NYT..McCain Frequently Used Wife’s Jet for Little Cost

[Joanne98]

Given Senator John McCain’s signature stance on campaign finance reform, it was not surprising that he backed legislation last year requiring presidential candidates to pay the actual cost of flying on corporate jets. The law, which requires campaigns to pay charter rates when using such jets rather than cheaper first-class fares, was intended to reduce the influence of lobbyists and create a level financial playing field.

Skip to next paragraph
Blog
The Caucus
The latest political news from around the nation. Join the discussion.

Candidate Topic Pages
More Politics News
But over a seven-month period beginning last summer, Mr. McCain’s cash-short campaign gave itself an advantage by using a corporate jet owned by a company headed by his wife, Cindy McCain, according to public records. For five of those months, the plane was used almost exclusively for campaign-related purposes, those records show.

Mr. McCain’s campaign paid a total of $241,149 for the use of that plane from last August through February, records show. That amount is approximately the cost of chartering a similar jet for a month or two, according to industry estimates.

The senator was able to fly so inexpensively because the law specifically exempts aircraft owned by a candidate or his family or by a privately held company they control. The Federal Election Commission adopted rules in December to close the loophole — rules that would have required substantial payments by candidates using family-owned planes — but the agency soon lost the requisite number of commissioners needed to complete the rule making.

Because that exemption remains, Mr. McCain’s campaign was able to use his wife’s corporate plane like a charter jet while paying first-class rates, several campaign finance experts said. Several of those experts, however, added that his campaign’s actions, while keeping with the letter of law, did not reflect its spirit.

“This amounts to a subsidy for his campaign, which is notable given how badly they were struggling last year,” said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that collects and analyzes campaign data.

Mr. McCain was not available to be interviewed, a campaign spokeswoman said. In response to written questions, the spokeswoman, Jill Hazelbaker, said his campaign had acted legally and ethically in paying first-class airfares for Mrs. McCain’s corporate aircraft.

Continued>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/us/politics/27plane.html

[Muttocracy]

1. "agency soon lost the requisite number of commissioners"

just happened to lose them?!

"Mr. McCain was not available to be interviewed"

So much for Mr. Straight Talk

[nichomachus]

2. They were

just happened to lose them?!

They were behind the sofa the whole time.

[Igel]

3. It's one of the political fights that you have to have seen to

know about.

Lots of temporary appointments by * to a board that should be even numbers of dem/repub, appointments that lapsed, as all temp appointments do, when the new Congress is in session. I'm not sure that * actually made temp appointments to maintain the evenhandedness; I think I remember there was some board where one of the members became officially independent after s/he was considered or appointed, the result of which would be to make the board de facto majority repub; don't know if it was this board.

One of the repub appointees was a no-no for dems because of something he did in some other position. I forget what he did, but it was egregious, and there's no sign of repentance. (Yes, I'm long on details today.)

Dems wanted to appoint commissioners to the board individually. The repub loser I alluded to would have been excluded.

Repubs said no, appoint all or none. Dems said 'none'.

So the FEC is running without a board of commissioners; they cannot make rules, set rules, or hear disputes until they have a quorum. What that'll mean is anybody's guess: What if McCain (or Obama) is doing something now that was objected to back in November, but which won't be decided until next December? Should be interesting.

[Rosemary2205]

4. I'm not even sure I understand why this is a problem.

If they own the jet why can't they use it anyway they like?

[Muttocracy]

5. I'm unclear whether it's hers or her company's - thought maybe that doesn't matter? nt

[varelse]

6. Given Senator John McCain’s signature stance on campaign finance reform,

it was not surprising that he backed legislation last year requiring presidential candidates to pay the actual cost of flying on corporate jets. The law, which requires campaigns to pay charter rates when using such jets rather than cheaper first-class fares, was intended to reduce the influence of lobbyists and create a level financial playing field."

Pardon the pun, but his use of his wife's corporate jet flies in the face of his stance on campaign reform.

[UTUSN]

7. Kickapee, kickapoo!1 n/t

[joeybee12]

8. K&R! Let's get this on the first page! n/t