Post-White House, a Pretty Good Deal

Long after they leave office, American presidents are still with us.

Many stay in the public eye, of course, calling attention to the Middle East peace process, AIDS or disaster relief. They give speeches for substantial sums and sometimes even stump for their spouse on the campaign trail.

All the while, in the limelight or out, they are still on the public dime.

There is the lifetime pension, in effect since Congress approved it in 1958. The award is taxable and pegged to the annual salary for Cabinet secretaries, which these days is $191,300, according to the Congressional Research Service.

But that is just the best-known ex-presidential perk. There are travel costs, postage, office rental and supplies. Former U.S. chief executives enjoy lifetime subsidies from the people they once served.

The White House's 2009 budget request seeks a total of more than $2.5 million to take care of surviving presidents' needs. That doesn't include the cost of providing Secret Service protection for them, a figure the federal government no longer releases for public consumption. The last available figure, from fiscal 2000, was $23.7 million.

Bruce Buchanan, a professor of government and presidential scholar at the University of Texas at Austin, said most Americans understand that former presidents continue to draw federal dollars, even if they don't know every detail of where the money goes.

"My guess is it's kind of a tacit collusion between the parties," Buchanan said. "They both occasionally have presidents, and they want their former presidents treated well. They are regarded as national resources. Most of them do good works and make good use of the money, and do gradually reduce the bite that they take out of the Treasury as time goes on. And they are seldom charity cases in any event."

Recently released tax returns show that former president Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) have earned more than $100 million since leaving the White House. President Bush and wife Laura reported income of nearly $924,000 last year, and have a ranch in central Texas and other substantial assets.

So, given the considerable resources and earning power of former presidents, is there an argument for ending some of their lifetime entitlements and awarding them only as needed?

"There could be, especially when you have presidents who accumulate what most would regard as fabulous wealth," said Buchanan, who added that such a change is highly unlikely. "The question is who has got the political capital to pursue it and who wants to use it on that issue."