White House Defends Pelosi Plane Request

The military model of the G5 jet can easily make it to the west coast in fueling. In fact it can make it to Israel on one fueling. The speaker wants to upgrade to a 757-200 which has the capacity to carry 111 first class seats, has a 16 person crew, and costs $300,000...one way, to fly.

I have to problem with the speaker flying in a high security plane, I just do not want her to spend 600,000 to take her family back to san fran for the weekend.

The speaker wants to upgrade to a 757-200...

Actually that 's incorrect. She said....

"I said well, that's fine, I'm going commercial," she told Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren. "I'm not asking to go on that plane. If you need to take me there for security purposes, you're going to have to get a plane that goes across the country, because I'm going home to my family."

I think she would be happy with the Gulfstream, its the DOD that pushed the larger jet and then made a fuss about it.

not really a tough call, just a distraction from the fact that the gop decided to block even talking about bushes plan to escalate the iraqi war, when that is what we should be talking about. Frankly i could careless about dem waste right now, lives are more important to me... give them a few months and we will talk about 08.. but otherwise i couldnt give a crap.. I want to know why in a democratic society the number 1 branch of government is being blocked from discussing the war by a party that obviously hasnt learned from the elections.

"number 1 branch of government"

Don't we have 3 equal branches of government?

I'm not sure "number 1 branch of government" was a priority labeling but perhaps it was an indicator of the fact that, typically, when saying all three branches the legislative comes first..

Legislative, Executive, and Judicial

every time I see them mentioned they are in that order - Legislative being the first or #1 branch..

So she has to land somewhere and re-fuel. Too bad.

Extra landings are security risks, especially on repetetive flights like hers would be (i.e. weekly flights to San Francisco). If the whole point of putting her on a military flight is security then a plane that can make the distance without landing is needed.

The military model of the G5 jet can easily make it to the west coast in fueling

Is there a military model of the G5? I wasn't aware of one, but if there were it would likely be ideal. The plane they put her on before was a C-23 transport I believe - which does not have that kind of range.

I am pretty sure there is military model of the G5.

To TC (1.1)

No, Andres does not have a G5. Please see related stories.

There are only three planes at Andrews that can fly coast-to-coast, non-stop, 365 days a year: the C-32 (Boeing 757 built for the military, 45 passengers), C-40B (Boeing 737 built for the military, 26 to 32 passengers) and C-37 (Gulfstream business jet, 12 passengers). (cite)

To All:
PELOSI DID NOT MAKE THIS REQUEST!

It was made by Bill Livingood, the House sergeant-at-arms appointed to his job in 1995 by former Speaker Hastert.

The speaker wants to upgrade to a 757-200 which has the capacity to carry 111 first class seats, has a 16 person crew, and costs $300,000...one way, to fly.

Vs the G5 which comes in at only $3000 per hour of flight time.

Do the math.

It doesn't cost 300,000 one way. I'm really curious as to where this keeps coming from. As you can see here it would roughly cost 110,000 one way (and the sites I used for this reference were: this site and this one).

And again, the C-32 is the largest of the three models that can make the flight, and for the last friggin time, SHE DIDNT REQUEST IT. You do the math.

The first half of your statement was well put and I would say the same thing if the GOP was spending 600,000 to go home for the weekend....the second half......not so much.

You could, perhaps, read the article, and see that it was the governments insistence she fly on a military plane. It's the government forcing the expenditure of "600,000" dollars for her to go home --btw, where the hell did that random figure come from? The max cost of a C-32 is 22,000 an hour. Max cost, as in, flying fully loaded. The plane can go around 530 miles an hour, and the distance (driving distance - a planes flightpath would be lesser miles) is 2800. So the flight, at tops, will take a little over five hours. Meaning even a roundtrip flight would cost 220,000 dollars. Your little "estimate" (read: panicky overexaggeration) is 3 times that amount. And I gave you the better side of all the variables, because there's no way Pelosi and her baggage cost the max amount for it to operate. Please, keep your estimations grounded.

And read the story: She'd rather fly commercial in order to get to her family quickly. She didn't make the rule; the government balked at her flying commercially. She simply made it known that if they were going to force her to fly on a military plane, she wanted a nonstop trip like that she could get if she got a commercial flight.

reading the article takes far too much effort

i stand corrected

i have to take a poop now. bye.

It's not that confusing. She said she's happy to fly a military plane IF it can get her there non-stop. If it can't, then she'll fly commercial. Sounds reasonable to me.

But then, I'm not looking to make political hay here.

The reason for the military plane AND for the non-stop trip is security. That's per Bill Livingood, House Sargeant At Arms.

The press is an echo chamber on this one ... belatedly, but an echo chamber none-the-less. The only way to figure out what's going on is to read different sources -- I read four different accounts to piece together what's known and what's alleged.

Captain Caps Lock: Does this have anything at all to do with the story? Or, are you just venting?

What? I couldn't read that. Could you type it larger? Thanks.

My eyes are ringing.

According to an unnamed source in the Washington Times, "Congress looks at that Andrews fleet as their Hertz rent-a-car."

agreed!

btw, the C-32 only has capacity for around 50, not 111.

i will take your word on that....

The C-32 carries 45 passengers...

