Records Show Ron Paul Trips Paid Twice

[ProSense]

Records Show Ron Paul Trips Paid Twice

House Appears to Have Reimbursed Congressman for Trips That Were Also Paid for by Other Groups

By Jonathan Strong
Roll Call Staff

Rep. Ron Paul appears to have been paid twice for flights between Washington, D.C., and his Congressional district, receiving reimbursement from taxpayers and also from a network of political and nonprofit organizations he controlled, according to public records and documents obtained by Roll Call.

Roll Call identified eight flights for which the Texas Republican, a GOP presidential candidate and leading champion of smaller government, was reimbursed twice for the same trip. Roll Call also found dozens more instances of duplicate payments for travel from 1999 to 2009, totaling thousands of dollars' worth of excess payments, but the evidence in those cases is not as complete.

<...>

Spokesman Jesse Benton said it was "possible that wholly inadvertent errors were made in a handful of instances" in which flights were reimbursed twice, but he maintained that "absolutely zero taxpayer funds were ever misused."

Benton said those flights "may appear to show duplicative reimbursements because Congressman Paul's wife or a campaign staffer traveled with him. In such instances, the U.S. House would reimburse Congressman Paul's travel to D.C. for Congressional business, while his campaign or political action committee would reimburse his traveling companion's ticket." But Benton declined to discuss any of the trips in detail, arguing that the office does not have records for many of the years in question and that Roll Call was using "stolen" credit card records as the basis for the story.

- more -

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_90/Records-Show-Ron-Paul-Trips-Paid-Twice-212118-1.html?pos=hftxt

If he's admitting "errors were made," was the money reimbursed?

Then again, there are two more excuses "stolen" credit cards and missing records.

Ron Paul flew first class 74 times on the taxpayer's dime.
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/1002176366

[nanabugg]

1. Crook, thy name is GOP. nt

[Scuba]

2. Records show Ron Paul is a racist pig.

[BlueToTheBone]

5. Goes along with being a cheat.

I would have been surprised if he hadn't double dipped! Another self-entitled white man for whom the laws do not apply.

[tech_smythe]

39. he's just a hypocrite

proving that his stuff about the libertarian way is a lie, much like the libertarian way is.
he steals from the government, when he should be paying his own way, as he expects others to do.
i wonder if the dems will hit him on that.

doubtful, since they're about as spineful as a jellyfish.

[Frustratedlady]

3. We must remember that whatever the Repugs protest about the most...

are usually what they try to get away with. Maybe that's why they know so much about the subject.

"Thou protesteth too much" should be their slogan.

[HughBeaumont]

4. It's literally amazing how many people this two-bit shyster has fooled.

And how blatantly batshit insane his flock is . . .

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. Add to "racist" and "deranged" and he's a trifecta of electoral lunacy.

[think]

7. Do we need to sink to GOP tactics to smear opponents?:

Benton also argued "Roll Call did not provide Congressman Paul's campaign with copies of the credit card receipts it relied on in writing this article. Those records, if authentic, apparently were stolen from Congressman Paul's business office in Texas.

"Congressman Paul has taken many thousands of commercial flights between Houston and Washington, D.C., since returning to Congress in 1997. The particular flights Roll Call provided us as examples occurred between 1999 and 2005, well before the current time periods for which the FEC and IRS require records to be maintained."

I hate it when the GOP resorts to these tactics and I hate it even more when the Democrat side which is suppose to be above such crap do it.

Please stick to real issues and not made up BS supposedly based on stolen credit card records from the congressman.

[ProSense]

8. Wait

Do we need to sink to GOP tactics to smear opponents?:

Benton also argued "Roll Call did not provide Congressman Paul's campaign with copies of the credit card receipts it relied on in writing this article. Those records, if authentic, apparently were stolen from Congressman Paul's business office in Texas.

...you're accusing who of smearing whom by quoting Benton? Should we believe Paul about the newsletters?

I hate it when the GOP resorts to these tactics and I hate it even more when the Democrat side which is suppose to be above such crap do it.

I hate when people try to protect Ron Paul using false equivalencies.

Please stick to real issues and not made up BS supposedly based on stolen credit card records from the congressman.

This OP is about a real issue!

[think]

11. What does this have to do with the newsletters? So invoking newsletters trumps facts?

Yellow journalism is yellow journalism. Period.

