Congress buys 3 private jets for $200 million
posted at 2:55 pm on August 5, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Remember when Congress erupted in outrage over the arrival in Washington DC of the CEOs of the three major American automakers in private jets? The bumbling public relations of the Big Three gave elected officials an opportunity to indulge in populist spleen-venting at rich fat cats and their greed. Public pressure pushed the automakers to dump their private fleets of corporate jets and focus belt-tightening in the executive suites as well as on the manufacturing floor.
Who knew that Congress merely wanted to undercut price on their own purchase of private jets?
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.
Normally, that would be considered an earmark. However, since Appropriations merely expanded a line item instead of creating one, it didn’t require the member to identify him/herself. Instead, the jet-setter will remain anonymous — and Congress as a whole can take the blame for passing it.
How about it, America? Does this Congress need three more private jets, or even one? Should they not fly commercial like the rest of us? Considering the massive deficits this administration and the Democrats in Congress now run — much worse than anything remotely imagined at GM, Chrysler, or Ford — should they not hold themselves to the standard they dramatically demanded from the CEOs of the automakers last November?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Although we do need the F-22 right? Even though it has proven to be useless in any of our contemporary wars. Am I right conservatives?
sarc/off
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 3:26 PM
Running from the mob, are we?
faraway on August 5, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Come on now, they need the jets to keep up with the huge increase in traveling the democrats have to do during the “worst economy since the Great Depression”.
Dem control of Congress spikes junket travel 50%
posted at 3:35 pm on July 2, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/07/02/dem-control-of-congress-spikes-junket-travel-50/
This is “smart power” in action.
It’s only wasteful under Republican leadership.
Baxter Greene on August 5, 2009 at 3:28 PM
He wasn’t that brilliant…he was a socialist, after all.
ZJPolitical on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
To bad the republicans will never use them from fear of offending the liberals.
jmarcure on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
I understand completely. I was at Home Depot the other day and I bought a 6-pack of light bulbs even though I only needed 2. I knew I would eventually need them.
Besides, this expanded earmark is in only in the Millions, it doesn’t even have a B or a T next to it. It’s really quite affordable…oh wait, I guess this didn’t make Barack’s didn’t the $100 million cut short list, eh?
And everybody knows that, ahem, The Speaker only travels in Gulfstream 5′s. There was that time when she couldn’t get one…this should fix that terrible inconvenience.
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Why kill a cash cow? If the USAF didn’t need it I bet Colombia or Israel might like a crack at it. (sacr recognized-posted for troll heartburn)
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Wow, just wow!….the absolute gall
CLUELESS!!!
cmsinaz on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Is it me–or have these pols started to think of themselves as royalty?..and with our money.
jeanie on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
Didn’t Congress acquire a fleet of jets when they bought GM and Chrysler?
Stephen Macklin on August 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM
I love it when congress acts with fiscal responsibility. I mean after all it could have been 6 new jets.
/
milwife88 on August 5, 2009 at 3:30 PM
I found the Latin Translation to be hung over Pelosi’s picture every time we see her:
Fac quod dico, non quod facio
(Do as I say, not as I do.)
Christian Conservative on August 5, 2009 at 3:31 PM
THROW THE PIGS OUT
daesleeper on August 5, 2009 at 3:31 PM
All animals are equal,but some animals are more equal than others.-Animal Farm
Knock Knock,
Who’s there?
Orwell.
portlandon on August 5, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Crazy Nancy is a gift from God.
Jaibones on August 5, 2009 at 3:33 PM
This is why they hate Palin so much. She sold their state’s jet on ebay. How dare she be fiscally responsible with other peoples’ money.
ThackerAgency on August 5, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Yup. They don’t ever expect to be out of power and Miss Blinky has said as much. I believe them and I believe we are looking at our new royalty class whether or not we want it.
jmarcure on August 5, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Do not imagine for a moment, Mr. Morrissey, that leadership is a pleasure. On the contrary, it is a deep and heavy responsibility. No one believes more firmly than the leadership in the congress that all America’s citizens are equal and should be able to have the luxuries that Congress has. The leadership in congress would be only too happy to let citizens keep more of their own money and spend it on themselves and their families, but sometimes the citizens might spend their money in the wrong ways, Mr. Morrissey, and then where would we be?
Cheshire Cat on August 5, 2009 at 3:33 PM
Of course we don’t need these jets. We also don’t need to fund NASA, PBS,Acorn, etc.etc.
Jeff from WI on August 5, 2009 at 3:34 PM
Yet, he wrote the two (2) greatest fiction books about Statism. The lies associated with Statism. The hypocrisy associated with Statism. The tyranny associated with Statism. The darkness associated with Statism.
He’s my favorite author … Socialist or not.
OhEssYouCowboys on August 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM
The F-22 has “proven to be useless”? When were you last in the cockpit?
rplat on August 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM
Got Hope?
faraway on August 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM
These jets are the Liberal Elitist Mob’s getaway cars. But let’s not let them getaway with it.
First business for the new majority after the 2010 elections: Put these jets up for sale to reduce the national debt.
Yes we can!
Loxodonta on August 5, 2009 at 3:37 PM
That’s only IF we keep on paying the bills…
Chainsaw56 on August 5, 2009 at 3:37 PM
3 more jets for Palin to put on eBay
GOP version of Cash for Clunkers
faraway on August 5, 2009 at 3:38 PM
It has never been used in Iraq or Afghanistan. To put it into production would be a great waste of money considering the type of war that we are waging in the past generation.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Wells was pretty good with a couple of his stories. I always liked the “First Men in the Moon” which even touched on body modification to allow one to better function in their assigned jobs.
jmarcure on August 5, 2009 at 3:38 PM
Actually she didn’t sell it on eBay, just listed it there. Ended up selling it thru an aircraft broker.
Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Four legs good, two legs bad. Extravagant spending is frugality. Slavery is freedom. Ignorance is strength.
Cheshire Cat on August 5, 2009 at 3:39 PM
The man had no qualms with statism…it was the inequality of the capitalist system persiting in statism that he criticized in his work.
ZJPolitical on August 5, 2009 at 3:39 PM
What’s another $200,000,000. of your taxpayer money these days? Politicians had already earmarked millions for influential constituents back home to get reelected as soon as the “stimulus” excuse was available, so they are not too worried. Just recently Obama & Hillary dished out $200,000,000. of taxpayer money directly to Fatah who would cheerfully wipe Israel off the map if they only could and would dance in the street at another 9-11. Doesn’t cost them a thing, it’s just dumb taxpayer’s money. They gave billions of taxpayer bailout money to the big banks whose officers promptly gave themselves and their cronies billions in bonuses. You think it didn’t occur to our elected politicians & treasury people that this gigantic thieving would occur?
IMO there’s clearly been an orgy of gigantic thieving of ordinary citizen wealth going on. Why should it stop? Because Obama is our hope, change & transparency savior ?
Chessplayer on August 5, 2009 at 3:40 PM
This has all happened, before. Never forget, when the worker’s, in the worker’s paradise, were freezing in their State-owned, one-room apartments, and standing in queues for luxuries like bread – the Socialist pigs in power, in the Soviet Union, were attending parties in the Kremlin, and had their dachas on the Black Sea.
It is the same, here.
OhEssYouCowboys on August 5, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Again, why kill a cash cow?
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Do you even have any idea of it’s capabilities?
Do you have any idea of the advanced aircraft other countries are working on? Like China and Russia?
darwin on August 5, 2009 at 3:40 PM
See new blog on how we lose Taiwan air war to Chinese and get back to me…
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 3:41 PM
LOL, how energy efficient is an old 727, though?
Del Dolemonte on August 5, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Does anyone know whether Reid and Hoyer threw off to see who got to pick first for the call names Maverick and Ice Man?
BuckeyeSam on August 5, 2009 at 3:42 PM
150,000 jobs saved or created.
Ted Torgerson on August 5, 2009 at 3:43 PM
That he was… unfortuantely, he couldn’t see that the only way the events pictured in Animal Farm and in 1984 could come about would be through Socialism. Terry Gilliam is another Socialist who created a world in Brazil that could only occur in a Socialist structure.
mankai on August 5, 2009 at 3:44 PM
You might try reading Homage to Catalonia, where he first learned about Stalinism, in the Spanish Civil War. Animal Farm was almost not published, because it was a clear attack on Stalin and his “paradise.”
1984 wasn’t so concerned with Stalin, as it was State tyranny – regardless of what politics created it.
He was against State tyranny in any form. And so am I.
OhEssYouCowboys on August 5, 2009 at 3:46 PM
The mobs look so tiny from up here…
mjbrooks3 on August 5, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Sure, why not? As long as they used taxpayer money to buy three clunker jets to destroy before buying new ones, everybody wins!
taznar on August 5, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Do you really think that if either of these countries felt threatened in an air war that they wouldn’t just resort to the nuclear option? Or that we wouldn’t? We will never have a prolonged battle with Russia or China. It would just go nuclear. This isn’t 1940 where great powers have great wars outside of proxy wars. A fighter like the F-22 is only useful against a country that doesn’t have hundreds or even thousands of nuclear warheads. Those countries don’t have any fighters in the F-22′s league anyway, which makes the point moot. WASTE OF MONEY.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Really . . . and you’re sure about that?
rplat on August 5, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Again, why kill a cash cow?
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Palin is pretty much the opposite of Pelozee in common sense.
seven on August 5, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Lol. Actually, you just made our point. Would you prefer we have fighters on par with other countries? Seriously?
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Ah yes, Brazil with Robert Deniro. Good ex
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xNnRBksvOU
Ozprey on August 5, 2009 at 3:51 PM
F-22 sales denied to Australia, Japan, Israel. Job losses in U.S.
Smart business & mutual defense model you have there Terry.
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 3:53 PM
I think you need to do a little research. As to your other point that we or “they” would just start popping off nukes at the drop of a hat is a tad unrealistic. The point is to win, not insure mutual destruction.
darwin on August 5, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Herself. San Fran Nan (Pelosi) herself.
But I digress. How many tons of CO2 do those jets emit per trip to Frisco?
Steve Z on August 5, 2009 at 3:55 PM
That’s my point. We never go to war with countries that have nuclear arsenals. At most we have proxy wars. The F-35 will be far more useful in the future than the F-22. Our enemies in the present and future will be rogue countries and terrorists, not countries like Russia or China.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 3:56 PM
Orwell believed in the “worker’s paradise”, just not in authoritarian rule…anarcho-communism is even more idiotic than totalitarian communism. You might try reading some Rand…her work actually supports capitalism instead of bashing it like Orwell did, and is far less cartoonish than his work.
ZJPolitical on August 5, 2009 at 3:58 PM
*crickets*
Hey, at least Terry isn’t claiming the South China Sea belongs to China…
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Famous last words of the Truman/CIA intel estimate: China will never cross the Yalu.
Famous last words of the FDR/War Department intel estimate: The Japanese fleet is bound for the Kra Peninsula.
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 3:59 PM
I fail to see how this buy is GREEN.
Maybe Teh Goracle sprinkled some tap water with birth control on the jets.
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 3:59 PM
When are they going to get their own Space Shuttle?
percysunshine on August 5, 2009 at 4:01 PM
I thought Nissan just showed their ALL ELECTRIC car, ready for sale. Let Pelosi drive home in that.
Jeff from WI on August 5, 2009 at 4:01 PM
FIFY
aikidoka on August 5, 2009 at 4:02 PM
That is something I’d willingly pay for… as long as there was just enough fuel to get them out of our atmosphere.
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:02 PM
F-22 & F-35 are two totally different types of fighters, for different jobs.
Jeff from WI on August 5, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I totally agree with you… the problem is, Pelosi probably can’t drive. Too advanced for her.
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:03 PM
I didn’t realize cash cows cost us hundreds of billions to develop and build. I admit that the F-22 is awesome and that it is the greatest fighter ever built. That doesn’t make it useful though. I thought that you of all people would be against government excess. Even if we don’t build them now and some unforeseeable event makes them useful in the future, it’s not like we can’t just build them at the drop of a hat.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Well that would put an end to more planes in the future. I’m sure he used bottled water this time…
Ozprey on August 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM
I know. Thank you for making my point for me. Every branch is buying up the F-35.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM
LOL…yeah…retool from plowshares to F-22s is just a matter of tapping your Ruby Shoes together.
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Seriously, there has never been one successful multi-branch fighter in the history of military aviation. It’s been tried before, the roles and demands are so different. The verdict is definitely out on this.
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Hey, everything should be talked about. I’m up for discussing cutting that program, but let’s focus on the now first. Why 3 jets?
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:06 PM
So, obviously, it’s wrong for corporations to purchase private jets, but it’s OK for Congress to triple its budget for the same.
mankai on August 5, 2009 at 4:07 PM
ONLY if the bottle was recycled in Vermont.
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:07 PM
But she will “concealed carry” and tell you that you can’t at the same time. (How’s that for a tangent!)
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Deal!
Ozprey on August 5, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Do you mean the three f-35 variants?
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I don’t think you understand the roles of the various aircraft. The F-22 is slated to replace the aging F-15 as our air superiority fighter. The US must have the top of the line to attain and maintain control of the skies.
Nothing on the ground is safe if we don’t own the skies.
Additionally, per your point that we never go to war with nuclear armed nations, then we need conventional assets to fight a conventional war.
You can’t have it both ways.
darwin on August 5, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Pelosi’s not even tangent to anything realistic. She’s some isolated point.
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:09 PM
No corporations can do what they like. Just as long as it’s not on the taxpayers dime.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:10 PM
The three variants are service specific. Navy, USAF and Marines. They are not and never will be air superiority fighters.
darwin on August 5, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Wait, is there a single mother in Vermont of Guatemalan/Pakistani heritage that recycles paper bottles?
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:10 PM
We haven’t had real air superiority battles in a generation. Countries like Iraq and Afghanistan don’t pose a threat to our fighters. Terrorists don’t pose a threat to our fighters. Anybody who poses a real threat to our fighters has worse things to worry about. Like nuclear warheads.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Seriously, someone save this for when Eliot Spitzer is resurrected.
