CONGRESS' PRIVATE JUNKETS TOP $14M ; SOME ALLEGE UNDUE INFLUENCE
Wisconsin State Journal; 10/14/2004; Stephen Baxter and Justin D. Fox
The Capital Times/Medill News Service

WASHINGTON

Criss-crossing the globe for speeches, conferences and fact- finding missions, members of Congress and their families have taken nearly $14.4 million worth of trips in the last 4 1/2 years - with private interests picking up the tab.

An analysis of congressional trips by Medill News Service in partnership with American Public Media's Marketplace program and American RadioWorks found that private interests spent $14,388,672 since Jan. 1, 2000, to send House and Senate members on 4,851 trips.
The academic groups, think tanks and corporate sponsors say the trips allow lawmakers to learn valuable information without spending taxpayer money. But critics say sponsors are buying special access to lawmakers, often in congenial surroundings.

While some members took privately funded trips to make speeches in places such as Pittsburgh and Peoria, Ill., others went on fact- finding jaunts to Aspen, Colo., or spent $3,000 on meals at a five- day conference in Barcelona, Spain.

The most popular destination was Florida, with 558 trips, followed by California with 386 and New York with 354. West Virginia, home to the luxurious Greenbrier resort in White Sulphur Springs, was the fourth most popular destination, with 223 trips.

Many of the 159 sponsored trips to Nevada - the fifth most common destination - mixed tours of the proposed nuclear waste disposal site at Yucca Mountain with the lure of adult playgrounds in Las Vegas.

While domestic destinations dominated the list of travel hot spots, Israel, Mexico, Italy, the United Kingdom and Cuba also made the top 20 most-visited list.

In all, senators took 1,071 trips, House members 3,781.

The House and Senate allow the trips if they are part of official duties and if lawmakers disclose where they went, the amount spent, and the sponsor. Senate rules limit domestic trips to three days and international trips to seven days, excluding travel time.

Bill Nell of the Aspen Institute, a left-leaning international relations think tank that sponsored 488 trips, said sending lawmakers on trips helps them better understand issues.

"If we discuss China, Latin America or Russia, for example," he said, "it is much more meaningful to do it in the country we're studying, with people from that country."

The Aspen Institute topped the list of money spent by sponsors at more than $2.5 million. Second place went to the Ripon Educational Fund, a program of the conservative Ripon Society. It doled out more than $600,000 to pay for 59 trips. Spending about $575,000 on 70 trips, the American Israel Education Foundation placed third.

Opinions on privately sponsored trips range from enthusiasm to skepticism to outright disapproval. While some lawmakers and sponsors say the trips promote understanding, some government watchdog groups say they give sponsors disproportionate influence on Capitol Hill.

Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project said: "Typically these trips help educate members of Congress about only one side of an issue. As such, sometimes they're worse than not traveling at all."

"It's for the most part only wealthy institutions that can do this," said Danielle Brian, director of the nonpartisan Project on Government Oversight, referring to groups that sponsor trips. "So in itself there is definitely a skewed leaning toward powerful special interests versus the average citizen."

"At some level, Congress doesn't have all the resources to go on all the trips it could. So I don't say they're blanket wrong. But if the company sponsoring the trip has a financial interest, that's where I draw the line," Brian said.

Over the years, efforts have been made to tighten congressional rules related to privately sponsored trips and make the information more easily available to the public. But none of them have been successful.

(Copyright (c) Madison Newspapers, Inc. 2004)