If you have facts and not hearsay I'm all for it. But this kind of smear does a disservice to Democrats rather than makes their case.

It's about integrity and honesty or at least it use to be.

There are PLENTY of valid and important issues that differentiate Dems and Repugs but this is just playing fast and loose with facts.

[ProSense]

12. Oh

Yellow journalism is yellow journalism. Period.

If you have facts and not hearsay I'm all for it. But this kind of smear does a disservice to Democrats rather than makes their case.

It's about integrity and honesty or at least it use to be.

There are PLENTY of valid and important issues that differentiate Dems and Repugs but this is just playing fast and loose with facts.

...bullshit! The campaign's explanation includes "errors were made," there were likely "duplicative reimbursements," "stolen" credit card records and "the office does not have records for many of the years in question." More:

Benton suggested it was "possible" there could have been a second credit card Paul was using to book his official travel, but he offered no evidence to support that possibility.

Your say anything response about "yellow journalism" "integrity and honesty" is simply an attempt to distract from the report by trying to appear objective.

You can find detailed examples in the report.

[think]

13. why didn't Roll Call make the credit card records available to both the public &

the Ron Paul campaign so they could check?

[ProSense]

16. So

why didn't Roll Call make the credit card records available to both the public &

the Ron Paul campaign so they could check?

...you're dismissing the report based on a single claim by Benton, but ignoring the other excuses? Why don't you demand Roll Call release the information?

For example, on March 24, 2003, Paul purchased a round-trip flight from Washington, D.C., to Houston for $651.50. Several weeks later, filings with the FEC show, the Committee to Re-Elect Ron Paul paid $651.50 for the Continental Airlines ticket. Congressional expenditure records show Paul also was reimbursed $651.50 by taxpayers for the same flight.

FYI, FEC filings are public.

It's interesting that you're invoking "integrity and honesty" using an excuse from the Paul campaign as the basis.

[think]

17. I support Obama with the same fever as I do ANY person when the situation merits it

so accuse me of what ever you like.

[ProSense]

19. Maybe

I support Obama with the same fever as I do ANY person when the situation merits it

so accuse me of what ever you like.

...you should avoid accusing people of employing "GOP tactics to smear opponents."

[think]

18. Why don't I ask Roll Call to release their information? Because I'm not the one making the claim

Roll Call is making these claims based on their information from their source. Not me.

[ProSense]

20. You're

Why don't I ask Roll Call to release their information? Because I'm not the one making the claim

Roll Call is making these claims based on their information from their source. Not me.

...the one demanding the information be released. If you're that interested in clearing Paul's name, you can address your concerns to Roll Call. You can even track down the FEC filings on your own. Maybe you can contact the Paul campaign and tell them you believe they're being falsely accused of double dipping at the expense of tax payers. Oh, and let them know that you believe that doing so is not a "real issue."

[think]

23. I went through this same stuff defending Obama where the OP makes

claims and then expects me to disprove the claim.

I wasted way too much time back then until I realized I was being lead around like a pony and refused to continue to do so. I say the same now.

I repeat I am not the party making these claims so the burden of proof is not my responsibility anymore than Obama should have to defend going to the church where the Rev Wright was. The repugs claimed he was there and supported those few sermons where Rev Write spoke his mind.

So since Obama went to the church is it his burden to prove whether or not he knew those sermons were made? Does he need to prove he wasn't present during those sermons? I say HELL NO!

I'm not going to try and find the even more ludicrous claims waged against Obama but hopefully you get the gist.

You have posted two different stories about Ron Paul and travel expenses. The first one involving first class travel was easily proved and based on solid facts. So I have no problem with it. It is factual, accurate, and shows that Ron Paul while stating his staunch fiscal conservatism has not held fast to this dictum.

This second story has some facts mixed with unvalidated accusations based on credit card receipts the author has not revealed. The whole sum of the potential over charges is less than $15k from at least 7 years previous or more.

Considering the sheer number of flights taken by any congressman over a ten year or so span this not some great issue comparatively speaking. So while we are parsing words over these small discrepancies in a travel budget it's almost insane in light of the out of control spending in our Government.

I'm much more concerned about Ron Paul's stand on abolishing the EPA. This is in my mind a REAL issue that has far much more validity and effect on Americans than these claims regarding travel expenses which amounts to a hill of beans in comparison.

