It’s those damn special interests stirring up the voters!

 WASHINGTON — When 10 members of Congress wanted to study climate change, they did more than just dip their toes into the subject: They went diving and snorkeling at the Great Barrier Reef. They also rode a cable car through the Australian rain forest, visited a penguin rookery and flew to the South Pole.

The 11-day trip — with six spouses traveling along as well — took place over New Year’s 2008. Details are only now coming to light as part of a Wall Street Journal analysis piecing together the specifics of the excursion.

It’s tough to calculate the travel bills racked up by members of Congress, but one thing’s for sure: They use a lot of airplanes. In recent days, House of Representatives members allocated $550 million to upgrade the fleet of luxury Air Force jets used for trips like these — even though the Defense Department says it doesn’t need all the planes.

The South Pole trip, led by Rep. Brian Baird (D., Wash.), ranks among the priciest. The lawmakers reported a cost to taxpayers of $103,000.

That figure, however, doesn’t include the actual flying, because the trip used the Air Force planes, not commercial carriers. Flight costs would lift the total tab to more than $500,000, based on Defense Department figures for aircraft per-hour operating costs.

Lawmakers say the trip offered them a valuable chance to learn about global warming and to monitor how federal funds are spent. “The trip we made was more valuable than 100 hearings,” said Rep. Baird, its leader. “Are there members of Congress who take trips somewhat recreationally? Perhaps. Is this what this trip was about? Absolutely not.”

Other legislators agree it wasn’t all fun and games. “There are a lot more glamorous things to do than hang out on the South Pole,” said Rep. Frank Lucas, an Oklahoma Republican who traveled as well. “I never want to wear that many clothes again.”

Taxpayer-funded travel for Congress is booming. Legislators and aides reported spending about $13 million on overseas trips last year, a Journal analysis has shown, a nearly 10-fold jump since 1995.

Other lawmakers have taken big-ticket trips. In June 2007, Ted Stevens, then a Republican senator from Alaska, and four other senators went to the Paris Air Show, costing the government $121,000 for hotels, meals and other expenses. Information needed to estimate their flight costs wasn’t available.

Mr. Stevens said the purpose was to learn more about developments in aviation. “My state is very dependent on the industry” because many cities can be reached only by air, he said.

The 10 members of Congress gathered at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland on the morning of Dec. 29, 2007, along with several of their staff. Those who brought spouses were four Democrats (Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas, Rep. Russ Carnahan of Missouri, Rep. Charlie Melancon of Louisiana and Rep. John Tanner of Tennessee) and two Republicans (Rep. Randy Neugebauer of Texas and Mr. Lucas of Oklahoma). Spouses must pay for their own meals, but they don’t have to pay for lodging and travel.

Asked about his wife’s participation, Mr. Lucas cited a busy congressional schedule that often keeps families separated, even on weekends. If spouses couldn’t go along on trips abroad, “then you couldn’t travel — simple as that,” he said.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Melancon said the representative’s wife of 37 years, Peachy Melancon, added “insight and perspective” that “only amplified the educational benefit he gained as a lawmaker.”

Representatives for the other four who brought spouses declined to comment on doing so. Lawmakers said the trip offered them a valuable chance to learn about global warming and to monitor how federal funds are spent on scientific projects.

The party boarded a C-40, the military’s business-class version of a Boeing 737. It is designed to be an “office in the sky” for government leaders, according to the Air Force Web site.

The lawmakers touched down at their first destination, Christchurch, New Zealand, a few hours before sunset on New Year’s Eve. Mr. Baird watched the town’s fireworks at midnight, his spokesman said.

The next day, Jan. 1, 2008, preparing for their South Pole trip, the lawmakers were provided clothing for extreme cold weather, including thermal underwear, according to the National Science Foundation.

On Jan. 2, the lawmakers and four aides flew to McMurdo Station in Antarctica on a supply flight, about 800 miles from the South Pole. “Take your camera to dinner,” the itinerary reminded the travelers, for a post-meal tour of Discovery Hut, an outpost that was the launching pad for early South Pole expeditions.


After flying back to McMurdo, they visited a penguin rookery to see the “threats to the wildlife,” said a spokeswoman for the National Science Foundation.

They also spoke with National Aeronautics and Space Administration scientists there who hope to use the South Pole’s frigid and hostile environment to test inflatable moon dwellings. “Some of the most important science in the world is being done down there,” Mr. Baird said.

Next stop: Australia. The group took a boat trip to the Great Barrier Reef, where lawmakers spoke with scientists about research showing its vulnerability to climate change, according to the Science Committee’s report.

