By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A military parade celebrating the Army’s 250th anniversary, coinciding with President Trump’s birthday, is planned for June 14th in Washington, D.C. The event, featuring approximately 9,000 soldiers, over 130 vehicles, and a large aerial display, is estimated to cost $45 million, with up to $16 million allocated for street repairs following the parade. The Army is implementing preventative measures, including steel plates and modified tank tracks, to minimize street damage. The parade’s route will follow Constitution Avenue, showcasing various eras of military history.
Read the original article here
The Army estimates that a military parade proposed by Trump could inflict $16 million in damage to Washington D.C.’s streets. This significant cost raises serious questions about the wisdom and practicality of such a large-scale event.
The potential for damage is substantial, considering the weight and impact of military vehicles on city infrastructure. The cost of repairs would fall upon taxpayers, further fueling concerns about the financial responsibility of this extravagant display.
Concerns extend beyond mere monetary cost. The potential disruption to city life during the parade itself could also have an economic impact. Businesses may lose revenue during the event and road closures could create massive traffic jams and inconvenience residents. The scale of the disruption warrants serious consideration.
The projected damage of $16 million is a conservative estimate. The potential for even greater damage exists, particularly given the age and fragility of some of Washington’s infrastructure, including the structurally deficient Arlington Memorial Bridge. The risk of structural damage to bridges or underground utilities adds to the already significant financial risk.
The event is planned to feature heavy military equipment, including tanks that weigh many tons. Such vehicles are not designed for the stresses of urban environments, increasing the likelihood of damage to roads and other infrastructure elements. It’s not just the road surfaces that are at risk; the substantial weight could damage underground utilities, leading to costly repairs that aren’t initially included in the damage estimate.
The proposed parade raises questions about priorities. The potential $16 million in damage could have been allocated to address more pressing needs, such as education, infrastructure maintenance, or social services. It’s easy to question whether a parade, ultimately serving as an ego-boost for one individual, is a worthwhile use of taxpayer dollars.
Many argue that the parade is unnecessary and a wasteful use of funds. Critics suggest that alternative celebrations of the military could be organized without causing significant damage or expense to the city. In the context of other significant financial needs and priorities, the expenditure seems frivolous at best.
The potential for damage extends beyond just the physical infrastructure. The parade’s impact on the image of Washington D.C., as well as America’s image on the world stage, is also a concern. A poorly executed event could negatively impact tourism, a key component of the District’s economy. The potential for international embarrassment is another significant, less easily quantifiable, cost.
There is growing concern that the administration may not be fully considering the potential risks or expenses associated with the parade. Many argue that the process has been rushed and lacks transparency, leading to further skepticism about its true cost and value. The possibility of additional, unforeseen costs arising from damages adds more uncertainty and reason for pause.
Ultimately, the decision to proceed with the parade, despite the high likelihood of significant damage to city streets, highlights a disconnect between the government’s priorities and the needs of its citizens. The projected $16 million in damage merely scratches the surface of the potential consequences of a rushed, ill-considered and, ultimately, likely unnecessary event.