I just finished reading The Doorman by Chris Pavone. The novel, which I highly recommend, is a bit of a potboiler. It focuses on the goings-on at a fictional grand apartment building in New York City called The Bohemia. 

In the novel, pretty much every social class is angry. Some extremely wealthy residents at The Bohemia are angry because newcomers to the building are not up to the standards formerly set—meaning people of color are resident. Other wealthy residents are angry because it is so exhausting cranking out the revenue needed to afford their lifestyles, which sometimes results in their being complicit in illegal deeds. Some residents’ wives are angry because they have become disillusioned with their unscrupulous spouses.

Protesters outside the building are angry because a White police officer killed an unarmed Black man. 

MAGA-supporters nearby are angry and coalescing around the building to protest the people protesting the Black man’s killing. 

Latinos who work at The Bohemia are angered by some of the absurd requests made by the spoiled and privileged residents. 

And the Doorman, Chicky, who has worked at The Bohemia for three decades, juggles all the requests of these various factions in an effort to keep the peace. He has his own set of issues as his wife has recently died and left him with mountains of medical bills and mountains of debt. 

What I loved about the novel is Pavone’s almost satirical portrayal of today’s society. So many Americans are angry. Why? 

After Trump’s first presidential victory, many analysts opined that White voters voted for Trump in the hopes that he would restore the racial hierarchy upended by Barack Obama. Wages for America’s working class had been stagnant for a long time. Workers were frustrated by foreign competition. And many Blacks and Latinos faced declining economic prospects. 

In short, many American voters, saw Obama’s reign as a signal that White voters were no longer at the top of the social scale, so they became angry and anxious. 

And then there was the double-whammy threat of Hillary, a woman, becoming president. Okay so first we have to deal with a Black man dethroning our former hierarchy and now a woman? What next?

The second time around, analysts opined that Trump won because many Americans were angry because they felt as though they were being ignored by “The Elites.” Voters saw Trump as a savior from that financial elite class, even though he was clearly one of them and his former tax cuts benefited those despised elites. Then there was the issue of millions of undocumented immigrants coming across our border, coupled with Trump’s opponent being not only a woman but a person of color. Hence, some voters became even angrier. 

So where are we today? Let’s just say there are a lot of angry people out there. It is estimated that during the “No Kings” resistance last Saturday, more than five million people participated in at least 2,000 protests. (An estimated 200,000 people attended Trump’s military parade, fewer than anticipated.) 

Experts claim that peaceful protests are actually a good idea when you feel a lack of control and a sense of hopelessness. They are a way of taking action and connecting with your community. And they are a helpful way of generating a sense of hope. Other actions to counteract a sense of despair and hopelessness are volunteering for worthy causes; reading books that inspire and lift spirits; and looking after yourself as best you can by focusing on self-care. 

Anger is often a double-edged sword. It can be a source of motivation and a catalyst for change. It can also lead to destructive behaviors, such as electing an unqualified leader who builds a dangerous and frighteningly incompetent administration. 

Maya Angelou once wrote, “Anger is like fire. It burns itself out, leaving behind only ashes of regret.” Given the number of people who protested last weekend, I’d say there is a lot of regret in America right now. 

Ironically, the situation brings to mind some lyrics from Trump’s favorite musical, Les Misérables, which opened at the Kennedy Center last week, “Do you hear the people sing? Singing the songs of angry men? “

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm and is currently on the Board of Chesapeake Music. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

 

Sheer perfection would be an apt description of the first three concerts in Chesapeake Music’s six-concert Chamber Music Festival series at The Ebenezer Theater in Easton. I attended all three concerts and left exhilarated, inspired, and anxious to hear the remaining three concerts this Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. These upcoming concerts also feature The Juilliard String Quartet, dubbed the most important American quartet in history!

Themed “Reflection and Celebration” in honor of its 40th year, this Festival’s first three concerts featured a thoughtful pairing of amazingly talented seasoned musicians coupled with inspirational rising-star musicians who exhibit impressive talent beyond their years. Such juxtapositioning epitomizes how far the festival has come over the last four decades and its exciting potential in years to come. 

Chamber music was first performed in intimate private settings such as palace chambers, drawing rooms, and residential parlors. Thanks to Paul and Joanne Prager, Chesapeake Music’s home at The Ebenezer Theater provides a similar intimate setting to listen to amazing music but also offers more accessibility to exceptional musical performances with better acoustics and comfortable seating.

