• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House Orders Up Three Elite Jets

from feb, 2007

what's good enough for hastert just won't do for frisco nance

Pelosi Jet Request Sparks Debate - CBS Evening News - CBS News


Pelosi Jet Request Sparks Debate


CBS/AP) Ever since 9/11, a small military jet has been made available to transport the Speaker of the House for security reasons, CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports. The Speaker is second in the line of succession to the presidency.

Before the 2006 elections, the speaker was Republican Dennis Hastert of Illinois. Now it's California Democrat Nancy Pelosi, and she may be getting some more leg room. Pelosi reportedly is asking for a much bigger jet — a government version of the Boeing 757 that can make the trip between Washington and her San Francisco home without stopping to refuel.

The speaker's critics have dubbed it "Pelosi One." Military officials are said to be grumbling about it, and she finds herself on the defensive. Today, she insisted that size doesn't really matter.

"It's not a question of size. It's a question of distance. We want an aircraft that can reach California," Pelosi said.

A Defense Department spokesman said Wednesday that the Pentagon informed Pelosi's staff that she would be provided with a plane but that its size would be based on availability.

But an aircraft like that can also comfortably seat 50 — and Republican leader Roy Blunt of Missouri is among those questioning how all those extra seats might get filled.

"If you can say to your supporters 'Do you want to fly with me from San Francisco this week, spend the week in New York and fly back with me,' that's an incredible perk. It's an incredible fundraising tool," Blunt said.

Pelosi's office told CBS News she'll follow all the appropriate guidelines. The problem is there aren't any yet. Because of the flap, the Defense Department are said to be quickly writing the rules for the speaker's plane — with regulations on everything from size to who can go along for the ride.
 
Gosh, Nancy would have to have STOPS on her trip? That's TERRIBLE. Of course she should be able to fly non-stop. At any cost, of course.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Gosh, Nancy would have to have STOPS on her trip? That's TERRIBLE. Of course she should be able to fly non-stop. At any cost, of course.
Click to expand...
Oh, come, now Catz...you're a woman...surely you don't expect her to use an airplane lavatory on a cross-country flight! :mrgreen:

(sexist, I know, but you left it laying out there....I couldn't resist!)
 
I'm gonna toss this out here as the dissenting voice but...

I can see having 3 jets for Congressional use for Congressional BUSINESS only.
 
jallman said:
I'm gonna toss this out here as the dissenting voice but...

I can see having 3 jets for Congressional use for Congressional BUSINESS only.
Click to expand...
Congressional business is done in the Capitol. For that, Congress doesn't need jets but a fleet of taxis.

Congressmen can fly commercial airlines to go back to their constituents.

There's no other travel that is "Congressional business."
 
celticlord said:
Congressional business is done in the Capitol. For that, Congress doesn't need jets but a fleet of taxis.

Congressmen can fly commercial airlines to go back to their constituents.

There's no other travel that is "Congressional business."
Click to expand...

You are being obtuse if you think that the Capitol is the only place congressmen need to be to run the business of the country.
 
jallman said:
You are being obtuse if you think that the Capitol is the only place congressmen need to be to run the business of the country.
Click to expand...
They need to be in Washington. Or they need to be in their districts. Any place else and they are not doing the business of the country.
 
celticlord said:
They need to be in Washington. Or they need to be in their districts. Any place else and they are not doing the business of the country.
Click to expand...

You're flat wrong. Oversight of projects around the country, visits with different military bases, being on site during catastrophes, receiving guests of state, etc, etc.

Congressmen have a bit more to do than pose for C-Span on the house floor.
 
jallman said:
You're flat wrong. Oversight of projects around the country, visits with different military bases, being on site during catastrophes, receiving guests of state, etc, etc.
Click to expand...
Congressmen know how to critique the digging of ditches? Somehow, I doubt that.

Visits to military bases? That's called a photo-op for the Congressman. Let him do it on his dime.

Being on site during catastrophes? Well, if it's his district, perhaps, but on those rare occasions a Congressman has a catastrophe in his district (besides his own election, that doesn't count), a chit to fly the first flight into the area is cheaper than a jet. And if it's not safe for commercial aviation, a Congressman has no business being in there mucking up the works in the first place.

There's nothing that Congressmen do that requires dedicated jets just for them.
 
celticlord said:
Congressmen know how to critique the digging of ditches? Somehow, I doubt that.
Click to expand...

I'll just disregard this as obtuse refusal to acknowledge that we have committees established for the very purpose of overseeing infrastructure projects.

