Just because you’re coming to Washington during a once-in-a-generation economic crisis, that doesn’t mean you have to scrimp on the parties:
(CNN) – The global economy may be undergoing a significant downturn, but the White House’s dinner budget still appears flush with cash.
After all, world leaders who are in town to discuss the economic crisis are set to dine in style Friday night while sipping wine listed at nearly $500 a bottle.
According to the White House, tonight’s dinner to kick off the G-20 summit includes such dishes as “Fruitwood-smoked Quail,” “Thyme-roasted Rack of Lamb,” and “Tomato, Fennel and Eggplant Fondue Chanterelle Jus.”
To wash it all down, world leaders will be served Shafer Cabernet “Hillside Select” 2003, a wine that sells at $499 on Wine.com.
The exceedingly pricey wine may seem a bit peculiar given leaders are in Washington to discuss a possible world financial meltdown, but Sally McDonough, a spokeswoman for Laura Bush, said it “was the most appropriate wine that we had in the White House wine cellar for such a gathering.
Why couldn’t they just go down to Trader Joe’s and get a few cases of Two Buck Chuck ?
Aren’t we all supposed to be tightening our belts ?
November 16th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Ya! No kidding! Junior (George Jr.) could have done that one cheaper. Junior could have fried hambergers and brats, Laura could have baked a crazy cake and they could have washed it down with some soda from Wal Mart. Now, what would Obama have done? Malt liqior of course!
November 16th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
This wine retails for as little as $135 and the winery suggests a retail price of around $235. Chances are that the White House paid around 35% to 50% of the MSRP.
The CNN folks either got sloppy or intended to sensationalize a non-topic.
This is not a case of callous and insulated-from-reality bourgeois quaffing delicate elixirs while the streets burn. This is a diplomatic dinner with foreign dignitaries. The White House should serve elegant foods and wines that showcase the finer side of American culture no matter the topic of the meeting or political or economic climate. Protocol dictates that we host the guests graciously, honoring them and the countries they represent. Two Buck Chuck just would not do that.
November 16th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Arthur,
Explain to me why taxpayer dollars should be used so that a bunch of foreign leader can drink bottles of wine that most Americans can’t afford.
November 17th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Obama will save us all from this waste!!
November 17th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Doug:
The short, (and maybe flip) answer is: ask the Clintons. They hired Daniel Shanks (who bought the wine served at this dinner and has been doing so for over 13 years): http://www.northjersey.com/food/wineandbeer/The_politics_of_the_White_House_cellar.html
I understand people may have very visceral feelings against the current president but let’s try to separate those from the fact that this is as much part of the protocol as any (like paying for security and transport of foreign dignitaries) and Barack Obama will continue this tradition as will his successors because it is the proper thing to do. It is ridiculous to present this situation in analogies of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.
The long answer is that this has been the protocol in good times and bad times and under Democratic and Republican administration.
The White House cellar is a calling card of an aspect of American Culture. When you consider that wine is a multi-billion dollar industry for the US, (one that exports all around the world) the White House should be putting its best foot forward here – no matter what has brought those diplomats together.
Because the taxpayer benefits from that multi-billion dollar industry – either through excise tax revenue or the development of a tourist infrastructure in wine country (which brings jobs and economic stability to generally rural areas), it is absolutely appropriate to use tax dollars for things like the white house cellar.
In the grand scheme of things, the cost of these wines pales in comparison to other expenditures (more or less questionable). If the wine retailed for $210 per bottle at the time of release and the White House served a case (12 bottles) the cost of the wine to the taxpayers of this country is somewhere around $1260 (here is something to give people a sense of what expensive wine really is: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=a4wYdUiuWiyY&refer=muse).
But let’s not get hyperfocused on the affordablilty of a $100 to $200 dollar bottle of wine to a single individual when that individual is likely to spend similar amounts of money on sneakers or other items they could purchase for a third of the price or less. Very few single individuals can afford Air Force One, a tank, a military grade Humvee, a highway, aqueducts, dams, hospitals and other things that benefit a greater good, so the cost is distributed to the society.