Co-artistic directors of Chesapeake Music Marcy Rosen (who also co-founded Chesapeake Music) and Catherine Cho developed programs that showcase beloved favorites, including Boccherini, Schumann, Brahms, Beethoven, Dvořák, Haydn, Mozart, and Mendelssohn, as well as less well-known and more modern composers, such as Amy Beach and Cécile Chaminade. 

In addition to developing the programs, cellist Marcy Rosen and violinist Catherine Cho played several of the selected pieces accompanied by clarinetist and co-founder of Chesapeake Music J. Lawrie Bloom, pianist Robert McDonald, oboist Peggy Pearson, violist Zhanbo Zheng, and violinists/violists Todd Phillips and Carmit Zori. 

Two rising stars who also performed in several of those selections were cellist Sterling Elliott and pianist Albert Cano Smit. In addition, Elliott and Cano Smit played an Opus by Beach, and Cano Smit played two selections by Chaminade. These pieces were played to perfection and were a delightful opportunity to hear music with which audiences will surely want to become more familiar. 

This week’s Thursday, Friday, and Saturday concerts feature music by Mendelssohn, Farrenc, Smetana, Mozart, Widmann, Beethoven, Bonis, Schoenberg, and Fauré. For details about this week’s concerts and to purchase tickets, be sure to visit ChesapeakeMusic.org. 

Let’s never take for granted how fortunate we are to experience this caliber of music on the Eastern Shore. It is indeed a reflection of Chesapeake Music’s dedication and hard work, and a time to celebrate upcoming opportunities to hear phenomenal artistic talent perform glorious, inspirational music.

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm and currently serves on the Board of Chesapeake Music. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

 

We on the Eastern Shore sometimes fail to appreciate how lucky we are to have so many opportunities to listen to world-class music. Last Saturday’s concert at Easton’s Ebenezer Theater was a prime example of our good fortune. 

James Ehnes starred in Stradivari Nights accompanied by pianist Orion Weiss. The result was truly wondrous music flawlessly performed. 

Ehnes plays the “Marsick” Stradivarius violin of 1715. He performs in concert halls around the world, including at Carnegie Hall, with the Philadelphia Orchestra, San Francisco Symphony, London Symphony, and Munich Philharmonic. He was the artist-in-residence with the National Arts Centre of Canada and an artistic partner with Artis-Naples. Ehnes began his violin studies at age five, was a protégé of Canadian violinist, Francis Chaplin at age 13, attended Juilliard, and has won many music awards, including two Grammy Awards. He currently is a professor of practice in violin at the Indiana University Jacobs School of Music. 

Orion Weiss is an American classical pianist and one of the most sought-after soloists and chamber music collaborists of his generation. Weiss studied at the Preucil School of Music in Iowa City and graduated from Juilliard, where he studied under Emanuel Ax. He has performed with many major orchestras of North America, as well as many around the world. Weiss released the final album in his recital trilogy called Arc III in 2025. One of Weiss’ greatest claims to fame is that he was asked with less than 24 hours’ notice to replace Andre Watts for a performance of Shostakovich’s Piano Concerto No. 2 with the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra. The response was so overwhelming he was immediately asked to return for a Tchaikovsky performance later that year. 

 Last Saturday’s performance at the Ebenezer included Bach’s Violin Sonata in C minor BWV 1024, a work with considerable depth and complexity; Korngold’s Suite from Much Ado about Nothing, op. 11, a work with four movements each of which captures different aspects of Shakespeare’s play;  and my favorite, Grieg’s Violin Sonata No 3, Op. 45, a work with three movements that is characterized by a strong romantic style with overtones of Norwegian folk influences and often considered Grieg’s most mature work. 

The love, commitment, and mastery that Ehnes and Weiss had for this music was on full display during this glorious concert. The evening concluded with a well-deserved standing ovation and an encore performance of one of Korngold’s opera arias, a rare treat indeed.

A huge shoutout to Paul and Joanne Prager and Gabriela Montero for making these sensational concerts possible in the exceptional Ebenezer theater. We are beyond privileged to have access to these superb musical experiences right here in Easton. 

Be sure to check out two additional concerts in the series: Summertime with Gershwin with Paul Merkelo on June 28, and Night at the Opera with Michael Fabiano on July 5. 

