"Jets for Jerks" May Be Gone But "Perks for Jerks" Continues

The Wall Street Journal has been hot after Congress on the "Jets for Jerks" program to buy fancy new bizjets for members of congress to zip around the world in. Thanks to the public outcry that program may be gone, but as the WSJ reports there is still big money to be made on congressional junkets:

The total cost for congressional overseas travel is never made public because the price tag for State Department advance teams and military planes used by lawmakers are folded into much larger budgets. Members of Congress must only report the total per diem reimbursements they receive in cash for hotels, meals and local transport.

They don’t have to itemize expenses—a convenient arrangement since most costs are covered by the government or local hosts. Some trips subtract some hotel and meal costs from the per diems, others do not. “The policy is completely inconsistent,” one House member told me. Total per diem allowances (per person, including staff) can top $3,000 for a single trip. Unused funds are supposed to be given back to the government, but congressional records show that rarely happens.

It’s all part of the “arrogance of D.C.,” Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) told me Monday. “These are lucrative payments since many members have zero expenses overseas.” After his last government-sponsored trip to Iraq, Mr. Coburn wrote the U.S. Treasury a check for his unused per diem. Not wanting to be dependent on government handlers, he paid for his own trip to the Middle East a couple of years ago. “I learned a lot more on my own than on the government trips I’ve been on,” he says.

The House’s official handbook requires that lawmakers use regular U.S. airlines “whenever possible, unless such service is not reasonably available.” But congressional records show members routinely take military planes to London, Paris and other well-served locales. Members can fly for free with their spouses on military aircraft.

You’d think House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would be wise to the poor symbolism of a jet-setting Congress. But she’s part of the problem. No one objects to her ability to fly on a government jet from time to time. But last March the watchdog group Judicial Watch obtained embarrassing internal Pentagon correspondence: “Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi’s team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?” one such email read. “[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case.’”

Other emails show intermediaries for Mrs. Pelosi frustrated when told transportation demands couldn’t be met. “It is my understanding there are no [Gulfstream] 5’s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable . . . The speaker will want to know where the planes are,” wrote aide Kay King. In a separate email, when told a certain type of aircraft wouldn’t be available, Ms. King wrote, “This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset Speaker.” A Pelosi spokesman said the Judicial Watch report seemed to be based on “a few emails.”

I don't know about you, but I like to have a Gulfstream G5 reserved for me each weekend. And I get very cranky if it's not available. I'm a regular person just like Nancy.