# Bill would bar lawmakers from flying first class



## CHamilton (May 4, 2015)

Bill would bar lawmakers from flying first class




> A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced legislation to prevent members of Congress from using official funds for first-class airfare.
> Reps. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) and Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.) said that luxury air travel is "especially wasteful" while Congress has yet to eliminate the federal deficit.
> 
> "Members of Congress are public servants of the people and should not be considered a privileged status," Gosar and Ruiz said in a joint statement.


----------



## Paysanne (May 4, 2015)

The Bill is 'first class' grandstanding of the highest degree. It has a snowball's chance in Hell's Kitchen of passing and being signed into law by the 'Second Estate.'


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 4, 2015)

Paysanne said:


> The Bill is 'first class' grandstanding of the highest degree. It has a snowball's chance in Hell's Kitchen of passing and being signed into law by the 'Second Estate.'


Then bring it to the floor and let the small government hypocrites vote it down.


----------



## Paysanne (May 4, 2015)

It will quietly wither and die without ever making it out of committee.


----------



## trainman74 (May 4, 2015)

I would guess Members of Congress are on enough VIP lists that they usually get free domestic first-class upgrades anyway.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 4, 2015)

Paysanne said:


> It will quietly wither and die without ever making it out of committee.


It may wither and die but there's no reason it needs to be kept quiet. In a country where anything of relevance is tabled while laws endorsing faith based bullying and bigotry pass with flying colors there is no longer any reason to hold back. What you flippantly dismiss as pointless grandstanding may be the only dialog still worthy of engagement.


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 4, 2015)

This bill has as much chance of even making it to the floor, let alone pass, as members of the House of Lords, er Congress voluntarily giving up bribes, er campaign contributions!

Most of these hypocrites ride on private jets that belong to their puppet masters anyway!


----------



## railiner (May 5, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> This bill has as much chance of even making it to the floor, let alone pass, as members of the House of Lords, er Congress voluntarily giving up bribes, er campaign contributions!
> 
> Most of these hypocrites ride on private jets that belong to their puppet masters anyway!


Well said! But lets hope the press keeps up the pressure on them, disclosing the various 'perks' of office to embarrass them out of accepting them.....


----------



## Hobson's Choice (May 5, 2015)

The Fourth Estate has been marginalized by the Second Estate to the point where the Third Estate voluntarily supports whatever the Second Estate wants.


----------



## NW cannonball (May 5, 2015)

Hobson's Choice said:


> The Fourth Estate has been marginalized by the Second Estate to the point where the Third Estate voluntarily supports whatever the Second Estate wants.


Uuuh -- that seems about right - or left - or -- approximately so


----------



## fairviewroad (May 5, 2015)

trainman74 said:


> I would guess Members of Congress are on enough VIP lists that they usually get free domestic first-class upgrades anyway.


Yes, the headline of the article is a bit misleading. The bill would ban lawmakers from using tax dollars to purchase first-class tickets. That's different from an all-out ban on flying first-class, which is what the headline suggests. West-coast lawmakers in particular easily rack up enough miles to qualify for elite status and likely get upgraded due to that fact****, or else have access to upgrade instruments in the same way that other non-elected frequent fliers do.

And then of course if a bill like this passes, then the first time someone boards a plane at IAD and sees a Congress-critter in First Class, they're going to Tweet about it or call Fox News and then the outrage machine will be in high gear, even if the lawmaker has not technically violated the policy.

****I'm sure there are WAS area gate agents who recognize and upgrade lawmakers due to some sort of "celebrity" factor, but I'd guess even in the Beltway most Congress members are relatively anonymous to the typical airline employee. But even a gratuitous gate agent upgrade would not involve the use of public funds.


----------



## NW cannonball (May 5, 2015)

Long ago, and far away - late 60's

I remember that Senator Karl Mundt (R, SD) raised a stink when a Car Rental outfit refused to rent him a car because he had no credit card.

He had his Senate ID, he had his South Dakota driver's license, probably a lot of cash, but no credit card.

"Sorry, Senator, no go" he was good and mad, but didn't get or propose a "senators rent cars free" bill.

Whether the old goat would support taxpayer-paid frequent-flyer miles for Senators private use -- nobody can say. Simpler times - not.

Now-a-days there's always a "supporter" with a free limousine, or Gulfstream, when a Senator wants to go somewhere.


----------



## tp49 (May 5, 2015)

Maybe it's just me but if they want to be fair they should have included Acela first class in this bill as well.

But we all know it's never going to see the light of the House floor.


----------



## NW cannonball (May 5, 2015)

tp49 said:


> Maybe it's just me but if they want to be fair they should have included Acela first class in this bill as well.
> 
> But we all know it's never going to see the light of the House floor.


True. Good point


----------



## xyzzy (May 5, 2015)

Last time I flew domestic with my congressman, he was in the back of the bus with me.


----------



## Metra Electric Guest (May 7, 2015)

Remember the fuss made when all the GM execs flew to Washington rather than driving....?


