers money on him.
The endless bleating about what Republicans "are" is always belied by how they act. A professed reverence for free speech is always followed by the caveat "except for expressing ideas we don''t like". Likewise freedom of religion, which is apparently only for Christians and maybe Jews (on good day). As for "fiscal responsibility" that''s the biggest laugh of all - Republicans are the biggest spenders when it comes to your tax dollars; you only have to look at the deficit, corporate welfare, pork spending and this endless war. They LOVE to spend your tax dollars on themselves.
Sorry, but all the evidence, every bit of it, shows that Republicans are corrupt and incompetent and not qualified to hold responsible positions anywhere in a free society. You wouldn''t hire a bank robber to run a bank, and you wouldn''t hire a Republican for the same reason.
Posted by trishab4
I disagree, Lincoln was a Republican and just because Reagan and Ford (both Repubs.) were not killed, it was not because their would be killers did not try.
You have Assassinated and killers spelled wrong, I don''t give a damm but gwagener has set himself up as spell and grammar cop here. Look out!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 61 Comments