Also, tickets for Chesapeake Music’s 2025 Chamber Music Festival held from June 6 through 14 at the Ebenezer Theater, are currently on sale at ChesapeakeMusic.org. These concerts feature world-class performers, rising stars, and members of the world-renowned illustrious Juilliard String Quartet. 

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

The author, public speaker, and humorist Fran Lebowitz displayed an incredible amount of energy, wit, and wisdom at Saturday night’s Avalon performance in Easton. The evening was pure delight filled with frank and refreshingly honest comments about modern life and politics. Here are just a few of Fran’s viewpoints that I’ve been thinking about the last few days. 

Fran: I’m 74-years-old. America will never elect a woman president in my lifetime. Why? Because white men just can’t handle that concept. They want things to go back to the 50’s where white men were in charge. And if not a white man, at least a man. 

I don’t want this to be true but perhaps it is. Fran talked about how many countries have had women leaders—even Mexico. If Democrats want to win the next election she said they should nominate a white male. She suggested Sheldon Whitehouse, the senator from Rhode Island. Just think about that last name, she said. He would be perfect. 

Fran: Don’t give Justice John Roberts the benefit of the doubt. He’s quieter than some of the others. But he’s also responsible for the sorry state of the current Supreme Court.

 I totally agree with this statement. I’ve been severely disappointed in Roberts’ positions and voting history on a myriad of issues. And don’t forget, Roberts and four other Justices ruled to strike down limits on how much money can be spent on political campaigns, resulting in obscene amounts of money virtually buying some elections. 

Fran: I don’t understand parents’ attitudes towards their grown children in their 30’s and 40’s. My parents did not support me after I went to college. I was totally on my own. 

I agree with Fran on this too. One of the best things my mom did for me was when she said, “I paid for your college education. Now you are on your own.” I knew I had to fend for myself, and I did. 

Fran: I don’t have a computer or a cell phone. Why? Nobody needs immediate communication with me. I’m not a neurosurgeon who needs to be on-call. 

Though most of us can’t imagine life without being glued to our devices, once again, Fran has something here. She spends much of her time reading–a much better use of time than the endless streaming and scrolling that many of us do. 

Fran: I’m more concerned about the decline of American intelligence than the rise of artificial intelligence. I worry about the decline of individualistic thinking alongside a lack of unique opinions. 

I couldn’t agree more. Fran also encouraged young people to get involved, to run for something and take charge of creating the politics that they want to see.

Fran: I love New York because it’s the only place in the world where you can walk down the street and see all kinds of people doing all kinds of things and no one pays any attention. 

Fran’s comments make you once again appreciate the magic of NYC. Even with all its problems, it truly is a place like no other. 

It’s interesting to me that people of all age groups appreciate Lebowitz, including those of many different political persuasions. Perhaps it’s because she doesn’t care whether you like her or not—whether you agree with her or not. She is who she is. And she does a great job of reminding us how crazy many of society’s foibles are.

We can all learn lessons from the value of refreshing candor, especially in this current political environment where so many public figures have become embarrassing pandering sycophants. 

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

 

It’s interesting to analyze the effects that various administrations have had on the current state of America. Of course, in a democracy, campaigns are built on the promise of change. Yet, how much sense does it make to take a wrecking ball to almost everything your predecessor has built? How about adopting the concept of saving the best and leaving the rest?

Over the last 65 years, the U.S. went from liberals John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson to conservatives Richard Nixon and Ford, to liberal Jimmy Carter, to conservatives Ronald Reagan and George Bush, to liberal Bill Clinton, to another conservative Bush, to liberal Barack Obama, to a so-called conservative Trump, to a liberal Joe Biden, and then back to a second Trump who has been labelled an extreme right-wing autocrat. 

Each of these so-called whipsaw or flashback political agendas meant that agendas got started and then stalled, started then stalled, and on and on. One president wants the government to promote racial and economic equality and equity. The next wants laissez-faire government. One president calls climate change an existential threat and makes responding to it a top priority. The next wants to eliminate environmental controls. One wants to stop drilling. The next wants to drill baby drill. One cares about improving the infrastructure. The next wants to cut government spending. One wants the wealthy to pay more taxes. The next wants to reduce taxes on the wealthy. 

The result is stymied progress on many initiatives and overall slow going on getting much accomplished, plus a ton of waste and unnecessary spending. 

