The Washington Post ran two inaugural updates this morning.
According to the Post, the Presidential Inaugural Committee has announced that it will hold ten official inaugural balls in five locations. These are the only balls where the first and second families are certain to make an appearance the night of January 20th. Six of the balls will be held at the Washington Convention Center, with the remaining four at the National Building Museum, Union Station, the Washington Hilton and the D.C Armory. Attendance at the balls is sorted geographically, with ticket holders from various parts of the country attending together. The five sites are guaranteed to be tightly guarded by Secret Service, with long lines expected and traffic severely curtailed in the surrounding streets. Ten balls is more than either of George W Bush’s inaugurations, while falling short of the record of fourteen, set by Bill Clinton in 1997.
Additionally, the Post reports that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff met with DC mayor Adrian Fenty and the governors of Maryland and Virginia to discuss the incipient road and rail fiasco as millions of people arriving for the inauguration test the limits of the Washington Metropolitan Area’s transportation infrastructure. It seems that the gravity of the situation may suddenly becoming real to elected officials and their representatives. Obamapalooza has reported extensively on the likelihood that tens of thousands of people trying to get into DC for inauguration festivities will be stranded on over-crowded train platforms and in gridlocked traffic backed up for miles. Robert Crouch, homeland security advisor to Virginia governor Tim Kaine told the Post, “[traffic] is part of where the major focus will turn, so that people don’t spend hours, if not days on the interstate.”
Days, people. Days.
Showing posts with label Presidential Inaugural Committee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Presidential Inaugural Committee. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Abrahamapalooza 2.0
First he settled on following the tail leg of Lincoln’s whistle stop tour to the 1861 inauguration, deciding to travel by train from Philadelphia to Washington January 17, 2009. Now Barack Obama will swear his allegiance to the Constitution on a bible once owned by the sixteenth president, the Presidential Inaugural Committee announced yesterday.
Owning to a combination of Obama’s personal admiration for his predecessor and a knack for political showmanship, the 2009 inauguration will be full of nods to Lincoln. True the men have something in common. Both were adopted sons of Illinois who began their careers in Illinois state politics. Both were long shot candidates, political outsiders often ridiculed for their backgrounds, appearances and lack of the traditional presidential trappings. But much of the Lincoln-Obama parallel results from circumstance and shrewd stagecraft.
Obama has chosen to arrive at his inauguration on a train from Philadelphia, after a stop in Baltimore, as Lincoln did in 1861. Obama will take the oath of office with his hand on Lincoln’s bible. During Obama’s swearing in on the west steps of the US Capitol he will look across the National Mall to the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, where Martin Luther King gave the most important speech of the civil rights era forty-five years ago.
If any theme has predominance in Obama’s nascent presidency it is reconciliation. He has stocked his cabinet, as Lincoln did, with rivals. He has reached across party lines, inviting prominent Republicans to join his cohort. In the selection of Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation, Obama showed that embracing the evangelical right at least symbolically was worth alienating an important and influential part of the left.
The inauguration is our first glimpse at what the Obama presidency will be like, apart from the bluster and promise of the primary and general elections. It is the first fruit of Obama policy. In the choice of Lincoln as a symbol and a role model, Obama promises to follow ideals rather than political expediencies. Hopefully he can live up to that promise.
Owning to a combination of Obama’s personal admiration for his predecessor and a knack for political showmanship, the 2009 inauguration will be full of nods to Lincoln. True the men have something in common. Both were adopted sons of Illinois who began their careers in Illinois state politics. Both were long shot candidates, political outsiders often ridiculed for their backgrounds, appearances and lack of the traditional presidential trappings. But much of the Lincoln-Obama parallel results from circumstance and shrewd stagecraft.
Obama has chosen to arrive at his inauguration on a train from Philadelphia, after a stop in Baltimore, as Lincoln did in 1861. Obama will take the oath of office with his hand on Lincoln’s bible. During Obama’s swearing in on the west steps of the US Capitol he will look across the National Mall to the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, where Martin Luther King gave the most important speech of the civil rights era forty-five years ago.