If there are discrepancies and Ron Paul's people double billed for 10-12 plane flights then they need to reimburse these funds. But hey let's use the same scrutiny for all candidates and see what we come up with. And further more let's "steal" or "take" the credit card records of congress people and make accusations based on these records and then refuse to release the records to the candidates we chose to "expose". but that's what a real journalist would do right?

In the end the main thing that is important to me is that what is passed off as news is factual and credible. The facts are not tangible entities that can be tossed aside if one wants to make a case. without facts you have one person's word against the other. Facts are what make a statement true or false not unsubstantiated claims.

[Iggo]

27. Fuck Ron Paul.

[ProSense]

28. This

I went through this same stuff defending Obama where the OP makes

claims and then expects me to disprove the claim.

...and the rest of the comment is a long excuse based on nothing but your desire to dismiss the article. It has nothing to do with Obama, and continuing to invoke your defense of Obama doesn't make your excuses valid.

The article makes a specific charge, cites examples and the source. Paul's campaign responded with a series of less than convincing claims.

Not only are you defending Paul, but you're also making excuses as to why members of Congress should be excused for keeping poor records and making up claims when challenged on abuse of taxpayer funds.

[think]

29. You win. Just remember when similar tactics are used on Democrats that you defended this /nt

[ProSense]

30. This

"You win. Just remember when similar tactics are used on Democrats that you defended this"

...isn't a game, and if a Democrat is accused of double dipping, citing examples and FEC filings (easily verifiable), I hope they're held accountable. You seem to want to write off the charge in the face of the Paul campaign's absurd multiple excuses.

[think]

34. Looks like I was wrong. The first class travel story is a bust as well:

I actually thought the 1st class story was accurate in regards to Ron Paul but according to Lawrence O'Donnell the AP story was patently false:

This is what I was getting at with the new charges. If the credit card records are the smoking gun which show double billing then they should be listed as "Exhibit A" rather than alluded to. If the claims by the author are accurate I can think of no reason not to make these documents public to back the author's claim.

If a Democrat was accused in this fashion would you not want the Democratic candidate to have a chance to see the documents that are the basis of the claim? Would you not expect those documents to be presented and be willing to allow the the Dem candidate to respond to those claims if they are inaccurate, false, or there are mitigating circumstances?

Roll Call claims they gave the RP camp the significant information from those records to the Paul camp. If they did, why after Paul's campaign claims that they don't have access to the complete documents, do they not release these documents instead of leaving it up to speculation?

Does it not concern you when when Republicans try to make Dems jump through hoops to prove claims in regards to events that occurred a very long time ago and immediately brand the Dem based on loosely based speculation?

Is it not worth giving an opponent the same set of criteria to be used by that we would expect Democratic candidates to be judged by?

The facts may bear out that Ron Paul intentionally double dipped or unintentionally double dipped therefore showing some level of ineptitude. If so bring the evidence forth and let the chips fall where they may.

[ProSense]

35. O'Donnell's

It wasn`t just lost in the headline of the AP story. It wasn`t anywhere in the AP story. Anyone who read the AP story was led to believe that Congressman Paul was buying first class tickets using congressional funds. Paul`s chief of staff continued, "changes in the congressional voting schedule are frequent. And if he bought a non-refundable ticket and then didn`t use it, he would incur the expense or change fee personally. That is, the U.S. House would not allow him to be reimbursed for a flight he ultimately didn`t take."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46040648/ns/msnbc_tv/

....claim is bogus. It was in the AP story.

<...>

Congressional members don't have to pay the government rate for travel, but most do, including many like Paul and Bachmann who advocate cuts in federal spending.

"You could almost always beat the government rate," said Steve Ellis, vice president of the Washington-based Taxpayers for Common Sense, a federal budget watchdog group. "They need to be walking the walk, and one of the ways they can do that is to be fiscally responsible for how they spend their member office money."

Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign manager, didn't respond to a written request to explain how Paul's use of more expensive airfare, which allows him to fly first class, corresponds with his commitment to cut federal spending. Instead, he sent a statement that started, "No one is more committed to cutting spending than Dr. Paul."

<...>

Paul paid $51,972 for his government-rate flights between Washington and Houston between May 2009 and March 2011, or more than twice the $24,351 average airfare on Continental for travel between Washington and Houston. The average airfare figure represents the price for all tickets purchased for Continental flights between Washington and Houston, including economy and first-class travel, according to the Transportation Department's Domestic Airline Fares Consumer Report, which collects airfare information for the nation's busiest travel routes.