----------



## PRR 60 (May 8, 2015)

Metra Electric Guest said:


> Remember the fuss made when all the GM execs flew to Washington rather than driving....?


Ah, no, I don't. The fuss wasn't because they flew, it was because they flew private on a mission to secure the GM bailout.


----------



## jis (May 8, 2015)

Initially, after the policy stating that the company will pay for Minimum Logical Fare (read Coach lowest available fare) came out, the company travel agent folks used to get terribly confused when status based complementary upgrades came through. We had to file explanations on how come we were in First Class. Finally the company clarified the policy stating that complementary upgrades were fine, and if an employee chose to use miles or even their own money to get upgrades that was fine too. The point was that the company would not pay more than the stipulated fare for the base ticket, and also that the employee was not allowed to kick in money to get a higher fare base ticket beyond what the company would pay for. But once the base ticket was secured per rules, the employee is free to put whatever icing they want on it.

Of course different companies have different policies regarding upgrades, but AFAIK I have never heard of a policy in a non-government outfit banning free upgrades. In government and government contract travel situations I thought they were not allowed to accrue any status individually at all so the question of such upgrades did not arise. I don't know if that has changed.

So as you see, this can get pretty complicated pretty quickly.


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 8, 2015)

Good post jis! When I used to use the Metroliners to travel between WAS,PHL,NYP and BOS instead of flying on the infamous Eastern Shuttle, my unit travel department ( one clerk! LOL), as well as co- workers, didn't understand why I wanted to pay the difference between the standard cattle car fares on the shuttle and an Upgrade on the Metroliner.

We eventually got Government rates on Amtrak and the travel desk could book us directly on the train.

This allowed me to use my money that I had paid for upgrades for entertainment, upgraded meals and for alcohol which wasn't allowed on the magnificent travel per diem we government road warriors were given!


----------



## Anderson (May 10, 2015)

From what I have read with respect to the State Dept. rules (which I took a gander at since I was referred to their website to calculate a per diem in Montreal some years ago), generally the rule is as follows:
-The government will pay for coach fares, potentially even refundable ones if you can make a case for them (which I suspect often exists as far as messy return trip timing issues go). The government will also pay for an upgrade to Business Class in certain cases. Those cases generally involve (A) super-long flights; (B) not-quite-as-long flights when there's a meeting more or less immediately upon arrival; or © security/privacy needs such as needing to review classified briefings en route.

-In most other cases, an individual can upgrade to Business Class on their own dime if they so desire.

-The government will almost never pay for First Class upgrades and generally bars using personal funds (but not comped upgrades) for said options. There are a few narrow exceptions, however.

By the way, 14 FAM 567.1 refers specifically to "slumber coach" accommodations.

One thing I would note is that these regulations likely connect very closely with a lot of airlines deciding that whatever their premium class(es) may be in effect, they'll be called "Business" or some variant thereof instead of "First" (hence the BusinessFirst on, I believe, Delta) so as to work around restrictions like these (which I believe exist in a lot of other guideline sets).

Edit: Also, the government doesn't ban acquiring status (well, at least State's regs don't). To quote:



> All Department employees, their dependents, and others whose travel is funded by the Department may retain for personal use promotional items (i.e., frequent flyer miles, upgrades, access to carrier clubs or facilities) earned as a result of official travel under terms available to the general public and at no extra cost to the U.S. Government. This includes all benefits earned, including those earned before enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2002.


There's a program (the Frequent Flyer Gainsharing Program) which rewards employees who use their miles/upgrades with half of the stated value of the ticket they would have bought...which I'm going to mention to a friend who is, I believe, with Commerce.


----------



## jis (May 10, 2015)

Business First used to be on Continental. United inherited it from them.


----------



## CHamilton (May 19, 2015)

GOP leaders deny vote on banning first-class airfare for lawmakers


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 19, 2015)

CHamilton said:


> GOP leaders deny vote on banning first-class airfare for lawmakers


Too bad their Lordships aren't getting a raise, its tough to live on $175,000 a year plus all the various perks, so they feel that riding in First Class ( is Acela included?) is their compensation for the tough 3 days a week/ 32 weeks a year schedule they must endure!

Let them eat cake!


----------



## NS VIA Fan (May 23, 2015)

You're not the only ones with this problem.....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/senators-to-be-banned-from-taking-pricey-flights-1.3080878

And then there’s Senator Nancy Ruth who claimed breakfast because she "shouldn’t be expected to eat airline food.......If you want ice-cold camembert with broken crackers, have it!"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senator-nancy-ruth-slams-auditors-over-breakfast-claims-1.3018132

(Should have taken VIA Business Class as it probably would get her to Ottawa from Toronto faster than flying along with a hot breakfast)


----------



## Bob Dylan (May 23, 2015)

Canada's Senators seem to have a lot in commonn with our Senate, and the House of Lords in England, as opposed to the lowly MPs. I'm really shocked that Cabinet Ministers have restrictions, our Cabinet Officers are treated like Royalty

Let them eat cake indeed!


----------

