Fight Looms on Lawmakers' Use of Corporate Jets

[Judi Lynn]

Fight Looms on Lawmakers' Use of Corporate Jets
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
Published: March 8, 2006

WASHINGTON, March 7 — Senator Barack Obama flew at least nine times on corporate jets last year, traveling to fund-raisers in New York and San Francisco, home to Chicago and to Rosa Parks's funeral in Detroit. Each time, he reimbursed the plane's owners at first-class rates, as Senate rules require.

But Mr. Obama, freshman Democrat from Illinois, felt queasy about this perk of Senate life, so he said he gave it up.

"This is an example where appearances matter," he said. "Very few of my constituents have a chance to travel on a corporate jet."

As the Senate looks at changes in lobbying laws this week after the Jack Abramoff scandal, a big fight will be over limiting lawmakers' use of corporate jets. Critics like Mr. Obama want an end to the practice, or at least substantial rate increases. Other lawmakers, in both parties, say travel on corporate planes is necessary in modern politics.
(snip/...)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/08/politics/08lobby.html

[barbaraann]

1. A few points about corporate jets.

1. Flying in a bizjet instead of going commercial wastes fuel.
2. Commercial airlines are mostly unionized, private aviation employees aren't.
3. General avaition security is far less stringent than commercial.
4. Do corporate execs get face time with elected officials on those flights?
5. The cost is really more comparable to that of a charter flight than of a first class flight.
6. There is just too much blankety-blank fundraising.

[Radio_Guy]

3. Great points, barbarann

Lawmakers who fly private jets and drive SUVs are not good role models. I am so tired of seeing the right wing politicians like Mike Rogers and Richard Shelby campaigning on wasteful spending, then getting into their SUVs to drive to the airport and board a private jet. Do they want to kill our environment and keep us slaves to foreign oil?

[barbaraann]

5. And there was a recent report that most Americans have a jet fuel

chemical in their bodies. I think it was benzene.

[DemoTex]

4. Another point on your 1st point ..

1. Flying in a biz-jet instead of going commercial wastes fuel.

Actually, it wastes more than just fuel. It wastes another valuable and limited resource of the public domain: Airspace. It takes the same amount of airspace to handle a Gulfstream-V (with a U.S. Senator on board) on a flight from DCA to DFW as it does a Boeing 757 with 160 passengers on board. It also takes the same amount of air traffic control resources to handle that Gulfstream-V as it does the Boeing 757. An aluminum tube is an aluminum tube. Also, the corporate jets with few passengers on board add to the congestion which increases the time all aircraft in the IFR system spend in the holding pattern, wasting more fuel.
In the DCA-DFW example, I should point out that American Airlines has flights almost every hour (just like Delta's DCA-ATL schedules, and the DCA-LGA and DCA-BOS shuttles). In other words, on many city pairings it is hard to argue that the airlines' schedules are inconvenient. It is just that most politicians have a keenly honed sense of entitlement, a fuzzy grip on the ethics of the situation, and pampered butts that require a ride on a fine, wide hide.

[barbaraann]

6. Interesting. Thank you for the additional information.

I'm sure the private jet flying has a special effect on one's sense of entitlement.

[cantstandbush]

2. The fact that this is even a "fight" speaks volumes about our Republic

and our government and the people we have elected to run it. THROW ALL THE BASTARDS OUT!