Nancy's big plane request

[kapkomet]

On this one, STFU GOP. It's a waste, sure, but if the shoes were reversed, they would do the same damn thing. IMO, she should get a plane that can fly cross-country. Maybe not a 757-200, but something that gets her over there without stopping.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070208/ap_on_go_co/pelosi_plane

[Texsox]

On this one, STFU GOP. It's a waste, sure, but if the shoes were reversed, they would do the same damn thing. IMO, she should get a plane that can fly cross-country. Maybe not a 757-200, but something that gets her over there without stopping.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070208/ap_on_go_co/pelosi_plane

 

Hassert received the same benefit. This started after 9/11 based on succession.

[southsider2k5]

Hassert received the same benefit. This started after 9/11 based on succession.

 

Well sort of. Except she wants a bigger plane, and some reports have said, which she now denies FWIW, that she wanted to take her whole posse on the plane with her. The plane Hastert had use of sat 10, the one Nancy wants seats 45 and costs $22,000 to operate. Call it about a 5 hour flight each way, and you are looking at $220,000 a week for Nancy and company to fly home and back. That's a helluva way to cut the deficit, huh? I figured you as the balanced budget hawk would be a little more upset about this.

[Texsox]

Well sort of. Except she wants a bigger plane, and some reports have said, which she now denies FWIW, that she wanted to take her whole posse on the plane with her. The plane Hastert had use of sat 10, the one Nancy wants seats 45 and costs $22,000 to operate. Call it about a 5 hour flight each way, and you are looking at $220,000 a week for Nancy and company to fly home and back. That's a helluva way to cut the deficit, huh? I figured you as the balanced budget hawk would be a little more upset about this.

 

good points. I was more commenting on getting a plane. There does have to be some restraints on this.

[kapkomet]

Well sort of. Except she wants a bigger plane, and some reports have said, which she now denies FWIW, that she wanted to take her whole posse on the plane with her. The plane Hastert had use of sat 10, the one Nancy wants seats 45 and costs $22,000 to operate. Call it about a 5 hour flight each way, and you are looking at $220,000 a week for Nancy and company to fly home and back. That's a helluva way to cut the deficit, huh? I figured you as the balanced budget hawk would be a little more upset about this.

Again, though, the GOP needs to just hush. Hastert got a 10 seater because he could make the flight non-stop on a 10 seater. I'm not saying she should get a 757, but she should get something that could fly across the country.

[Texsox]

IIRC, before ethic reforms, mosty of these flights were on private planes paid for by companies looking for a little face time with a Senator.

[Balta1701]

I think this ranks up there with the stupidest media-manufactured controversies I have ever seen. Here's an LA Times bit on the actual plane in question.

At issue is what kind of aircraft the House speaker — second in line to the presidency — should use to get around the country. For years, speakers flew commercial like everybody else in Congress. But after the Sept. 11 attacks, it was deemed that anyone two heartbeats away from the presidency warranted a military jet.

 

Until now, the only speaker affected was Republican J. Dennis Hastert, who commuted to his Illinois district in small executive-style military jets.

 

But those aircraft require ideal weather conditions to make the cross-country trip without stopping to refuel.

 

The military passenger plane that can make the flight in any weather and also provide the communications necessary to stay in contact with the White House is the bigger and costlier C-40 — described by the Air Force as an "office in the sky" with beds, two galleys and business-class seating.

 

It's this plane that critics have flogged for a week in an attempt to paint Pelosi as a San Francisco elitist who wants to fly around in splendor with family and friends.

 

"That has nothing to do with family and friends and everything to do with security," a perturbed Pelosi said Wednesday at the event for veterans. "It's a question of distance."

...

Military officials said in interviews that there were more VIPs looking for rides than there were planes available.

 

Air Force officials say at least 21 people can theoretically request to use the C-40s and there are only four of the planes. The 89th Airlift Wing at Andrews Air Force Base has two; the Air National Guard also has two.

 

Those who can ask for the planes include the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Cabinet secretaries and seven commanders who oversee military operations around the world. In addition, the planes are regularly used to fly congressional delegations to military theaters.

 

The Air Force's descriptions of the C-40 perhaps make the plane sound more elegant than it is. The seats are similar to those in commercial first-class cabins, and most have electrical outlets and Internet access.

 

Hastert flew in the military's smaller jets: the C-20, a version of a 12-seat Gulfstream; the C-21, a version of a six-seat Learjet; and the C-37, a version of a 12-seat Gulfstream. Hastert, according to a military official, usually traveled with up to three staff members and two members of the Capitol Police. Occasionally his wife, Jean, came along too.

 

The House sergeant at arms originally advised Pelosi that Hastert had used a military plane and recommended that she use one that didn't need to refuel. That prompted her office to request clarification of the rules, Daly said, noting that she never actually requested a specific plane.

