Flight patterns raise questions for Gov. Blunt

Jefferson City — When it comes to flying, there's no denying, Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt is the king of the air.

Consider the recent holiday-shortened Labor Day week.
   
In a mere three days, Blunt flew from Jefferson City to St. Joseph and Kansas City to Springfield; to St. Louis and Kirksville and Dexter; to St. Louis again, and Kansas City again, then to Nevada and Joplin.

At most of the stops, Blunt simply put a new twist on old news — highlighting the local benefits of statewide bridge repair and tax-break bills he already had signed into law elsewhere.

The statewide flyaround has become a common and costly occurrence for Blunt.

The Republican governor's most recent campaign finance report reveals he spent more than $126,000 on air travel in the three months from April to June. The bill for Blunt's most recent flights won't show up until the next round of reports come due in mid-October.

Asked for an explanation for his high-flying habits, Blunt proclaimed as he prepared to dart from one news conference to the next: "It's about communicating with Missourians.

   
"It's an opportunity for me to talk directly with the people of the state, and that means I need to go where the people of our state are," Blunt said.

Democratic Gov. Bob Holden, the predecessor with whom Blunt often contrasts himself, said much the same thing when asked after his first few months in office why he was flying so often.

"When you take on these tough issues, you can't sit in Jefferson City and build the support base to get things accomplished," Holden said in June 2001. "You've got to be able to reach out there and touch people."

But there is a key difference between Holden and Blunt.

Holden was flying on state airplanes, which cost taxpayers money but for which there is a record of the exact times and places he went and who flew along with him.

Blunt is flying on privately chartered or corporate planes, which cost taxpayers nothing but for which there is no record of the exact times and places he went or who flew with him.

Blunt pays for even his official-duty flights with money raised from the individuals, businesses and interest groups that fund his campaign.

"I think the way we do it is a responsible way to respect taxpayers and ensure that their resources aren't spent on any sort of political activity," Blunt said.

But Democratic Attorney General Jay Nixon, who is challenging Blunt in the 2008 gubernatorial election, contends Blunt's way is a poor way for an elected official to act. His main concern is that the privately financed flights keep the public in the dark about when someone's currying favor with the governor.

Nixon's campaign says it spent less then $8,500 on his airline travel from April through June. When Nixon travels on official state business, he usually rides on the roads.

But unlike Blunt, Nixon is not averse to using a state plane.

State flight logs show a dozen Nixon flights during the 2007 fiscal year, costing the state $12,225.

Blunt flew on a state aircraft just once in that time — to Monett on May 10 at a cost of $900.

"The way Matt Blunt travels has nothing to do with being responsive to the people of Missouri," said Nixon campaign spokesman Oren Shur. "It's just another example of him giving special access to the special interests."

Added Shur: "That is not good for the taxpayers of Missouri."

In some respects, a frequently flying governor puts himself in a no-win situation, said political scientist Dave Robertson, of the University of Missouri-St. Louis.

If he takes state planes, he can appear to be wasting tax dollars. But if he takes private planes, he can appear cozy with special interests.

"Governor Blunt is trying to make sure the voters of Missouri understand he is trying to act in their best interest," Robertson said. "But as a vulnerable incumbent, he's going to find inevitably that political opponents will find a way to try to use this against him and raise questions about the way he's approaching these flyarounds."

Blunt's staff members are sensitive to that political possibility. They don't always provide notice when he flies out of state, preferring that some trips remain off the public radar.

Nixon's office also fails to provide notice of his various travels, though there typically is a lesser expectation of that for an attorney general than for a governor.

In 2004, then-Auditor Claire McCaskill used Holden's frequent flights against him in a catchy TV campaign ad in the Democratic gubernatorial primary.

Blunt's opponents may try a similar tactic in 2008.

But the fact Blunt isn't spending taxpayer dollars makes their case a bit harder, Robertson said, unless they can highlight particular flights on the private planes of particularly unpopular companies.

"I don't think the Democrats are going to get traction on this issue unless they can connect it to a larger narrative that will raise deeper questions about the governor's actions," he said.

Source: Springfield News-Leader