If any theme has predominance in Obama’s nascent presidency it is reconciliation. He has stocked his cabinet, as Lincoln did, with rivals. He has reached across party lines, inviting prominent Republicans to join his cohort. In the selection of Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation, Obama showed that embracing the evangelical right at least symbolically was worth alienating an important and influential part of the left.
The inauguration is our first glimpse at what the Obama presidency will be like, apart from the bluster and promise of the primary and general elections. It is the first fruit of Obama policy. In the choice of Lincoln as a symbol and a role model, Obama promises to follow ideals rather than political expediencies. Hopefully he can live up to that promise.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Looking Out For Number One (& For Number Two)
In what is either a serious downgrading of expected inauguration turnout or a bureaucratic snafu waiting in the wings, Presidental Inaugural Committee executive director Emmett Beliveau announced that 5,000 portable toilets will be made available for the inauguration.
While that may sound like a lot, 2,200 portable toilets were on hand for George W Bush’s 2005 inauguration, which 300,000 people attended. That’s one porta-potty for every 136 people. If two million people attend the noon swearing-in ceremony and the 2:30 inaugural parade, 5,000 toilets will provide one seven-foot plastic sanctuary for every 400 people, exceeding the National Park Service’s recommendation of one per 300.
Does this mean the Obama inaugural committee expects a lower than predicted turnout? Or has Mr Beliveau fudged his toilet algebra?
Obamapalooza thinks the latter.
Of those 5,000 toilets, only 1,000 will be arrayed along the Mall, with 3,500 dotting the parade route. Surely at least as many people will attend Obama’s inaugural ceremony as will attend the parade. Beliveau’s toilet algebra would have three times as many people attending the latter, which, if a smaller than expected crowd of 1.5 million comes for the inauguration, would mean the Obama team anticipates a crowd of about 350,000 to watch his swearing-in.
500,000 turned out to watch Obama’s victory speech in Chicago on Election Day. It is highly unlikely, given numerous estimates putting expected attendance somewhere between two and five million, that fewer people would turn out for Obama’s inaugural ceremony than did his Chicago victory speech, particularly as they are coming to Washington specifically for the inauguration.
Even a Mall crowd of 700,000 – twice the figure required to validate Beliveau’s equations – seems conservative. If a lowball estimate of 1.5 million people come to Washington on Inauguration Day, would more than half of them really opt to miss the swearing-in?
Obamapalooza predicts at least one million people fill the National Mall on Inauguration Day, at a bladder/toilet ratio of a 1,000:1.
Mr Beliveau, get your mop.
While that may sound like a lot, 2,200 portable toilets were on hand for George W Bush’s 2005 inauguration, which 300,000 people attended. That’s one porta-potty for every 136 people. If two million people attend the noon swearing-in ceremony and the 2:30 inaugural parade, 5,000 toilets will provide one seven-foot plastic sanctuary for every 400 people, exceeding the National Park Service’s recommendation of one per 300.
Does this mean the Obama inaugural committee expects a lower than predicted turnout? Or has Mr Beliveau fudged his toilet algebra?
Obamapalooza thinks the latter.
Of those 5,000 toilets, only 1,000 will be arrayed along the Mall, with 3,500 dotting the parade route. Surely at least as many people will attend Obama’s inaugural ceremony as will attend the parade. Beliveau’s toilet algebra would have three times as many people attending the latter, which, if a smaller than expected crowd of 1.5 million comes for the inauguration, would mean the Obama team anticipates a crowd of about 350,000 to watch his swearing-in.
500,000 turned out to watch Obama’s victory speech in Chicago on Election Day. It is highly unlikely, given numerous estimates putting expected attendance somewhere between two and five million, that fewer people would turn out for Obama’s inaugural ceremony than did his Chicago victory speech, particularly as they are coming to Washington specifically for the inauguration.
Even a Mall crowd of 700,000 – twice the figure required to validate Beliveau’s equations – seems conservative. If a lowball estimate of 1.5 million people come to Washington on Inauguration Day, would more than half of them really opt to miss the swearing-in?
Obamapalooza predicts at least one million people fill the National Mall on Inauguration Day, at a bladder/toilet ratio of a 1,000:1.
Mr Beliveau, get your mop.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