 

Daly acknowledged, however, that Pelosi has inquired whether family and friends can fly with her on business travel. A mother of five and grandmother of six, Pelosi's family often accompanies her on the road.

[Texsox]

I don't have a problem with the media reports. I believe it is interesting how well prepared we are for every possibility.

 

I am wondering if having to stop for refueling is that big of an issue in heading west? If she was God forbid, required to take over as President, and was away from the WH, I could see her needing to get there and not stopping for refueling. But in the course of normal events, welcome to Omaha Madam Speaker . . . we'll be stopping for fuel.

[southsider2k5]

I think this ranks up there with the stupidest media-manufactured controversies I have ever seen. Here's an LA Times bit on the actual plane in question.

 

Of course it is.

[Texsox]

Seriously, I am a little perplexed why refueling is such a big deal. I can't believe it would add more than an hour or so to her flight. I understand not flying commercial, which until 2001 was good enough for everyone else, but non stop? Enjoy the extra landing and take off. IMHO I'd want her to end the controversy and fly the same plane as Hassert unless something extraordinary was happening. I don't even mind an occasional family member.

[StrangeSox]

Seems like a whole bunch of nothin' to me. She asked if they had a plane that could get to San Fran to DC without stopping -- she didn't specifically request any plane. If they don't have one, she'll find other means.

 

 

 

 

Pelosi: I'll fly commercial

Speaker says politics behind whispers she wants a bigger plane

 

 

Updated: 52 minutes ago

 

WASHINGTON - Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., hinted her opposition to the war in Iraq is behind the storm over her desire to fly non-stop from Washington to her home in San Francisco.

 

The speaker insisted she has not requested a plane of any size, but rather asked about the option to fly non-stop. "That's really the issue," Pelosi said, "If they can have a plane that goes cross-country, then I'll take that plane. If they don't, I will go commercial."

 

Republicans on Wednesday assailed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's request for access to an Air Force transport plane as an extravagance, though former Speaker Dennis Hastert flew in a military jet as well.

Story continues below ↓ advertisement

 

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Pentagon agreed to provide the House speaker, who is second in the line of presidential succession, with a military plane for added security during trips back home.

 

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, flew in a small commuter-sized jet. Pelosi and her aides say that because her congressional district is in California, her security would require a larger plane that can fly coast to coast without refueling.

 

"It's not a question of size, it's a question of distance," Pelosi said Wednesday. "We want an aircraft that can reach California."

 

"I have told them," Pelosi said, "I would travel cross-country, nonstop, commercially, as I have done and always done, probably... how many times? A thousand times since I've been in Congress. This would be nothing new for me."

 

Republicans are taking issue with the size of the plane. Pelosi and the Defense Department are discussing letting her fly in a C-32 plane, a military version of the Boeing 757-200. Neither the Speaker's office nor administration sources has ever specifically said that Pelosi has requested the modified 757.

 

"This is really something that is very strange," Pelosi said, "The Department of Defense - the Pentagon - which I have been a constant critic of [on] the war in Iraq - and where I understand Mr. Rumsfeld still has a desk, even though he is no longer the secretary - has decided that they would go public about a conversation - I mean issue - that applied to the previous speaker."

 

Click for related content

 

Vote: Does the size of Pelosi's plane matter?

 

NBC News reports the Department of Defense sent Pelosi a letter Wednesday night saying it will offer her the same plane offered to Dennis Hastert when he was Speaker of the House. That plane is said to only be capable of reaching San Francisco nonstop under optimal wind conditions.

 

Speaker Pelosi's office reacted to the offer Thursday morning, saying, "We appreciate the Defense Department's continuing concern for the Speaker's security. We are reviewing their letter"

 

Pelosi also took a stand on the issue as the first female speaker explaining, "I don't want any less opportunity than the male speakers have had when they have served here."

 

Rep. Adam Putnam of Florida, the No. 3 Republican leader, said he supported the tradition of House speakers having access to secure airplanes with secure communications in the post-9/11 era, because of their spot in the presidential line of succession. But he called a desire for a large transport "an extravagance of power that the taxpayers won't swallow."

 

Some Republicans have argued that Pelosi could use a larger plane to offer trips to top political donors as a reward for their contributions.

 

"It's important we see what the specific request was," Putnam said.

 

Asked about the flap, White House spokesman Tony Snow on Wednesday noted that after the 2001 suicide hijackings the Pentagon, with White House consent, agreed to provide military transport to the speaker of the House.

 

"What is going on is that the Department of Defense is going through its rules and regulations and having conversations with the speaker about it," he said. "So, Speaker Hastert had access to military aircraft, and Speaker Pelosi will, too."

 

Pelosi is aware of President Bush's support on the matter, and said, "Whatever the source of this misrepresentation - mischaracterization - I know for certain that its not coming from the President of the United States. If anything, he's encouraged me to have the security that I need."