Trump rescinded Obama’s orders on the Dakota Access pipeline. Obama reversed a ban on abortion funding that George Bush restored, that Clinton revoked, and that Reagan created. 

Nixon tried and failed to dismantle Johnson’s Great Society, and Bush tried and failed to change Social Security. 

President Biden signed an executive order to reinstate the 2015 Paris climate agreement that Trump withdrew from in his first term. Then Biden revoked Trump’s presidential permit granted to the Keystone pipeline. Already in his second term, Trump has signed more than 137 executive orders—everything from. withdrawing from the World Health Organization, to rolling back Federal recognition of gender identity, to pardoning more than 1,500 January 6 rioters, to attempting to end birthright citizenship for new children of undocumented immigrants. 

A majority of Americans think this pull and push of various initiatives is a good thing as things don’t go too far to the right or to the left. But is it really? We were making progress on environmental issues. Now, much of that progress is being dismantled. How soon will we be back to square one? 

Cancer and other healthcare research were moving forward. Now much of the grant and research funding has been cancelled. And four years from now, it’s not a particularly easy task to pick up the ball and continue where you left off.

In addition, all this push and pull results in an increasingly polarized America. Democrats and Republicans both have increasing contempt for the opposing party. Many politically active Americans think the opposing party is misguided and a threat to the well-being of the country.

A majority of Americans prefer a political philosophy that is not too far right or too far left—they want a middle-of-the road consensus.

Let’s juxtapose that philosophy with what is happening in China. China’s economic growth over the last 40 years has been the largest and longest lasting in world history. Its GDP has risen at 10 percent per year for the last several years. In 1990, China’s share of global industrial production was 2.5 percent. Today it is 35 percent, as much as the next ten industrial economies combined. China is the leader in green production, such as solar panels and has made great leaps forward in technology and science. 

A big reason for China’s advances in infrastructure, technology, and research and development has been its relatively stable political and economic policies. China also has a relatively decentralized system which stimulates competition. Plus, China has reduced its dependence on coal and moved to more renewable resources. Yet in spite of its huge growth spurt, China still lags behind the U.S. in household wealth, social services, and consumer power parity.

There is no question that escalating trade wars between the two countries along with the proposed tariffs will increase economic uncertainty for both countries in the coming months. And both countries will need to adapt to an increasingly complex global economy. 

China has the advantage of moving forward in a consistent direction given its authoritarian government. The U.S. advantage is in its soft power—that is the support it has from other countries—a support that is currently dwindling thanks to Trump’s pro-Russia stance on the Russia/Ukraine peace talks and his alienating economic policies with other countries. That is unfortunate. 

It is also unfortunate that so many presidents feel compelled to destroy so much of what their predecessors have accomplished. The concept of keeping the good stuff and getting rid of the bad has been foreign to so many presidents. 

Opportunities are multiplied when they are seized. Instead of dismantling everything your predecessor did, it makes much more sense to seize the good stuff, make it even better, and maybe even take credit for doing so. It sure would help the United States move forward in terms of prosperity, innovation, and discovery.

The Desert Rose Band said it best: “One step forward two steps back. Nobody gets too far like that. One step forward two steps back. This kind of dance can never last.”

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

 

In his first term, Trump promised to build a wall that Mexico would pay for. He promised to repeal Obamacare. The Washington Post tracked sixty other pledges that Trump made in his first term. Let’s just say his track record is less than stellar.

During the 2024 campaign, here are just a few of Trump’s promises: 

“When I win, I will immediately bring prices down on Day One.”

“They’re dying. Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”

Promises made. Promises broken.

“Under my administration, we will be slashing energy prices by half.”

“We will eliminate regulations that drive up housing costs with the goal of cutting the cost of a new home in half.”

Promises yet to be realized. But I doubt that few Americans think “the golden age of America is here,” as their nest eggs dwindle, friends and relatives lose their jobs, and Social Security offices close in droves. 

Of course, Trump is only one of many candidates who have made pie-in-the-sky declarative statements about how rosy life will be when they’re in charge. 

Woodrow Wilson promised to keep us out of war—29 days later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany. 

Herbert Hoover promised “a chicken in every pot.” Less than a year later, the U.S. was in a major depression. 

Lyndon Johnson promised not to send our boys to war. He sent combat troops to Vietnam and escalated the war many times. 

George Bush said, “Read my lips, no new taxes.” Later, he was forced to admit that increases in tax revenue would be necessary. 

