Good Question

(WCCO) It's an unprecedented race for the finish line to attract the 2016 Olympics to the United States. For the first time in history, a sitting American President is personally lobbying the International Olympic Committee to try and bring the games to Chicago. But is it the right time when there are so many larger problems in the United States?

"In this case, he's the pitchman-in-chief in trying to get the Olympics to the U.S.," said Professor Larry Jacobs, a presidential scholar at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute.

Online and on-the-air, many people are asking about the president's priorities, in a time when the U.S. is involved in wars in two countries, unemployment is high, and health care is still an unresolved issue at home.

"Great that we are trying to get the Olympics here, but isn't there something called a war that we are trying to end?" asked Nicole Leach.

"The most valuable resource the president has is his time," said Jacobs. The White House points out that the nine hour flight is in the overnight hours, and the president will be on the ground in Copenhagen for only about four hours. Then he'll have a return flight of nine hours.

"The president gets on that plane it's like the info superhighway flying with him," said Jacobs. "He's doing work, he's having meetings all over the world, and meeting with key staff."

Still, Jacobs notes, the Olympics are taking priority over other things, just not necessarily the big issues that people are complaining about.

"The president works with a large staff, they fill several large office buildings, there are a lot of people out there to work on these jobs, even when he's not working on them personally," said Jacobs. But the president has a smaller opportunity to do discretionary things. Choosing to fight for the 2016 Olympics means he's not fighting for something else that could have a more immediate impact.

"Should he be luring a business here, or is there another meeting he could be having in congress," asked Jacobs.

The competition for the 2016 Olympic Games comes at a time of intense involvement by heads-of-state. The equivalent leaders are all coming to pitch Rio, Madrid, and Tokyo's bid for the games.

There's "something embarrassing about the Prez shilling for the Windy City. Seems too commercial," wrote Kathy Kane on Twitter.

"There was a time the U.S. would say 'thank you very much' when asked if we wanted to host the Olympics," noted Jacobs. But today, "America is just like the other countries, if they're there to lobby in person, so is the U.S."

British Prime Minister Tony Blair started this trend for national heads-of-state campaigning, when he visited the Olympic Committee, lobbying for days in 2005. It worked. London beat out the Paris (considered the favorite) by a handful of votes to get the 2012 Olympics.

Chicago claims the 2016 Games would mean $20 billion dollars in tourism and infrastructure benefits. Another independent analysis put that closer to $5 billion.

Either way, there's undeniable national pride the games would earn. "Isn't that what leaders are expected to do? Lobby for things that will positively impact their country?" said Jason Gabbert.

"On any given day, the White House gets dozens, hundreds of requests for intervention, and they've said no to all of them, except the Olympics," said Jacobs.

The cost of the trip, like all presidential travel outside of political campaigns, is picked up by taxpayers. The General Accounting Office puts the cost of flying Air Force One at around $67,000 per hour, so the 18 hours of flying would cost upwards of $1.2 million. That doesn't include advance teams and security required on the ground.

(© MMIX, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

More Special Reports

• New Economy
• Good Question
• Reality Check
• Don Shelby's Good To Know
• Finding Minnesota
• I-TEAM Investigations
• Project Energy