|
The rules on who pays for presidential travel are extremely explicit. All presidents piggyback campaign trips with official business to minimize the cost to their campaign treasuries. There is an established formula for this, and the campaign ends up making a pro forma payment while the Treasury picks up most of the tab. Members of Congress play similar games. One of the perks of office. There is no point in getting steamed up about this during a campaign, because the other side will just point to ample bipartisan precedents. If you really want to reform the practice, the time to do it is immediately AFTER the next election.
P.S. An honest inquiry: Granted that I haven't paid much attention to the subject for the reasons described above, but has there been significant coverage and/or criticism of the size of Bush's entourage? I had the impression Bush was fairly informal in his travel preferences (as informal as a president is allowed to be), but I could be wrong.
Just for the record, the Republicans certainly tried to make an issue of Bill Clinton's expeditions to India and China, at least one of which involved over a thousand tag-alongs and a whole flock of 747s. If Bush is travelling in that Imperial style, a little turnabout criticism would certainly be in order.
|