Paul's staff regularly booked him in first class on flights when tickets were purchased, according to expense records. His office paid between $1,217 and $1,311 for each round-trip flight, compared to the average airfare for that trip ranging from $528 to $760, according to the airline fares consumer report.

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Paul-fights-Washington-spending-flies-first-class-2562010.php

In fact, if you go to the Daily Kos link in the DU thread, you'll see it was also discussed. Paul is a hypocrite, and that was the point of that piece.

[think]

37. So because Ron Paul like almost every other congressman pays the government rate

for a REFUNDABLE airline ticket he's a hypocrite?

Please name one other congress person who doesn't buy the government rate refundable ticket. There probably are some but I cannot find a single one mentioned anywhere.

Show me ANYWHERE in the AP piece where this fact is given:

The congressman`s chief of staff, Jeff Dice, e-mailed us a few more
details. Congressman Paul "doesn`t purchase first class tickets for
congressional travel. He buys a refundable coach ticket at the federal
government rate.

Additional back ground from the O'Donnel piece:

It wasn`t just lost in the headline of the AP story. It wasn`t
anywhere in the AP story. Anyone who read the AP story was led to believe
that Congressman Paul was buying first class tickets using congressional
funds. Paul`s chief of staff continued, "changes in the congressional
voting schedule are frequent. And if he bought a non-refundable ticket and
then didn`t use it, he would incur the expense or change fee personally.
That is, the U.S. House would not allow him to be reimbursed for a flight
he ultimately didn`t take."

~snip~

His chief of staff explains, "he upgrades to first class when
available, not always, using his frequent flyer miles with Continental
Airlines, which he flies frequently from Houston to Washington, thus
generating many such miles."
So the first class seats don`t cost the government one additional
penny above a regular government coach rate.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46040648/ns/msnbc_tv/#.TzBhQVxSRsM

Do you really blame a congressman for buying a ticket that is refundable at the government rate?

The claim was that the American tax payer was paying for 1st class travel for the congressman. This is FALSE. The difference was made up in airline miles.

I take O'Donnell at his word that this is a false narrative.

Anyone can take a kernel of truth and slant an article if they so desire. The question is should they and should we accept it as responsible journalism.

The right wing is the master of this kind of journalistic malfeasance. Shall we emulate their example?

[ProSense]

38. No

So because Ron Paul like almost every other congressman pays the government rate

for a REFUNDABLE airline ticket he's a hypocrite?

He's a hypocrite because he runs around advocating small government, posing as the most frugal member of Congress and pushing a plan to cut $1 trillion from the budget by eliminating federal agencies and programs that serve poor and elderly Americans.

Jesse Benton, Paul's campaign manager, didn't respond to a written request to explain how Paul's use of more expensive airfare, which allows him to fly first class, corresponds with his commitment to cut federal spending. Instead, he sent a statement that started, "No one is more committed to cutting spending than Dr. Paul."

But Paul's congressional travel conflicts with claims in campaign appearances that he's the most frugal and serious deficit hawk in the race.

"The talk you hear in Washington is pure talk, because there is nobody suggesting, the other candidates are not talking about real cuts," Paul said in a speech to supporters last week after his second-place finish in New Hampshire.

He has proposed cutting $1 trillion from the federal budget during his first year as president, and has confronted other candidates in public forums as "big government conservatives."

"The right wing is the master of this kind of journalistic malfeasance. Shall we emulate their example?"

Ron Paul likely has no bigger apologist!

[think]

40. If my goal was to be an RP apologist wouldn't I be better served to point this

out on both threads that you started? I chose to respond here because the issue, for me at least, is accuracy and journalistic integrity. You may feel that this is just about defending Paul but for me this is not a blanket defense for him.

What passes sometimes for journalism ESPECIALLY on the right leaves a great deal to be desired.

In this case it is the Dems passing around these stories and in the long run this will not help the Democratic cause IMO. One of these stories in fact was called out by a well respected liberal ex-congressman whose opinion I would think would carry some weight in defending my point.

There are so many easy take downs in regards to the right wing where one doesn't have to take the least credible arguments over the greater whole of arguments that have more merit.

Just because the story sounds good and supports a person's view of a candidate doesn't make it credible if people are omitting facts to slant an article. I'm not sure I can make my concerns any plainer.

