This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/first-class-travel-for-lawmakers-a-4-pinocchio-falsehood-pops-up-again/2014/10/21/6b3b12a4-a174-4d2d-9184-aeb0d7205d51_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
First-class travel for lawmakers: A 4-Pinocchio falsehood pops up again First-class travel for lawmakers: A 4-Pinocchio falsehood pops up again
(1 day later)
“Congresswoman Julia Brownley is what’s wrong with Washington. Brownley voted to allow first class air travel for Congress.”“Congresswoman Julia Brownley is what’s wrong with Washington. Brownley voted to allow first class air travel for Congress.”
— new ad by the Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican-leaning Super PAC— new ad by the Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican-leaning Super PAC
Nothing depresses The Fact Checker more than seeing the same Four-Pinocchio falsehoods repeated over and over. We’ve already dealt with this one before, but given that the Congressional Leadership Fund is sinking $500,000 to promote this false message, it is worth revisiting again. Nothing depresses The Fact Checker more than seeing the same Four-Pinocchio falsehoods repeated. We’ve already dealt with this one, but given that the Congressional Leadership Fund is sinking $500,000 to promote this false message, it is worth revisiting.
Ironically, Republicans have defended using this claim because Democrats had tried the same gambit two years ago. But as we often say, two wrongs don’t make a right.Ironically, Republicans have defended using this claim because Democrats had tried the same gambit two years ago. But as we often say, two wrongs don’t make a right.
How did Rep. Julia Brownley (D-Calif.) supposedly vote to allow first-class travel for Congress? She voted against a nonbinding budget resolution promoted by House Republicans.How did Rep. Julia Brownley (D-Calif.) supposedly vote to allow first-class travel for Congress? She voted against a nonbinding budget resolution promoted by House Republicans.
That’s right. Buried deep in the House Republican budget blueprint is Section 608, titled “Policy Statement on Responsible Stewardship of Taxpayer Dollars.” The policy statement included this line: “No taxpayer funds may be used to purchase first class airfare or to lease corporate jets for Members of Congress.”That’s right. Buried deep in the House Republican budget blueprint is Section 608, titled “Policy Statement on Responsible Stewardship of Taxpayer Dollars.” The policy statement included this line: “No taxpayer funds may be used to purchase first class airfare or to lease corporate jets for Members of Congress.”
The Republican budget blueprint passed the House by a vote of 219 to 205, with Brownley voting against it. But it was not taken up in the Senate, and even then it would have not had the force of law. (It’s simply a budget resolution.)The Republican budget blueprint passed the House by a vote of 219 to 205, with Brownley voting against it. But it was not taken up in the Senate, and even then it would have not had the force of law. (It’s simply a budget resolution.)
“It’s written clear as day in the budget,” asserted Dan Conston, communications director for the Congressional Leadership Fund. “And as you know, this is a little taste of their own medicine.”“It’s written clear as day in the budget,” asserted Dan Conston, communications director for the Congressional Leadership Fund. “And as you know, this is a little taste of their own medicine.”
What’s Conston referring to?What’s Conston referring to?
Look at the 2012 ad below attacking Rep. Reid J. Ribble (R-Wis.), which was based on the fact that he voted against the Democratic budget blueprint in 2011, which contained this language: “It is the policy of this resolution that no taxpayer funds may be used to purchase first class airfare or to lease corporate jets for Members of Congress.”Look at the 2012 ad below attacking Rep. Reid J. Ribble (R-Wis.), which was based on the fact that he voted against the Democratic budget blueprint in 2011, which contained this language: “It is the policy of this resolution that no taxpayer funds may be used to purchase first class airfare or to lease corporate jets for Members of Congress.”
The attack ad, sponsored by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is really over the top, featuring images of champagne bottles and starting off with this line: “Imagine you could travel first class — and make taxpayers foot the bill.”The attack ad, sponsored by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is really over the top, featuring images of champagne bottles and starting off with this line: “Imagine you could travel first class — and make taxpayers foot the bill.”
Similar language against first-class airfare appears in the Democratic budget resolution for 2014, but Brownley voted against that budget plan, too. Thus she’s one of the few lawmakers in either party who did not vote for either resolution — and thus cannot claim to have voted against first-class travel for lawmakers.Similar language against first-class airfare appears in the Democratic budget resolution for 2014, but Brownley voted against that budget plan, too. Thus she’s one of the few lawmakers in either party who did not vote for either resolution — and thus cannot claim to have voted against first-class travel for lawmakers.
But wait, the story’s not over yet. Brownley, along with several other lawmakers who did not vote for either budget resolution, is a co-sponsor of a bill with a mouthful of a title: If Our Military Has to Fly Coach Then so Should Congress Act of 2014. Unlike the nonbinding resolutions, this bill would actually have the force of law. But House Republicans have not allowed the bill to come up for a vote.But wait, the story’s not over yet. Brownley, along with several other lawmakers who did not vote for either budget resolution, is a co-sponsor of a bill with a mouthful of a title: If Our Military Has to Fly Coach Then so Should Congress Act of 2014. Unlike the nonbinding resolutions, this bill would actually have the force of law. But House Republicans have not allowed the bill to come up for a vote.
Even so, none of this legislative effort would save much money. Each member of Congress gets a base allowance for travel, which is adjusted according to the distance from Washington to their congressional district. The allowance would not be cut; the proposed law will only require that lawmakers could not spend it on first-class fare. So passage of the law would merely be symbolic in terms of budget savings.Even so, none of this legislative effort would save much money. Each member of Congress gets a base allowance for travel, which is adjusted according to the distance from Washington to their congressional district. The allowance would not be cut; the proposed law will only require that lawmakers could not spend it on first-class fare. So passage of the law would merely be symbolic in terms of budget savings.
(Separately, this ad also claims Brownley voted for an “energy tax.” This is based on her vote against an amendment that would have required the administration to receive approval from Congress before implementing a “carbon tax.” It was not actually a vote for a tax, though Conston claims that “she voted to give President Obama carte blanche authority to impose a carbon tax. With this administration, that is voting for a carbon tax.”)(Separately, this ad also claims Brownley voted for an “energy tax.” This is based on her vote against an amendment that would have required the administration to receive approval from Congress before implementing a “carbon tax.” It was not actually a vote for a tax, though Conston claims that “she voted to give President Obama carte blanche authority to impose a carbon tax. With this administration, that is voting for a carbon tax.”)
The ad claims that Brownley is “what’s wrong with Washington.” Actually, what’s wrong with Washington is this kind of game playing, in which both parties gin up phony issues with little basis in reality.The ad claims that Brownley is “what’s wrong with Washington.” Actually, what’s wrong with Washington is this kind of game playing, in which both parties gin up phony issues with little basis in reality.
The Congressional Leadership Fund goes especially off the deep end as it asserts that Brownley voted to allow first-class travel, when in fact she voted against a nonbinding budget resolution with nonbinding language on first-class travel. The Super PAC earns Four Pinocchios.The Congressional Leadership Fund goes especially off the deep end as it asserts that Brownley voted to allow first-class travel, when in fact she voted against a nonbinding budget resolution with nonbinding language on first-class travel. The Super PAC earns Four Pinocchios.
  
(About our rating scale)(About our rating scale)
  
Send us facts to check by filling out this formSend us facts to check by filling out this form
Follow The Fact Checker on Twitter and friend us on FacebookFollow The Fact Checker on Twitter and friend us on Facebook