Barack Obama promised to “close the political divide in Washington.” When he left office, the country was more divided than before. 

Our illustrious representative Andy “Handgun” Harris promised to serve only six terms but then opted to run again in 2022. An early holdout on Trump’s budget plan, Harris ultimately supported the budget resolution, paving the way for Trump’s “big, beautiful budget bill” which will increase the national debt.

The question is why anyone believes the unlikely scenarios for any of these promises.

Research indicates that voters interpret measured realistic explanations from candidates for possible progress on various issues as weaknesses. They want to see seismic progress on costs, inflation, the economy, border control, etc. So, when a candidate says all these things will happen on day one, they want them to be true, so they tend to vote for that candidate.

The result is major grandstanding by such candidates. They maintain their promises without showing any hint of compromising. Many voters see that positioning as strength. And the more unhappy the voter is with his or her current plight in life, the more likely they are to vote for the so-called “stronger” candidate.

The irony here is that many of those voters who felt they’ve been screwed by the so-called “elites” voted for Trump. They wanted stronger border protection, lower prices, and more jobs returning to America. Almost all Trump’s actions will benefit the wealthy more than the working class. The Urban Brookings Tax Policy estimates that households in the top five percent will get 45 percent of the benefits. 

Average grocery prices were about 2.4 percent higher in March 2025 than they were in March 2024, according to Consumer Price Index data, which was the highest year-over-year inflation rate since 2023. Trump has continued to claim that grocery prices are going down, down, down. (This inflation statistic is accurate even though egg prices have dropped because of an improved supply due to a reduction in bird flu, lower wholesale costs, and declining demand following peak pricing.) Yesterday the value of the dollar sank to a ten-year low.

Then there are the upcoming spending cuts for programs like Medicaid and Food Stamps.

Tariffs will result in higher prices on most goods, including clothes at Target made in China. The Center for American Progress estimates that the proposed tariffs could cost the typical middle-class American family an estimated $2,500 to $3,500 per year. 

The League of Women Voters claims that candidates can sometimes distort the truth in ways difficult to detect. The League suggests that voters be on the lookout for name calling, appeals to prejudices, rumor mongering, catchwords, passing the blame, promising the sky, and evading real issues. Sound familiar? Let’s attribute all our problems to DEI initiatives and trans athletes. (Out of the 510,000 athletes competing at the collegiate level in America, fewer than ten have identified as trans.)

We as Americans must do a better job of holding our elected officials accountable. We must keep scorecards on the promises they have made in the past and track their success rates. An independent body that publishes a monthly report on statements made accompanied by actual facts and outcomes would be a great first start. And voters have a responsibility to be as well informed as possible, something that is becoming increasingly difficult with partisan media and the outright misinformation on various streaming platforms. 

Many of you reading this article will say, “Hey, Trump said he was going to secure the border, cut costs, etc. He’s doing that.” But let’s peel back that onion further. The mucked-up deportations to the El Salvador prison will cost taxpayers about $15 million for starters. That is money that should have been approved by Congress. Plus, we don’t even know who a majority of these prisoners are—none of whom received due process. And the jury is out on how much money is actually being saved by firing all these Federal workers. Laying off 25 percent of Federal workers would only reduce the Federal budget by one percent. And prepare yourself for the crippling effect these cuts will have on services rendered. 

The proliferation of political promises rendering false hope reminds me of a few lyrics in the song Smiling Faces Sometimes by The Undisputed Truth. “Smiling faces show no traces of the evil that lurks within (can you dig it?) Smiling faces tell lies, and I’ve got proof.”  

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

I’ve been a huge fan of Brandi Carlile for years. I love her voice. I love the songs she writes. But lately, I’ve been thinking about what a difference she has made in two performers’ lives—Joni Mitchell and Elton John. Perhaps we can all learn a few lessons from her efforts. 

Joni Mitchell has been a “rockstar” folksinger and songwriter since the 1960’s. Her famous songs include Chelsea Morning, Both Sides Now, Big Yellow Taxi, and River, to name only a few. In 2015, Mitchell suffered a brain aneurysm rupture which led to a long period of recovery and therapy. She basically needed to learn to walk again. For the next several years, she stopped making public appearances. 

