McCain’s principles are leaving, on a jet plane

John McCain, back when he was a champion of campaign-finance reform, fought for a measure requiring presidential candidates to pay the actual cost of flying on corporate jets. Around the same time, McCain also vowed not to rely on his wife’s considerable personal wealth to finance his presidential campaign.

It looks like both of those commitments, like far too many of McCain’s promises, are a little shaky.

[O]ver 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.

Well, no, of course not. As Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, explained, “This amounts to a subsidy for his campaign, which is notable given how badly they were struggling last year.”

Quite right. When McCain’s campaign began to struggle financially, it began using his wife’s corporate jet at a discounted rate. It’s not illegal, but it does contradict two of McCain’s pledges to voters.

Last summer, just before starting to use his wife’s plane, Mr. McCain was quoted in a newspaper report as saying that he did not plan to tap her substantial wealth to keep his bid for the Republican presidential nomination going.

“I have never thought about it,” Mr. McCain was quoted by The Arizona Republic as saying at a July appearance. “I would never do such a thing, so I wouldn’t know what the legalities are.”

The McCain campaign turned to using the jet last August, a time when it faced mounting debts and the possibility of financial collapse. It stopped doing so in March, those records indicate.

So, McCain wanted presidential candidates to pay the actual cost of flying on corporate jets, except he didn’t want the rule to apply to his own campaign. He said he “would never” rely on his wife’s considerable assets, but did so anyway when he needed the money.

It’s worth emphasizing that this isn’t illegal. Indeed, if Cindy McCain wants to let John McCain use her jet every day, as much or as little as he wants, there’s nothing necessary untoward about it. It’s just self-financing, which is perfectly legal.

The problem in this instance is three-fold — the two commitments McCain was willing to break, and then the possible end-run around public financing.

Reading the piece, one question that suggests itself is why go through all the roundabout? McCain’s wife can give him as much free air travel as she wants. That’s just self-financing, which lots of candidates do completely legally. John Kerry, remember, took a loan out on his home to pour money into his campaign during its nadir just before Iowa. But remember, this was also around the time that McCain was kinda sorta opting in to the public financing system. So I’d be curious to hear how these two things would have interacted, what the legal repercussions would have been.

I’d just add that when the McCain campaign recently released the senator’s tax returns, it carefully excluded his wife’s income and assets (assets that include her jet). Given this, expect the calls for full disclosure to increase.

McCain is a double talking manipulator of facts and half truths. He finger points at others short comings while excusing away his own. Campaign finance reform from him? What a joke! Immigration reform..he can’t even deal with it in Az. Health care reform..any idea how many Az. children are on the ACCESS program, which is state funded with our tax dollars? How about Aid to Dependent Families? Did you know in Az. if you’re a TWEEKER who just got out of jail are single,no home, still addicted you qualify for food stamps because you can’t get a job. LOOK at Arizona and tell me if this is what we want for the US.

  • Ever since Newt Gingrich, the ethical standard for Republicans has declined considerably, from:

    It’s not illegal!

    to

    Will we go to jail if we’re caught?

    to the current standard

    We didn’t leave enough evidence behind to get convicted!

    It’s a sad state of affairs that John McCain is actually raising the moral standard for Republicans.

    But Barack Obama should still hammer McCain for making his ethical standard “What we’re doing is not illegal!” It might take a little of the shine off the “straight talk” express.

  • Steve, you write:

    …expect the calls for full disclosure to increase.

    That is adorable. It’s nice to know that after so many years in politics, you haven’t lost your wide-eyed innocence.

    Oh, sure, calls for disclosure will increase from you. They will increase from Digby. They will increase from AMERICAblog, and Daily Kos, and from CREW.

    But not a word will be heard where it can have a serious effect – among McCain’s base. Charles Gibson will not even bring it up on World News. It will never pass the lips of Chris Matthews on Hardball. I would be surprised if the editorial boards of the New York Times and the Washington Post waste even one column inch on John McCain’s absolute lack of anything resembling a principle with regard to campaign finance.

