Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How much did biden and obama spend on golf compared to trump
Executive Summary
President Donald Trump’s golf- and leisure-related costs to taxpayers are reported across the provided analyses as substantially larger and more contested than those for Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, but direct, apples‑to‑apples comparisons are impossible from the supplied materials because Biden’s and Obama’s golf-specific dollar totals are not consistently reported alongside Trump’s figures [1] [2] [3]. The supplied documents present a range of Trump estimates — from roughly $10.7 million in narrowly defined expenditures to $140–151.5 million for broader travel/security costs tied to golf and resort visits — and multiple sources argue the higher totals reflect Air Force One flights, Secret Service overtime, and local security fees [1] [3] [4]. Readers should treat point estimates with caution: the variation stems from different methodologies, timeframes, and whether reports count only incremental costs of golf days or full travel/security bills tied to leisure travel [4] [5].
1. Why the numbers for Trump range wildly — and what the key claims actually say
The analyses present several distinct claims about Trump’s taxpayer costs for golf and resort travel, producing inconsistent headline figures that reflect divergent counting methods rather than a single settled total. One item cites a narrow figure of $10.7 million as Trump’s golf-related taxpayer burden [1], while other pieces expand the scope to include broader travel and security expenses, producing totals between about $102 million and $151.5 million through various endpoints in 2020 and beyond [2] [4]. These higher estimates incorporate Secret Service overtime, Air Force One sorties, local police fees (a reported $240,000 daily police fee for Mar‑a‑Lago in one report), Coast Guard or maritime security, and county-level security requests — costs that are materially larger than the limited itemization of golf rounds alone [4] [6] [7]. The discrepancy is therefore methodological: some analyses count only incremental costs when Trump played golf; others count full travel and resort security bills for weekends or multiple‑day stays at Trump properties.
2. How Obama and Biden are treated in the supplied reporting — notable gaps
The supplied analyses repeatedly emphasize Trump’s costs while failing to provide equivalent, consistent dollar totals for Obama and Biden, which makes direct comparative judgments impossible from this dataset alone [1] [4]. One piece notes Judicial Watch’s tally that Obama’s family travel broadly reached around $114 million — a figure covering travel broadly rather than golf-specific spending — and contrasts that with Trump’s reported travel-related totals of roughly $102–144 million, while cautioning that the categories differ [2]. Biden’s golf expenditures are rarely quantified in the supplied materials; articles acknowledge that Biden’s golf has been reported but do not provide a consolidated taxpayer cost figure comparable to the varied Trump totals [6] [4]. The absence of standardization — matching timeframes, definitions (golf days vs. travel days), and accounting for private‑property profit dynamics — means the supplied reporting cannot answer “how much did Biden and Obama spend on golf compared to Trump” with precision.
3. What drives the higher totals attributed to Trump: ownership, frequency, and travel mode
The materials identify three recurring drivers that elevate Trump’s reported taxpayer costs relative to predecessors: frequency of resort visits, the fact that many visits were to properties he owns (Mar‑a‑Lago, Bedminster), and the high cost of presidential air and ground transport tied to those visits [5] [4] [7]. Analysts note that trips to privately owned resorts create a potential flow of taxpayer‑funded activity back into the president’s own businesses, a dynamic not present to the same degree under prior presidents; this factor is flagged as both a fiscal and ethical consideration in several pieces [5] [7]. The materials also document large localized security requests, including a reported $45 million Palm Beach county security request through November and county police fees that dramatically increase per‑visit costs [7] [6]. These operational factors explain why broad travel/security tallies exceed narrow per‑round golf cost estimates.
4. Contradictions, possible agendas, and why methodology matters
The supplied corpus includes clear agenda cues and contradicting emphases: some reports foreground sensational high totals and ethical critiques tied to self‑enrichment, while others present more conservative, narrowly scoped dollar figures [5] [1]. This divergence suggests selection bias in framing: outlets emphasizing large totals often count entire travel and security expenditures and underscore profit flows to private properties, whereas pieces citing smaller figures may tabulate only direct, itemized golf-related line items. The variance is not just rhetorical; it materially changes conclusions about relative fiscal impact. Readers must therefore ask whether a headline sum measures only the marginal cost of a golf outing, the full travel package, or longer‑term security commitments, because conflating these produces misleading comparisons between presidents who used different patterns of travel and residence.
5. Bottom line for readers seeking a definitive comparison and what would be needed
From the supplied materials, the only defensible conclusion is that Trump’s golf- and leisure‑related taxpayer costs are reported as substantially larger than many prior calculations for other presidents, but the dataset does not permit a robust, apples‑to‑apples comparison with Obama or Biden due to inconsistent definitions, timeframes, and missing Biden figures [2] [3]. To settle the question rigorously, one would need standardized accounting: matched date ranges, identical inclusion rules (incremental vs. total travel costs), Secret Service overtime and local security fees consistently tallied, and separation of travel tied to private‑business benefit. Until such harmonized analysis exists, any numerical comparison will reflect methodology more than an objective fiscal ranking.