Thiebear Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 http://www.rollcall.com/media/37552-1.html Last year, lawmakers excoriated the CEOs of the Big Three automakers for traveling to Washington, D.C., by private jet to attend a hearing about a possible bailout of their companies. But apparently Congress is not philosophically averse to private air travel: At the end of July, the House approved nearly $200 million for the Air Force to buy three elite Gulfstream jets for ferrying top government officials and Members of Congress. The Air Force had asked for one Gulfstream 550 jet (price tag: about $65 million) as part of an ongoing upgrade of its passenger air service. But the House Appropriations Committee, at its own initiative, added to the 2010 Defense appropriations bill another $132 million for two more airplanes and specified that they be assigned to the D.C.-area units that carry Members of Congress, military brass and top government officials. Worst Economy since the Great Depression and we Speed up the process to spend an 'extra' 130million on 2 extra jets? The Airline industry is in trouble and the 534 (I can see the President/Vice/Nancy ...) members + staff / Family can't use United or Delta or American. And of course nobody will claim it.. they duck and cover like roaches when the light is turned on. 200 million was the bridge to nowhere.. now its just a drop in the bucket. But the drops are hitting every day.. It's amazing how they excoriate private business while doing it personally. WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Senate voted on Tuesday to stop production of the F-22 fighter plane, handing President Barack Obama a victory as he tries to rein in defense spending. The Senate voted 58 to 40 to strip $1.75 billion for the Lockheed Martin Corp-built planes from a $680 billion defense bill, overriding the objections of lawmakers seeking to protect manufacturing jobs in the midst of a deep recession. Seems to me if any Jets needed to be funded for say '3' more... REIN IN DEFENSE SPENDING.. it says... REIN in defense spending, then add 200 million for 3 "Defense" jets, that are used as a taxi... unacceptable. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml I wrote Warner, Webb and Reid. I guess i'm a mob person now... I can't believe it... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124986067095218079.html By BRODY MULLINS and T.W. FARNAM WASHINGTON -- Bipartisan opposition is emerging in the Senate to a plan by House lawmakers to spend $550 million for additional passenger jets for senior government officials. The resistance to buying eight Gulfstream and Boeing planes comes as members of both chambers of Congress embark on the busiest month of the year for official overseas travel. The plan to upgrade the fleet of government jets, which was included in a broader defense-funding bill, has also sparked criticism from the Pentagon, which has said it doesn't need half of the new jets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 It's simply a safety measure. To protect them from the little people.:slap::shhh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Nice catch. I'll be mentioning it on my site, for what it's worth. Congress shouldn't get away with BS like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 This really fires me up, but hey, do we expect any less? Seriously. I'll put more thought down later when I have time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 This is silly. They should just lease Redskins One during the off-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Lol Redskins one... Yeah I saw this on the news the other day. It's hypocritical. Some of the Georgia (I think, it was one of the southern states) House figures tried to rationalize the planes by saying they would help bring jobs, but both of them received strong contributions from General Dynamics. Stupid hypocrites...say the Wall Street guys can't roll in planes but they buy planes for themselves. http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Story?id=8261754&page=2 The funding for the jets was pushed by two members of the Appropriations Committee, Democrat Sanford Bishop and Republican Jack Kingston. Both are from Georgia, where the Gulfstream is made, and both have received more than $10,000 over the past two years in campaign contributions from General Dynamics, the parent company of Gulfstream. Bishop didn't return calls for comment. Kingston's office told ABC News that buying the jets "supports local industry" and means jobs for his district. Government watchdog groups see it differently. "It is hypocritical in the fact that lawmakers rightfully criticized automaker CEOs for flying into town, but at the same time, they are stuffing in more than $100 million of taxpayer money so they can fly out of town," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense. I have no idea why they can't fly first class on commercial flights instead of having their own private jet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Got to love those Dem's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Both the Dems and Republicans are responsible for this disgusting overspending This kind of political bull**** makes me sick. Politics is filled with hypocrisy and it's revolting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Got to love those Dem's. Close. The proper phrasing is... "Got to love dem Redskins!" I can see where you got confused though. In terms of junkets and freebies and indulgence, I think this is the one area where Government truly is bipartisan... At least this year, the Dems gave themselves a pay cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I can see where you got confused though. In terms of junkets and freebies and indulgence, I think this is the one area where Government truly is bipartisan... At least this year, the Dems gave themselves a pay cut. Care to look at the expense increases? Congress travel perks top big business http://www.durangoherald.com/sections/Opinion/letters_to_the_editor/2009/07/12/Congress_travel_perks_top_big_business/ Now, I am reading that the congressional travel tab has increased 10-fold since 1995, tripled since 2001 and is up 50 percent over the last two years (The Wall Street Journal, July 2). The follow-up article in the Journal on July 3 reports this increase does not include the true cost of travel but strictly expenses for food, lodging, etc. The expenses do not include the full cost of using military aircraft or the salaries of those who organize the overseas trips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I dont understand why a typical congress person has to go overseas to serve their constituents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 6, 2009 Author Share Posted August 6, 2009 Close. The proper phrasing is..."Got to love dem Redskins!" I can see where you got confused though. In terms of junkets and freebies and indulgence, I think this is the one area where Government truly is bipartisan... At least this year, the Dems gave themselves a pay cut. I read they gave themselves 90k per member to fix their offices up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Seems as if it would be cheaper to set up charter planes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I read they gave themselves 90k per member to fix their offices up. I believe you. I do remember in his first few weeks, Obama cut the payroll of his White House staff (token amount as I recall) as a symbolic response to the recession. Wouldn't surprise me if they found a backdoor way to recoup and wind up getting more. As for Congress. Congress LOVES Congress. If they were six year olds they would have died from candyshop tummy aches long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 The thing that bugs me is that if I shine a laser pointer into the pilot's eyes and cause these planes full of gluttonous congressional pigs to crash, somehow I'M the bad guy. Ok, Mr G-Man. I'm only kidding. Stop tapping my phone. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hkHog Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 C'mon guys, these are the people who want to run the economy, health care system, country, etc..., etc... They clearly are much more wise and intelligent than any of you or something like the market for that matter... These wise people need their private jets and office redecorations so that they can live a life of comfort in order to make the best possible decisions on how resources should be divided, who should be allowed to make profits and how much, etc..., etc... Just realize that these politicians are much smarter than you or I and therfore deserving of every pay raise or perk they ever wish to vote for themselves (especially SENATOR Barbara Boxer, after all she has worked so hardd to get where she is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 10, 2009 Author Share Posted August 10, 2009 [update] +$350 million , so we cut the F22 program to make room for a fleet of jets for Congress in the Defense bill that doesnt require any earmarks... *worst recession ever, we need ALL new jets. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124986067095218079.html WASHINGTON -- Bipartisan opposition is emerging in the Senate to a plan by House lawmakers to spend $550 million for additional passenger jets for senior government officials. The resistance to buying eight Gulfstream and Boeing planes comes as members of both chambers of Congress embark on the busiest month of the year for official overseas travel. The plan to upgrade the fleet of government jets, which was included in a broader defense-funding bill, has also sparked criticism from the Pentagon, which has said it doesn't need half of the new jets. "The whole thing kind of makes me sick to my stomach," said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) in an interview Sunday. "It is evidence that some of the cynicism about Washington is well placed -- that people get out of touch and they spend money like it's Monopoly money." Heres the start: http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 C'mon guys, these are the people who want to run the economy, health care system, country, etc..., etc... They clearly are much more wise and intelligent than any of you or something like the market for that matter... These wise people need their private jets and office redecorations so that they can live a life of comfort in order to make the best possible decisions on how resources should be divided, who should be allowed to make profits and how much, etc..., etc... Just realize that these politicians are much smarter than you or I and therfore deserving of every pay raise or perk they ever wish to vote for themselves (especially SENATOR Barbara Boxer, after all she has worked so hardd to get where she is). Can the U.S finally be renamed Animal Farm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 10, 2009 Author Share Posted August 10, 2009 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x267012 heres the 93k upgrade per lawmaker in February... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I dont understand why a typical congress person has to go overseas to serve their constituents? They don't. It's a perk that they milk at the taxpayers expense. That's why so many take their families friends etc. Just stinks to high heaven. a pathetic bunch those politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighOnHendrix Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 They don't. It's a perk that they milk at the taxpayers expense. That's why so many take their families friends etc. Just stinks to high heaven. a pathetic bunch those politicians. Don't forget these memorable hi-jinx from our wacky elected representatives: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Post_Office_Scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_banking_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Abramoff_lobbying_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cunningham_Scandal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 When I told some DoD crazy about this story, he rationalized it by saying this "44% usage of those jets are used by the DOD and Pentagon. DC-9s are not cost effective anymore. 6 hrs. flight time = 22 hrs. maintenance. But I'm sure Bender was aware of that." Basically he said the old fleet sucked and they needed new planes. He didn't seem to mention why Congress can't ride first class though, instead of rolling around in private jets like the very elitists they criticized during car hearings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Do senators require security? I wonder how much of a harngue it would be and how costly to put a Senator on a plane? In the world we should live in, a Senator should just be able to buy a ticket and sit next to... well, not Joe the Plumber, but maybe Ron, the Radiologist. Would it wind up costing 100,000 per flight? More? Less? On the other hand, Biden reportedly took the train very frequently and that seemed to work out. See, Biden is the model that all politicians should aspire to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 10, 2009 Author Share Posted August 10, 2009 Do senators require security? I wonder how much of a harngue it would be and how costly to put a Senator on a plane? In the world we should live in, a Senator should just be able to buy a ticket and sit next to... well, not Joe the Plumber, but maybe Ron, the Radiologist. Would it wind up costing 100,000 per flight? More? Less?On the other hand, Biden reportedly took the train very frequently and that seemed to work out. See, Biden is the model that all politicians should aspire to. Congress Security? Prez, Vice, Pelosi yes. The rest can go to budget and American/Delta/Etc... Coach.. then out of pocket upgrade if they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 They don't. It's a perk that they milk at the taxpayers expense. That's why so many take their families friends etc. Just stinks to high heaven. a pathetic bunch those politicians. Palin's out of office now. You should move on and leave her and her family alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.