Visits to military bases? That's called a photo-op for the Congressman. Let him do it on his dime.
Click to expand...

And I will just disregard this as obtuse refusal to acknowledge that we have committees established for the expressed purpose of overseeing our defense operations.

Being on site during catastrophes? Well, if it's his district, perhaps, but on those rare occasions a Congressman has a catastrophe in his district (besides his own election, that doesn't count), a chit to fly the first flight into the area is cheaper than a jet. And if it's not safe for commercial aviation, a Congressman has no business being in there mucking up the works in the first place.
Click to expand...

And I will just disregard this as obtuse refusal to acknowledge that we have committees established for oversight of disasters and catastrophes.

There's nothing that Congressmen do that requires dedicated jets just for them.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, yes...we know you hate congress and the government in general. Nothing new there. Most of us do too. However, your feelings toward the government have done nothing to diminish the need for it to have access to immediate travel if necessary.
 
jallman said:
Yes, yes, yes...we know you hate congress and the government in general. Nothing new there. Most of us do too. However, your feelings toward the government have done nothing to diminish the need for it to have access to immediate travel if necessary.
Click to expand...
I do believe Southwest Airlines has flights out of Reagan International just about every hour on the hour. That's faster than a military jet can be fueled and prepped for takeoff.
 
celticlord said:
I do believe Southwest Airlines has flights out of Reagan International just about every hour on the hour. That's faster than a military jet can be fueled and prepped for takeoff.
Click to expand...

No it isn't when the jet is on stand-by already. And Southwest Airlines is fine for day to day business but I see every reason for there to be immediate travel available for congressmen with urgent business. You've made no effort to diminish that fact.

And you do know that these three jets are just replacing the three jets that congress has already had for years that need to be retired, no?
 
jallman said:
And you do know that these three jets are just replacing the three jets that congress has already had for years that need to be retired, no?
Click to expand...
I do know. Retire the jets and give the Congressmen travel vouchers if they must fly to their photo ops. Don't replace them.
 
jallman said:
No it isn't when the jet is on stand-by already.
Click to expand...
So in addition to the millions paid out for the jet, we have to pay thousands per day to keep it ready to fly a Congressman to a fund raiser. Oh joy.
 
celticlord said:
I do know. Retire the jets and give the Congressmen travel vouchers if they must fly to their photo ops. Don't replace them.
Click to expand...

You still say nothing that acknowledges congressional needs for travel nor diminishes the need for immediate access to that travel in certain circumstances.

I know you would rather put them in the cargo hold of a freight plane sitting on a hard wooden seat and deny them an in flight beverage but that feeling you hold toward the government is not an argument against efficiency.
 
celticlord said:
So in addition to the millions paid out for the jet, we have to pay thousands per day to keep it ready to fly a Congressman to a fund raiser. Oh joy.
Click to expand...

Who made the argument that the jet should be flown to a fundraiser for a congressman? I certainly didn't so why are you attacking an argument that hasn't even been made? You do know what a straw man is, right?
 
This thread is pleasing the Good Reverend. When is Sam coming back. Someone let me know. ;)
 
jallman said:
You still say nothing that acknowledges congressional needs for travel nor diminishes the need for immediate access to that travel in certain circumstances.
Click to expand...
I don't acknowledge it because it does not exist. Congressmen are not part of FEMA, the Military, or any other government entity geared for emergency/rapid response to crisis. If it's a crisis, Congressmen need to stand on the sidelines. If it's not a crisis, they can fly commercial aviation. Either way, no need for a military jet.
 
celticlord said:
I don't acknowledge it because it does not exist.
Click to expand...

OK, CL. I can see you are on one today and that obtuse is the game you intend to play.

I don't intend to let you frustrate me this morning with it. If you wanna have an honest conversation about this at some point, send me a message then. Until then, do whatever it is you think you are accomplishing and have fun doing it. Good day.
 
Congressmen could just stay put in their own states and do their business on the internet.

We could have University of Phoenix set it up. :cool:
 
sazerac said:
Congressmen could just stay put in their own states and do their business on the internet.

We could have University of Phoenix set it up. :cool:
Click to expand...
That's a pretty good idea, the Sun Belt athletic conference is doing that for media days, ULL is one of the participating members, UNO too I believe. Of course, we would lose out on the fun of them screaming across the room and maybe, just maybe we'll see poo-flinging if things really keep ratcheting up. I still say we need to bring back dueling. Sorry, I'm going ADD on everyone.:doh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom