Posted by Christi Parsons at 1:45 p.m. CST
As senators consider sweeping ethics reform this week, there's one perk of office they're having a hard time giving up: cheap use of corporate jets.
The House voted last week to ban the cut-rate use of the jets, which lawmakers are currently required to pay for only at the rate of a first-class airfare. But leaders in the Senate aren't sure they'll be able to pass the same thing.
Given all of the other changes they're willing to make, why are the jets such a big deal?
"It's part of what I call the culture of entitlement in Congress," said Fred Wertheimer, president of the reform organization Democracy 21. "It's a sense that senators feel that they're entitled to have corporations make their planes available at prices that are artificially reduced."
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who has suggested doing away with the cheap flights, boiled it down even further.
"Corporate jets are nice," he said. "They're waiting for you and you don't have to take your shoes off."
Senators are working on ethics reform this week.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Hey Paulo,check out Zorn's post story today.
He's having a discussion about whether you're a real person or a GOP designed self exploding robot.
I voted for the later.
Posted by: John E. | January 9, 2007 2:02 PM
I like the idea of requiring all of congress to use commercial airlines.
It would get them in touch with the people again, and what everyday real people have to deal with; humiliating and humbling treatment at the mercy of high handed officialdom.
Posted by: C.Morris | January 9, 2007 2:33 PM
I can't believe anyone would believe that free cushy airfare for legislators on the corporate dime could EVER be in any way good for our government.
Posted by: Jeff | January 9, 2007 2:37 PM
As for members of Congress flying around on corporate jets, not only should the people's representatives have to wait in line at the airport like everyone else, the main thing politicians do when they fly on private jets is shuttle from one fundraising event to another. If lack of access to corporate jets makes it harder for members of Congress to fundraise – good! Now it's time for the Senate to match the House restriction.
Posted by: Jeff | January 9, 2007 3:37 PM
If they did rule out use of corporate jets, that would be great. However, you know there will be some loop hole that will allow it. These are the very people writing the laws...most of them lawyers!
Posted by: lochnessmonster | January 9, 2007 5:35 PM
"If lack of access to corporate jets makes it harder for members of Congress to fundraise – good! Now it's time for the Senate to match the House restriction.
Posted by: Jeff | Jan 9, 2007 3:37:34 PM"
Jeff,
Now you are talkin'.
One thing everyone seems to agree on in the Swamp is the toxic effect of big money on our political system. Unfortunately, the Supremes have equated; $$$ = free speech.
Posted by: C.Morris | January 9, 2007 9:07 PM
WHAT A MISLEADING HEADLINE "Flying High" I thought this was going to be about Barack "Hussein" Obama and how he coped with trying to find out who he was.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | January 9, 2007 10:10 PM
If you take Jon Huntsman's jet away from 'borin' Orrin Hatch, he'll be just one of the "little people".
Posted by: dt | January 10, 2007 12:57 AM
dt,
Wasn't Orrin in John Ashcroft's boy band?
Posted by: C.Morris | January 10, 2007 8:10 AM
I flew coach next to Rahm Emanuel from Denver to ORD. First class was probably booked by pig Hastert and his traveling entourage of advisors. Or maybe he was on the Jenny Craig corp. jet.
Posted by: Bubba | January 10, 2007 10:08 AM
"Let the eagle Soooaaaarrrr"
"Like he's never soared befooooorrrrre"
Posted by: Bubba | January 10, 2007 10:26 AM
Bubba,
You need to post that as somebody's ring tone on the Radish lady blog.
Also, did you notice Snowjob's reference to 'riddin dirty'??
Yikes.
Hilariously sickening.
Posted by: C.Morris | January 10, 2007 4:59 PM