Kathrine Frich
Former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter described the situation as “scandalous.”
Former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter described the situation as “scandalous.”
A Birthday Outing with Political Consequences
Vice President J.D. Vance is facing a wave of criticism after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers raised water levels in the Little Miami River ahead of his birthday celebrations.
The adjustment was made so Vance could enjoy ideal kayaking conditions, but the move has sparked accusations of using public resources for personal leisure.
How the River Level Was Changed
The operation involved temporarily increasing water discharge from Caesar Creek Lake, coordinated between the Army Corps, the Ohio Natural Resources Authority, and the Secret Service.
Officials say the measure was necessary for “safe navigation” during the vice president’s visit, citing security protocols as part of the reasoning.
Coordination Behind the Scenes
Planning the water adjustment wasn’t a casual decision, it required cooperation between multiple agencies.
Security concerns meant the Secret Service played a central role, ensuring Vance’s time on the water could proceed without risk.
Critics, however, argue the safety explanation doesn’t erase the appearance of privilege.
Ethical Concerns and Public Backlash
Former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter described the situation as “scandalous,” accusing the administration of bending public resources for private enjoyment.
His remarks reflect a broader unease about politicians appearing to receive perks unavailable to ordinary citizens.
More Voices Join the Criticism
Norm Eisen, who served as an ethics adviser in the Obama administration, echoed the concern.
He warned that such actions feed perceptions of entitlement and undermine public trust, even if no laws were broken.
“It’s about the optics,” Eisen noted.
The Army Corps Defends the Move
In response to the uproar, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stated the river adjustment had no lasting environmental or community impact.
They also stressed that all relevant stakeholders were informed in advance. Despite this, questions remain over whether the change was truly necessary.
Silence from the Vice President’s Office
Reporters reached out to Vance’s office for comment, but no immediate response was provided.
The lack of an official statement has fueled speculation, with critics calling for transparency over the decision-making process and whether public funds were spent appropriately.