Mr. Baird, a certified scuba diver, said he went on two shallow reef dives with scientists. Rep. Loretta Sanchez, a California Democrat, said she preferred to snorkel. Mr. Lucas said he didn’t enjoy the boat trip because he hasn’t spent much time on the water. The reef is one of the world’s premier diving destination

The tab for two days in Australia was more than $50,000, according to the travel-disclosure form. According to the document, the lawmakers spent $32,000 on hotels and meals, $7,000 on transportation and $10,000 for “other purposes.” As on all such oversees trips, each lawmaker gets a daily stipend of $350 for incidentals, according to the form.

Mr. Baird said the travel report for Australia was inaccurate. His spokesman didn’t respond to requests for details.

The trip ended with a layover in Hawaii to refuel the Air Force plane. There, lawmakers visited troops based at Hickman Air Force Base.

On the last night of their 11-day trip, the lawmakers stayed at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel in Waikiki. The spokesman for Mr. Baird said he would have been “every bit as happy camping as staying in a hotel.”

Except that they didn’t go camping, of course – we bought them the most expensive hotel rooms on the island. Lyndon Johnson said that the difference between being a Senator and a Congressman was “the difference between chicken salad and chicken shit.” No longer.

You know, I’ve grown tired of being called a member of a “special interest’ for wanting to raise my family, live in peace and keep most of my money. The real special interests, it seems to me, all want to take other peoples’s money and use the power of the government to force them to behave in ways that they think they should. Wall Street firms, teachers unions, manufacturers, the UAW are all special interests. Since the term has been so corrupted, meaning today anyone who wants what you don’t want them to have, I suggest we use Ayn Rand’s term for these people: looters. And the chief looters of them all are the porkers at the trough in Washington.


Filed under Uncategorized

8 responses to “It’s those damn special interests stirring up the voters!

  1. Front Row Phil

    Thanks for bringing this to the attention of your readers. If you’ll excuse me, I have to go puke.

  2. anonymous

    Communism is an amusing form of elitism

  3. Anonymous

    Looters. Yes, that’s exactly the right term.

    So what do ya’ll think of Dodd’s getting “cleared” of any ethics charges by his Senate brethren?

  4. Anonymous

    I saw this story en route back to NYC. Abused and hassled by petty tyrants at the TSA, then by nasty airline personnel. Just following the rules, it’s THE LAW. Airports have become politically correct mini police states and I noticed the large numbers of my traveling brethren, hundreds of us, all shuffling along like cattle while empowered rent-a-cops barked and bullied (no toothpaste for you, missy, that’s 3.2 ounces). Most troubling, nobody seems overly bothered by this, or at least we all shrug and say “THEY are keeping us safe” or something equally untrue and silly. Sign at the Tampa airport “TSA agents have rights, too. Verbal abuse of a TSA agent is strictly prohibited.” By what? Under the 1st amendment, can’t I call the guy an idiot? Not without risking arrest.

    The point here… how many of the VERY IMPORTANT legislators who have enacted these laws and created this huge bureaucratic union of thugs and morons keeping us “safe” actually have to deal with them? Answer, very few, they are so important they jet around at taxpayer expense on private planes. Ditto for the mega rich morons pushing liberal agendas… for everyone else.

    I am starting a new political party, mostly Libertarian. It’s called LMA – Leave Me Alone!!! 🙂

  5. Rachelle

    Enjoy this site for the reminder that there are others who see what is happening and are willing to make note, albeit as “anonymous.” I fear the march on our institions is proceeding apace and while we few are aware, that’s all we are. Anyone know if someone is working on a Greenwich Tea Party — literally, a party as opposed to a happening — so we can try to do something apart from chat? Not a RINO effort, please, a patriotic one.

  6. Old School Grump

    ” ‘A spokeswoman for Mr. Melancon said the representative’s wife of 37 years, Peachy Melancon, added “insight and perspective” that ‘only amplified the educational benefit he gained as a lawmaker.’ ”

    These junkets are, in and of themselves, disgusting enough. The claim that spouses tag along to lend “insight and perspective” is flat out insulting, and I would like to know if the Congressmen submit for reimbursement for babysitting, dog kenneling, or other “travel related expenses” incurred when both spouses are away at the same time. But the fact that MY tax dollars funded a jaunt by someone named “Peachy” who was doing anything other than entertaining the troops in a g-string is truly a call to tax-payer revolt.

  7. networthdeclining

    Its is a shock that these guys are so out of touch. How can visiting the South Pole help anyone understand global warming? Try going to the slash and burn farmers in Brazil. Or how about the gas flare fields in Nigeria. Or a conference of scientists in Bern. But these hell holes are no fun to visit, especially with spouses. I dont understand why congress is not focussed on the economy: How do we create more jobs in the US? Vote out the whole crowd I say.

    • christopherfountain

      Because, networth, why on earth would you want to be a congressman if you had to go into the mosquito-infested jungles of Brazil or, worse, the stinking oil delta region of Nigeria? No, the place to study global warming is the Great Barrier Reef or wherever that island paradise was that hosted the GW conference for 20,000 global warmers, all flying on the taxpayers’ dime.