In the Right

The eight new airplanes in the bill were precisely twice as many as the Obama Administration had requested -- but, for some reason, the price tag had more than doubled, from $220 million for the requested four planes to $550 million for eight. I guess that's what passes for mathematics in Washington these days.

Facing a buzz-saw of opposition over the weekend, however, it appears that the Air Force will not be getting that funding after all, and lawmakers on junkets -- scratch that, insert "fact finding missions" -- will have to make do with their current jets.

What's more interesting about the episode is that it's not the first time Murtha has tried to upgrade his air travel -- and been shot down.

The November 27, 1989 edition of TIME magazine contains this news item:

"Even as the House was promising last week to cut down on perks in exchange for a pay raise, old habits were asserting themselves. Speaker Thomas Foley was embarrassed to learn about an amendment slipped into the defense-spending bill that required an Air Force C-20 jet be made available to him at all times. A military version of the Gulfstream III, the C-20 carries just eight passengers and is serviced by a crew of five.

"But Foley had not asked for an Air Force Three (the president and vice president have much larger jets). Pennsylvania Democrat John Murtha had inserted the provision. He enjoys luxurious travel and undoubtedly figured he could borrow Foley's jet. The Speaker quickly shot down his own plane."

The TIME article was entitled, "The Crash of Air Force Three," which raises the question -- should an article about Murtha's latest attempt to fund new jets for Members of Congress be entitled, "John Murtha and the Second Crash of Air Force Three," or "John Murtha and the Crash of Air Force Four?"

Follow me on Twitter!