In 2017, Carlile organized music sessions and recruited musicians to play music and sing in Mitchell’s Laurel Canyon living room. These sessions were called Joni Jams. In 2022, Mitchell joined Carlile and others at the Newport Festival. It was her first public performance in nine years, and it was a triumphant return. The response was overwhelming. 

Mitchell got the performing bug again and has done several concerts since then, many of them with Carlile, as well as a host of others. (If you haven’t watched the Kennedy Center honor Joni Mitchell, accessible on YouTube, please do. You will be in for a special treat, especially listening to Carlile, who frequently reinterprets Mitchell’s songs, sing River. By the way, I don’t imagine many folk singers will be frequenting the Kennedy Center in the coming days and months.)

The legendary Elton John, also one of my all-time favorites, has been dealing with a severe eye infection that has left him blind in one eye and with only limited vision in the other. Carlile and John have been friends for almost 20 years. Carlile credits John with being the main reason she picked up an instrument and wrote a song when she was just eleven. To stir John’s creative juices after his eye issues surfaced, Carlile and John collaborated on an album called Who Believes in Angels? If you haven’t heard any tracks from it, trust me, it’s well worth the time. The songs are magical and almost tear-inducing. The recent collaboration for this new album inspired the ailing John to new creative heights. Together they have made a sensational album. John says it’s his best since 1975!

These two scenarios of Carlile coming to, in a sense, rescue ailing musicians got me thinking. It’s a wonderful thing when people make Herculean efforts to rehabilitate others and reignite hope and talent. We have all had teachers, professors, friends, relatives, and colleagues who have been huge influences on our lives. Many of them may suffer from various maladies in their later years. It’s a true service if, with kindness and empathy, we make an effort to spend time with them, letting them know how special their talents are and how much they have influenced our lives. It also is a way of letting them know that all isn’t over yet—there may still be some gas in the tank for more creativity and output—even if it is of a different kind. (Think Matisse’s fabulous cut-outs when he was almost blind, or Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 when he was virtually deaf.) 

In doing so, we won’t just be helping an ailing soul, we too will gain special rewards. Imagine how both Joni Mitchell and Elton John have enriched Brandi Carlile’s life. It’s truly amazing. Plus, studies have shown that helping others can reduce stress, improve moods, and even boost immune systems. 

The closing lyric from the new Elton John/Brandi Carlile cover song, “Who Believes in Angels Anyway?” is: “There’s no need to curse the stars or bite before you bark. But when you need someone to walk with in the dark, I have been there. Man, I’ve been there.” That pretty much says it all. 

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

While playing golf at his Bedminster Golf Club during his first administration, Trump declared, “That White House is a real dump.” He also told a journalist that “Camp David would be likable for about 30 minutes.” Last week, Trump said the Kennedy Center was “in tremendous disrepair.”  And he has made several derogatory comments about D.C. itself, suggesting he should take it over and run it. 

So, what is Trump’s taste in décor? Many designers have labeled it “dictator chic.” Peter York authored a book called Dictator Style: Lifestyles of the World’s Most Colorful Despots. He studied 16 dictators and concluded that their styles were remarkably similar. I’ll sum up common attributes. See if they sound familiar. 

These dictators tend to “go big.” They don’t like antiques. Everything is repro—new, crisp, and shiny. They like French décor because they think it says “money” much more than the subtler English look. They get many of their design ideas from hotels–big reception rooms, big public rooms. They like gold—gold wall decorations, gold furniture, gold columns. After gold, they use a ton of glass–lots of shiny surfaces, chandeliers, giant mirrors, and tabletops. Art and ornaments are big and bright. They tend to commission large paintings of themselves, sometimes life-size or bigger. 

All these attributes are the opposite of the design traditions of Washington, D.C. The American Capitol was designed to avoid Europe’s autocratic excesses and instead project a message of simplicity, democracy, and egalitarianism. 

Each time I see Trump in the Oval Office since January 20th of this year, I notice more of his signature style. He brought gold angel statues from Mar-a-Lago. He added gold picture frames, a gilded TV remote, gold figurines on the mantle, gilded Rococo mirrors on the doors, and gold framed medallions now decorate the fireplace. There are 15 paintings on the walls, including a massive one of Ronald Reagan. He asked for the original Declaration of Independence, but the National Archives houses that faded document. So instead, Trump hung a valued replica of the Declaration that he hid behind a drape for its initial unveiling. He reinstalled his Diet Coke button. And he has added a big map of the Gulf of America. Let’s just say the Oval Office is now jam-packed with stuff. 