 

But, she added, looking at the whole issue, "I don't even like having the security. I'd rather travel with my friends on the plane to California and get some work done then to get engaged in this."

© 2007 MSNBC Interactive

Edited February 8, 2007 by StrangeSox

[Texsox]

Kodos for mentioning Bush's support

Boo for mentioning her sex as a reason this is being discussed.

[southsider2k5]

Another completely irrelevant thought on this... Do the people who aren't government employees have to pay taxes on these "free rides" that our reps are handing out? After all, anyone who is on that plane, and not on the government payroll (the rep and the people assigned to guard them) are getting gifts, and they should be paying taxes for them, not to mention the airline taxes they aren't paying to pay for the costs of preventing terrorism.

[Balta1701]

Another completely irrelevant thought on this... Do the people who aren't government employees have to pay taxes on these "free rides" that our reps are handing out? After all, anyone who is on that plane, and not on the government payroll (the rep and the people assigned to guard them) are getting gifts, and they should be paying taxes for them, not to mention the airline taxes they aren't paying to pay for the costs of preventing terrorism.

From the first article posted in this thread:

The guidelines provided by the Pentagon say Pelosi could be accompanied by family members, provided they pay the government coach fare. The plane could not be used for travel to political events. Members of Congress could accompany her on the plane if the travel is cleared by the House ethics committee.

[southsider2k5]

From the first article posted in this thread:

 

I wonder what "government coach fare" looks like?

[Balta1701]

I wonder what "government coach fare" looks like?

According to the OMB:

Full coach fare means a coach fare available to the general public between the day that the travel was planned and the day the travel occurred.

[kapkomet]

As I said in my opening comments, this is really stupid and the GOP people should just shut up.

[mr_genius]

Nancy Pelosi doesn't need $300,000 per flight to make it back and forth from California. Neither does some money wasting Republican.

 

 

not saying they should fly on a commercial plane, but does nancy really need seating for 50, a staff of 16 and expensive entertainment center on the frickin plane just for a ride to California? no, she doesn't.

 

I'm sure the Republicans are wasting money on crap like this too, so 'i'm not picking on Pelosi or one party here. Both are horribly wasteful.

Edited February 8, 2007 by mr_genius

[Balta1701]

For Immediate Release

 

February 8, 2007

 

As the Sergeant at Arms, I have the responsibility to ensure the security of the members of the House of Representatives, to include the Speaker of the House. The Speaker requires additional precautions due to her responsibilities as the leader of the House and her Constitutional position as second in the line of succession to the presidency.

 

In a post 9/11 threat environment, it is reasonable and prudent to provide military aircraft to the Speaker for official travel between Washington and her district. The practice began with Speaker Hastert and I have recommended that it continue with Speaker Pelosi. The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable. This will ensure communications capabilities and also enhance security. I made the recommendation to use military aircraft based upon the need to provide necessary levels of security for ranking national leaders, such as the Speaker. I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue.

[Rex Kickass]

Government Frequent Flyer miles aren't nearly as cool to collect. She should just stick with United. She'll be platinum elite in six months.

[Texsox]

Note to Senate, never elect the Senator from Hawaii as Speaker.

[NorthSideSox72]

Note to Senate, never elect the Senator from Hawaii as Speaker.

Note to Tex - there is no Speaker of the Senate.

 

 

But let's avoid the house rep from Alaska too.

[Balta1701]

Note to Tex - there is no Speaker of the Senate.

 

 

But let's avoid the house rep from Alaska too.

However, the President Pro Temp of the Senate is also in the line of succession directly behind the Speaker of the House, and presumably would have some level of similar concerns. That is usually the senior member of whichever party is in the majority in the Senate, which, frighteningly enough, is currently Robert Byrd of Virginia. And on top of that, and I bring this up for this reason, the man Sen. Byrd replaced in that position was none other than Senator Ted "It's not a dumptruck it's a series of tubes!" Stevens, the senior senator from Alaska.

 

God some scary people wind up 4th in line for the Presidency. There was a while when Strom was in that spot too.

[Balta1701]

These 2 guys get some bonus points. Especially Flake.

Some Republicans were put off by the flight fight. “This is a bunch of baloney,” said Representative Ray LaHood, Republican of Illinois, who said he had flown on Mr. Hastert’s military plane.

 

“Next week,” Representative Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, said, “we are going to steal their mascot and short-sheet their beds.”

[Balta1701]

This should prove to be an entertaining reply. No doubt the media who wasted a week blaming Pelosi for something she didn't even do will ignore it, but it'll still be fun to see.

Meanwhile, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said on Thursday that he's planning hearings this spring on executive and congressional travel on military aircraft.

 

Murtha said he's requested from the Defense Department records on travel and logistics from the past two years. He asked the Defense Department to hand those over within a month.