Considering that she's willing (and originally requested) to fly commercially, I doubt communication gear is much of a concern, as much commercial flights aren't exactly in Air Force One league when it comes to communications...

All she wants is the same basic level of service that she could get by hopping on Jet Blue or something. Since the military is the one stopping her from doing that, its perfectly reasonable that they provide her with that.

Well, 6 Pins, like TC, you're wrong.

There are only three planes at Andrews that can do this -- the C-32 (Boeing 757 built for the military, 45 passengers), C-40B (Boeing 737 built for the military, 26 to 32 passengers) and C-37 (Gulfstream business jet, 12 passengers).

don't you think they could fly a G5 there?

I have no idea if they > could < fly a G5 there.

The fact is that there are no G5 craft "stocked" at the AFB. Understand?

And even in Haster's defense, I don't believe that he was the one requesting the military flights.

This is a total non-story.

Its not, again, for security.

I'm beginning to think no one around here reads the damn articles.

Were she really worried about security, do you think she would be constantly offering to go commercially? Doubtful. She wants to get home quickly, not wait the 1/2 hour it typically takes to refuel. Granted, 1/2 hour isn't long; but she offered to go commercial for it to be her route (and invariably cheaper).

It must've been nice for the Speaker when they lived in Pennsylvania or Illinois, as Gingrich or Hastert did; but unless we're going to start changes the rules for congresspeople based on where they live, the government should be able to comply or let her take the commercial flight.

I think you need to re-read the article. Polosi never claimed a concern over security. She even went as fas as stating "I said well, that's fine, I'm going commercial," she told Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren. "I'm not asking to go on that plane. If you need to take me there for security purposes, you're going to have to get a plane that goes across the country, because I'm going home to my family." I believe it was the House sergeant-at-arms that raised the security concerns.. just like he did for the previous Speaker. I don't think asking for a non-stop flight is unreasonable. If I was going coast to coast on a regular basis, I'd probably insist on non-stoppers also...

Why is the pentagon concerned with security?

Um.. Department of Defense... Its their airplane...

reading is fundamental!!!

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Pentagon agreed to provide the House speaker, who is second in the line of presidential succession, with a military plane for added security during trips back home.

Because they agreed to be concerned with the Speakers security, just as they are tasked with the security of the President, and Vice President under similar circumstances.

What I ment to say in 10.3 is why is the pentagon concerned with security when she is flying a private jet which is taking refueling stops on Air Force bases.

Why is the speaker concerned about security when she is flying a private jet which is taking refueling stops on Air Force bases!!!

What private jet?

The House Sargeant At Arms requested a military plane of sufficient size to fly coast-to-coast for security reasons. Since 9-11, the Speaker is shuttled around in a military jet because of security.

Arghhhh.

Speaker Pelosi has said that she'd rather fly non-stop commercial than puddle-jump military. The problem with that, of course, is that she could be putting civilians at risk ... if the concerns about her being high profile because of being the first woman in this position are valid ones. She's not the person driving the security discussion!

I share your frustration, Kathy.

I wanted to throw something at the TV last night when Glenn Beck ranted for 12 minutes about Pelosi and her fiscal responsibility. He, like the conservatives around newsvine, didnt bother to read or research into the matter at all, and just took the hype for what it was.

like the conservatives around newsvine

Just like the liberals around Newsvine, lumping all of us together like that.

indecent, I'm going to have to agree with Jay there. Generalizations like yours really don't help anything. I'm in perfect agreement that this story is very much BS. The Republicans making a big deal out of all this are only hurting themselves. However, when you make generalized comments like that, you fall off your high horse and get stuck in the muck with all those Republicans acting like asses.

This is partisanship at its worst.

I apologize for the comment. I'm frustrated with the number of members around newsvine that don't read comments and don't read stories, instead choosing only to post ridiculous notions. I realize I just stooped down to their level - again, I apologize.

I just want to say that I did not read this article (I skimmed it) and posted with information that aired on Glenn Beck's radio program. The following is what I posted:

"The speaker wants to upgrade to a 757-200 which has the capacity to carry 111 first class seats, has a 16 person crew, and costs $300,000...one way, to fly."

After doing research on my own I found all of that to be false.

She does not want a 757-200, only a plane that will carry her to the west coast non stop.

I just wanted to say I have no problem with the speaker wanting to be able to fly non stop to her district and I applaud the way she has handled the whole thing.

I apologize to fellow Newsvine users for not doing my own research or even reading the entire article before posting. I usually do my own research on stories, but this one I did not, and I paid for it.

.....and posted with information that aired on Glenn Beck's radio program....

Your problem, as they say, is obvious... :-D Glad to see you come clean. Hows that old saying go... "It takes a big man to admit... "

Providing VIP transportation is part of the DOD's job. The 89^th Airlift Wing has been providing that service since 1948.

I suppose you could ask the GSA to provide that service, but you better buy them some airplanes first. :-D

Didn't know DOD did that since 1948.

I knew GSA had no airplanes but I assumed they wold contract it out (like everything else these days).

Though I agree with your statements, targeting one commenter for their views will rarely sway their opinion, Jimbo.

That was unexpected. Never expected her to die so soon.