Psychologists have done studies on the psyche of conspicuous consumption. The results are interesting. Such consumers are seen as arrogant, less moral, and less warm. Their ostentation is not effective in cooperative environments but tends to work in competitive environments—one-upmanship if you will. 

It’s interesting because in some ways these preferences represent the major divide in our country. Some citizens are impressed with flaunting excess. They believe that society needs to be ordered based on social rank and see ostentatious tendencies as reinforcers of that rank. Others are completely turned off by it. They believe that equality and fairness are important and see ostentatious behavior as a manifestation of power, social inequality, and waste. 

In general, western cultures tend to value equality more than Asian cultures which value social order.

The philosopher Bertrand Russell once wrote, “For my part, the thing I would wish to obtain from money would be leisure with security. But what the typical modern man desires to get with it is more money, with a view to ostentation, splendor, and the outshining of those who have hitherto been his equals.” Interesting. 

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.

  

As President Trump rants about government waste, he continues to spend taxpayer money, as my mom used to say, “like a drunken sailor.” Want some examples? Here are just a few. 

Since the beginning of his second term, Trump has flown to his properties every week to play golf. How much do these little excursions cost? Let’s take a look. In his first 30 days alone, he played golf nine times. So far, the cost of these golf expeditions is estimated at $18 million. These junkets involve Air Force One flying him back and forth, plus additional expenses for flying down vehicles, including two presidential limos and Trump’s motorcade. Let’s also consider the cost of the Secret Service staying at his properties during these weekends for which the government pays for rooms and meals. 

Last weekend, Trump did not break his golf-every-weekend streak. He flew to Florida, boasted that he won the tournament at Palm Beach once again, and then attended an awards banquet. He did take time out from his busy schedule to watch airstrikes targeting Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis on a remote display screen.

If Trump continues playing golf at this rate throughout his term, the cost is estimated to be $500 million. (His first-term golf expenses were $152 million.) 

All indications are that Melania is seldom at the White House. The estimated cost of protecting the First Lady while she is in Trump Tower in New York City and Mar-a-Lago is $300 million per year. 

Various financial newspapers estimated the cost of Trump’s trip to the Superbowl. Here is the breakdown. Secret Service: $7 to $10 million. Air travel and motorcade: $5 million. Stadium security upgrades: $2 million. Local law enforcement: $1 million. Conservative estimates make the total cost for this boondoggle at $15 million. Trump left at half time. 

Trump’s trip to the Daytona 500 is estimated to have cost taxpayers around $5 million. The costs again included an Air Force One trip, presidential motorcade, secret service, and security, staffing and logistical support, and additional emergency and military resources. Trump did a flyover on Air Force one before his presidential limousine drove him around the track for a lap. He left the event after 11 laps. 

So far, Trump’s Guantanamo Bay fiasco has cost taxpayers $16 million. Trump promised to send 30,000 migrants to Cuba. As of today, he detained 300 migrants there for a short time. Now all of them have been flown to various other places. The Wall Street Journal reported that hundreds of U.S. troops were guarding empty tents. 

During his first term, Trump spent $1.7 million redecorating the White House. So far, his plans in this term include replacing the Rose Garden with a hard surface that resembles a patio like the one he has at Mar-a-Lago. In recent days, Trump has also said he would like to build a new ballroom in the White House similar to the one at Mar-a-Lago. I doubt that any of the thousands of fired Federal employees will have an opportunity to check out the new ballroom.

Let’s remember that Federal employee salaries in total amount to less than five percent of the Federal budget. In 2024, the average Federal employee earned about 24.7 percent less than their counterparts in similar positions. The conspicuous consumption during the early days of this administration juxtaposed against thousands of Federal employees losing their jobs is difficult to swallow.

Adding up Trump’s cited exercises in excess in less than 60 days, and trust me this is the tip of the iceberg, would conservatively equate to about 6,000 Federal employee salaries. You know, employees who were working on cancer research, saving children’s lives in Africa, helping veterans get appropriate healthcare, and so much more, who are no longer employed.

Philosopher Bertrand Russell once wrote, “We have, in fact, two kinds of morality side by side; one which we preach but do not practice, and another which we practice but seldom preach.”

Maria Grant was principal-in-charge of the federal human capital practice of an international consulting firm. While on the Eastern Shore, she focuses on writing, reading, music, and nature.