What best serves the national interest?
A president who is able to govern, confident in the safety of his family, or a president facing a terrorist demand that unless he does X, a video of his child’s decapitation will trend on social media?
The answer is obviously the former.
I note this point in light of the growing obsession with finding out how much the Secret Service spends protecting President Trump’s children on their foreign travels. In exchange for supporting overdue legislation to return the Secret Service to the Treasury Department, Democrats are demanding that the Secret Service publish its first family-related travel costs. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin is resisting these demands.
Let me educate Democrats on two key truths. First, it costs a lot to protect the first family. Second, this protection is absolutely necessary.
The first truth is explained by the manner in which the Secret Service secures its protectees. Under law, the president, the first lady, and the president’s children receive full-time protection details. Unlike most other global protective agencies, such as those responsible for securing the Pope or the British royal family and the prime minister, the Secret Service doesn’t skimp here. Each Secret Service shift rotation over a 24-hour period will have at least two agents on duty at any one time. It’s normally two to three times that number. The Secret Service will also send agents on repeated advance sweeps of locations that its protectees are due to visit. This adds up in cost (something Democrats didn’t mind during the Obama administration).
But with Trump’s first family, the costs are higher for a simple reason.
Biology.
This first family has seven members. Protecting the Trumps is thus inherently more expensive than protecting past first families. And while it’s true that Trump’s four adult children travel frequently, we must observe historical context. After all, the children of Presidents Barack Obama, George Bush, and Bill Clinton spent most of their father’s presidencies as minors. That inherently reduced their travel.
That takes us back to the basic point: Is the national interest served by the effective protection of the first family?
Democrats complain about the costs involved, but what’s their alternative solution?
The only one I can see is to say that Trump’s children should remain on U.S. soil for the duration of his presidency. But even that illiberal contention would miss the underlying issue — namely, that Trump’s children aren’t ultimately responsible for their security costs. Threats against America are responsible. The Secret Service could reduce costs by cutting the size of the details assigned to each member on foreign travel, but that would bring added risk.
I opposed accepting that risk for Obama’s children, I oppose it now, and I will oppose it in the future. All patriotic Americans should do the same.