I guess I'm an apologist for Obama, The Volt, and OWS too since I've defended inaccurate depictions of them too. C'est la vie.

You mention Ron Paul's stance on Social Security and programs for the poor. Guess what? I COMPLETELY agree with you that these programs should not be cut.

Do I think it's because RP wants the elderly and poor to suffer? No. I really think he believes in the free market in a way only he can. For the life of me I do not understand how he would believe the free market and charitable outreach can adequately handle these situations.

As for the article mentioned in the beginning of this thread, if the credit card records are released as one would expect since they are the documents used to make the claim, I have amply stated my response that this would be a different situation. Without those documents the story is factually incomplete like the first class flying story.

I'm sorry if you feel my intent was anything other than to point out the inconsistencies in these articles. I should have found a more tactful way to express my disapproval with the quality of this article so as to not make you feel like it was a personal attack on you. It was not meant to be and I do apologize if you feel otherwise.

[ProSense]

41. I know

If my goal was to be an RP apologist wouldn't I be better served to point this out on both threads that you started? I chose to respond here because the issue, for me at least, is accuracy and journalistic integrity. You may feel that this is just about defending Paul but for me this is not a blanket defense for him....You mention Ron Paul's stance on Social Security and programs for the poor. Guess what? I COMPLETELY agree with you that these programs should not be cut. Do I think it's because RP wants the elderly and poor to suffer? No. I really think he believes in the free market in a way only he can. For the life of me I do not understand how he would believe the free market and charitable outreach can adequately handle these situations.

...Paul and the other Republicans really care. His advocacy to get rid of the Civil Rights Act is because he's looking out for the best interest of blacks. His "honest rape" is out of a sincere love and appreciation for women. Oh, and he didn't know about the newsletters.

Just thought I'd help with the defense.

[think]

42. So are the articles factual or not?

If you are expecting me to defend the racist comments in his newsletters, his anti choice stance, and his wrong view on the civil rights commission you've got the wrong guy.

I won't waste anymore of your time nor mine. Thank you.

[abelenkpe]

22. Reporting evidence that Ron Paul got double reimbursements for travel

and pocketed the money like a two bit grifter is yellow journalism?

WTF are you doing on democratic underground kissing Ron Pauls racist, bigoted, lying ass?

[think]

26. I won't stoop to your level. But think about your own words since you wield them so freely.

That problem is in the facts of the article. But apparently facts aren't important to you as long as you get to hate your opponent.

As I said to Pro Sense I had no problem with another article she posted about Ron Paul because it was factual. This article bases it's premise on "obtained" credit card records from an anonymous source which they won't reveal. Yes, there are discrepancies but we are talking about a few accounts over many many years.

The issue is not Ron Paul but factual accuracy but apparently you know me well enough to call me a racist lying bigot because I am upset with the accuracy of facts used in discussion.

Thanks pal.

[abelenkpe]

32. You have a reading comprehension problem

if you read my post and think I called you a lying racist bigot. But it does explain all your other posts in this thread.

[think]

33. My apologies. You are correct. Sorry I did read your post wrong./nt

[FSogol]

9. Fuck Ron Paul.

Griffters gotta grift.

[think]

10. Brilliant response. sigh...

[karynnj]

24. There are two problem here

1) the stealing of the records -

2) The alleged double billing. If this happened, it is a big deal and something that should hurt Paul.

The Paul response is rather weird. I would expect that they would simply demand to see the proof. (Even those of us with no connection ask for a link to allegations that are not common knowledge. Here, they are kind of admitting 2) by saying that they are based on stolen records.

Here, the "Democratic side" seems completely uninvolved - unless you are arguing they stole the records. Roll Call is not part of the democratic party.

[Historic NY]

14. People always use a stolen credit cards to book travel to Texas.....

of course if its stolen then it wouldn't be good because it would have been reported & canceled

[HipChick]

15. Spin..Spin...Spin

Tells me they cheated..

[Iggo]

21. That no-good double-dipping motherfucker!

[msanthrope]

25. I await the Glenn Greenwald article explaining this....nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

36. LMAO!

[Iliyah]

31. Don't do as I do, do as I say

repeat repeat repeat

Great motto for goppers. I'm still trying to understand what "Honest" rape is tho.

[NBachers]

43. Look! Over there! It's Nancy Pelosi's Airplane!