    But, it doesn’t hurt to dream, I suppose.

  • Katy Hill Prescott, Az. Completely agree. Also when asked what he would have done after Katrina, he said he would have turned the plane around and gone to New Orleans. Haven’t we had enough photo op symbolism? That answer doesn’t suggest he has given much thought to actually dealing with the problem.

    But I do have questions: 1) Isn’t the reason Kerry took a loan out on his home that it would have been illegal to use his wife’s money? In fact, it seems this was an issue when Hillary loaned her campaign five million. 2) If using his wife’s plane is not illegal, and exceeding campaign finance limits is, wasn’t this the better choice? 3) Since paying the extra money for use of the plane moves money from a campaign fund to his wife’s personal account, wouldn’t this have been controversial either way?

  • Interesting story of illegality, certainly not to be totally ignored, but this won’t beat him. Once the Democrats get out of this morass, or even if not, by June, any true Democrat has to start relentleslsy pounding McCain on his ties to the policies of the most incompetent, reckless, self-serving administration in our history and the fact that virtually every word out his mouth offers nothing but more of the same.

  • Part 2

    This has to be done soon so that McCain can be forced, long before the election, into his fallback position of being a ‘true conservative’, divorcing himself from the Bush idiocracy. That position is no more legitimate, but is less easily attacked in the minds of a public decades long propagandized to accept it as dogma. This beast didn’t get as strong as it is in 7 years, and will not succumb easily.

  • Who cares? So long as his name is on the election reform legislation, and the media wing of the corporatocracy doesn’t notice that he is breaking both the letter and the spirit of the law named after him, he is still a straight-shooting maverick reformer, right?

  • Christ-on-a-crutch, remember all the shit John Kerry got about his rich *elitist* wife? Why the hell is it that Republican money passes muster no matter how dirty but a Democrat with money is shamed simply for having made it? Even Democrats diss Democrats with money! I just don’t get it.

  • Given this, expect the calls for full disclosure to increase.

    Cue sound F/X: bulfrogs croaking, birds chirping, wind sighing through the trees, water gurgling….

    hoo-hooo-hoooooo (sound of monkeys laughing)

    This is the American Corporate Media you’re talking about, right???

  • Remember when the right and the mainstream media went nuts about Gore’s “no controlling legal authority”, and Bush sputtered (in a debate) “he went to a Buddhist Temple” a though that were a capital crime?

    Good times.

  • How did McCain get the presidentail nomination – because he SUDDENLY went from being underdog to topdog? It isn’t because Repug voters picked McCain, it’s because the Bush administratin went looking for a loyalist and McCain was it. McCain has had to kiss Bush ass dearly for this nomination. The “France is our foe” guy and anything else the Bushies demanded, even kissing CIA approved torture as totally okay to be the Bushite in waiting. I’m sure that Broder saw the torture light too, and nobody in the press world has ask Broder about the “un-ordinary men” in the GOP, thus Broder must now embrassing torture too.

    So even as Bush is the most unpopular Preznut ever in history it’s STILL whatever Bushie says, pretending it is populary party objectives – thus turning Nixon groupthink into a minature of today’s GOP problems. IT isn’t the Party of conservative voters anymore, instead, it’s the Party of BUSHITES, and thus no voters need apply because they would have to renounce conserative leaning to embrass Bushie. I’m sure Glen Reynolds considers 69% of Americans “treasonous”. You have to wonder if Bushie is contemplating the destruction of certain American symbols and faculties in order to punish the un-grateful, unworthy majority of US citizens for fleeing Bushite groupthing?

  • Candidates using their personal wealth is not at all unusual. Candidates changing their minds is not at all unusual. What’s the big deal?

    And for Katy. Why should McCain, as a Senator from Arizona, be responsible for the immigration situation in Arizona?

  • Comments are closed.