First Volunteer

Scott Hardie | February 21, 2009
Since Michelle Obama is now the third First Lady in a row to have put on hold a distinguished professional career to join her husband in the White House, an interesting question has come up: Should First Ladies be compensated? There's more to the role than just picking out drapes. Every day, there are more benefits to attend, more heads of state to entertain, more staff to supervise. It has become a complex, demanding role, and the woman who takes it is an unpaid volunteer while her husband collects an income. Obviously, their needs are well met during their years in the residence.

Does it matter that most couples who move into the White House are already wealthy? Adjusted for inflation, the Obamas are among the least wealthy presidential families with under $2 million in assets, but that's still well above middle-class net worth. (Insert joke here about "rich" starting at $5 million.)

I haven't formed an opinion on this subject, but I find this to be an intriguing question. What do you think?

Steve West | February 21, 2009
Factor in the perk of her Q factor going through the roof based on name recognition, then her post-White House speaker rate is a huge golden parachute. Granted, speaking at a Shriner's Convention doesn't exactly equal glamour but at $50,000 an hour pay rate, she can put up with guys wearing fezzes.

Jackie Mason | March 5, 2009
[hidden by request]