Because the inauguration of President George W. Bush is the most costly in history, the price tag has led some people to boycott consumer spending in response.

Inauguration funds from private donations have added up to $40 million, not including the $17.3 million for the unprecedented security.

The boycott, called Not One Damn Dime Day, was first started as an anonymous e-mail and then made into an official Web site. Monica Boyce, of www.notonedamndime.com, said the idea is to make a statement against President Bush without having to go to Washington, D.C.

Many people might be supportive of the boycott idea but will not follow through, College Democrats President Megan Green said.

"It's not going to have the results people want unless large amounts participate," Green said.

But she said she thought it was still a good idea in practice.

"For people who can't go to Washington, this is a great way to make their voice heard," she added.

Some local businesses were not aware of the boycott and do not think business will be affected.

Earle Harner, owner of the Apple Tree, 136 E. College Ave., said as far as the boycott could go in hurting his business, he could not see it getting slower.

"Democrats should worry more about connecting with the voters than squealing over spilt milk," Harner said.

"Elections are over," Harner added.

Centre County Democrats Chairman Bob Shepherd thinks the money could also be used in a better way.

"It's dreadful. Everybody likes to celebrate their victory but people are dying every day, and losing their jobs. If it were at a time of peace, it would seem more appropriate," Shepherd said.

Matthew Woessner, assistant professor of public policy at Penn State Harrisburg, said the money is being well-spent.

"You can hardly spend enough on an inauguration," Woessner said.

"It's a national ritual. The more lavish and extravagant, the better. It is an opportunity to revel in democracy. It's always bitter for the side who didn't win," Woessner said.

College Republican Chairman Andy Banducci also thinks the money is being well-spent because of the inauguration's symbolic value.

"It shows the world our peaceful transition to power," Banducci said.

The idea of large corporations making large donations is upsetting to some, communication arts and sciences professor Thomas Benson said.

"All of those corporations supplying the money, what are they getting? Access. There is something fundamentally undemocratic about it," Benson said.

"One of the fundamentals of democracy is that the mechanism should be open," he added.

"The public should be watchful of processes that could limit their access to business," Benson said.

Green has the same question for the government.

"It is a precedent to spend a lot of money. But this inauguration is the most expensive ever. When you have a president accepting millions of dollars from these corporations, the big question is do they expect something back?" Green said.

Woessner said those unhappy about costs are misguided.

"People upset about the money will be drowned out by the patriotism," he said.