Upstater85 on August 5, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Which is reason for Barry to reduce our nuclear stockpile? His ‘vision’ of a “world without nuclear weapons” (Feb 29, 2008) means what then? Conventional warfare will evaporate?
If you think the Fulda Gap is plugged just because four men in a hijacked aircraft say so then you’re nuts.
Limerick on August 5, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Robert Gates, who so many here respect (or used to before he was Obama’s Secretary of Defense) , is all for the stashing away of the F-22. I don’t think that anybody expect for perhaps pacifists are against the development of aircraft like the F-22. Mass production is a different and expensive thing.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Because clearly congress is not operating on the taxpayers’ dime. Thanks for clarifying that.
Vashta.Nerada on August 5, 2009 at 4:18 PM
That’s irrelevant to this subject but I certainly don’t agree with cutting down our stockpile.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:19 PM
What? Try Iraq. Even though Saddam had a relatively weak air force, if we had no jet to challenge theirs they could have wreaked havoc on our troops. F-15′s showed up and his pilots simply would not challenge them. They knew what the F-15 could do.
You have the same mentality as the F-4 designers who thought the age of dogfighting was over and didn’t put a gun on it … then we got into Vietnam and hey guess what! Dogfight city …
We have to be prepared.
darwin on August 5, 2009 at 4:20 PM
I’m curious Terry, where do you stand on the presidential helicopter program?
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 4:20 PM
sarc/off
Well, I guess what you’re saying is we should have kept a fleet of Sopwith Camels around from WWI as well as a squadron of P-51 Mustangs from WWII. Hey, maybe we can get a discount on some old Jap Zeros and German Stuka dive bombers that are still taking up space in air museums. Why try to keep pace with the Chinese and Russians in military technology when we’re never going to use it anyway, huh? Sound logic, right Libs?
Goldy1 on August 5, 2009 at 4:20 PM
Politicians are self-serving? What? What a shock.
They can’t fly commercial. They’re all pretty much terrified of hearing it out from us the pesky voters. Of course they love meeting with people such as those in Elkhart, IN who are really hurting and presumably have votes for sale.
cheesebiz on August 5, 2009 at 4:21 PM
That’s a cold war mentality. We don’t have the same threats that we used to. What threatens us nowadays are not fleets of jets, but backpacks full of explosives or roadside bombs.
Terry Silver on August 5, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Yes, of course, Orwell’s attacks of Stalinism were based upon all of those Capitalistic attributes of Uncle Joe and the Soviet Union. I’ve read Ayn Rand. And throughout her writings is the message that there is no God, that Man exists for Man’s sake, and that Man is to do all that the freedom of Man will allow. No thanks. Man, without God, is “cartoonish,” to me.
You might try looking into Orwell a little more closely. 1984 was based, in part, on Zamyatin’s We. Zamyatin lived under the Statism of Communism and the Bolsheviks. We was an attack on State-controlled societies. 1984 is the greatest distopian book, ever written. The distopia of the individual being controlled by the State. It has nothing to do with an attack on Capitalism.
Once again, 1984 attacked any State system that would tyrannize the individual. That is the epitome of any Statist society. State control.
I’ll no longer engage in a pissing-match, when my opponent is only full of shit.
OhEssYouCowboys on August 5, 2009 at 4:27 PM
What an embarrassing time if you are a Democrat.
Rockygold on August 5, 2009 at 4:28 PM
You mean when we’re fighting PR war? That’s about all those types of bombs are useful for. Yeah, we usually don’t use air superiority fighters for that.
NickelAndDime on August 5, 2009 at 4:30 PM
Yes, they should, especially since they are on the brink of asking for a taxpayer bailout due to Congressional and Administrative mismanagement.
Too big to fail is too big to exist.
Dusty on August 5, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Der Kongress ist der König und die Königin.
Johan Klaus on August 5, 2009 at 4:41 PM
Have you ever heard of the SU-37?
Johan Klaus on August 5, 2009 at 4:43 PM
And, nuclear subs off of our coast?
Johan Klaus on August 5, 2009 at 4:45 PM
Another reminder of the irresponsible stupidity of liberals like Terry and Obaaaama.
Consider the possibility, Terry, that Gates is working with a severely limited budget, and has to make difficult choices.
Jaibones on August 5, 2009 at 4:45 PM
There, fixed it for you, Joe.
As VP you got to set a good example and start using proper IngSoc grammar.
auzerais on August 5, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Frigging hypocrites need to be thrown out by their ears!!! They really have no shame and they think that voters and taxpayers are idiots.
bayview on August 5, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Since we can’t count on Jon Stewart and the rest of the “brave” nutroots lovers to highlight this hypocrisy, we are going to have to rely on Fox News doing it.
Speedwagon82 on August 5, 2009 at 4:53 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »