Political Communication blog

No, I don't think one is needed. And honestly, the president's salary is almost a formality too. I can understand that there may be some need for some kind of income for the 4 to 8 years that president's terms last, but for the most part, the perks seem to be enormous. (If you momentarily ignore all the stresses and problems that also come with the job.) And it only gets better once they leave, with book deals and speaking tours and such.
 

I agree with Dan.. to someextent. I hardly think $400,000 is a formality? I know its not that much money in the grand scheme of tings.. but its still almost half a million year. However, i do think if they upped the presidents salary or offered the first lady a salary the American public wouldnt look favorably at it. If the first lady was offered a salary it could have many negative effects.. first off the dynamics of marriage would be changed. That is one of the most notable marriages inn the country (think about how many presidents are elected without being married?) Well if the first lady was offered a salary, then that position would become a JOB (which it already is, but the govt. does not recognize it as a "job"). If the govt. chose to rcognize it as a job then the public would eventually see it as so also.. this would eventually change the dynamics of presidential races.
 

I didn't mean to minimize the amount of the president's salary, I just meant that compared to all the other benefits of being president, it's fairly small change. A salary just to say that the job comes with one.

However, put the amount in some perspective. It's less than the amount that he wants to set, to limit CEO pay for bailed out companies-- an amount that Republicans have said was not much money.

And it's 1/1000th of the amount former Exxon CEO Lee Raymond got as his retirement package in 2006. If you wonder why gas prices have been so high in recent years, one possible reason is that the oil company CEOs are getting nearly half a billion dollar paychecks.
 

No, I don't feel that the first lady should receive a salary because she doesn't have any "job requirements" by simply being married to a president. Though there is enormous responsibility and tasks at hand for a woman I'm this position, she is not contributing in a professional sense to the country or government.
 

There have been several First Ladies, such as Eleanor Roosevelt, Hillary Clinton and even Nancy Reagan, who might disagree with that. :)
 

The first lady does an assortment of work in the public eye that is required; the people of the country expect so much from her. When I think of a first lady I don't think of the mothering she will be doing or law firm she is a part of. I think of the duties she has to fulfill for her title recieved when her husband became president. She even brought her mother in to help raise and care for her children while her family resides there. The dynamics and daily life of that family has to be stressful. She does so many things in the public eye as well as her private life with her family. I think she deserves so much more credit and even a salary for her work done.
 

I do not feel that the first lady should recieve a salary. Sure she has regular public appearances, events, etc. but the well-being I guess you could say rests in the hands of the President. I'm sure it is very difficult to be the first lady and I cannot begin to imagine their duties in the public eye and just with their family after they have won the election, but after all the president is the leader of our country.
 

I don't think that the first lady deserves a salary neither. If she has all those advantages for being the presidents wife then what does she need extra money for? I mean we work for our necessities and by being the presidents wife all of her needs are meet and more. I know that being first lady is a lot of work also but they're not the one making the major decisions and doing the major work. So what would be the purpose of them getting paid? Just to support their spouse? If that's the case they're suppose to do that anyways because that's what marriage is about.
 

No.