Palin 's Per Diem Issue: Lived at Home, Billed the State

More information showing Ethics Reformer and Cost Cutter may be misnomers when applied to Gov. Sarah Palin -- The Washington Post reports:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions. And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

It's all seems legal, although there are some questionable items, but it doesn't fit too well with the image of her as one who is focused on cost cutting and savings to Alaskans: [More...]

Palin, who earns $125,000 a year, claimed and received $16,951 as her allowance, which officials say was permitted because her official "duty station" is Juneau, according to an analysis of her travel documents by The Washington Post.

The governor's daughters and husband charged the state $43,490 to travel, and many of the trips were between their house in Wasilla and Juneau, the capital city 600 miles away, the documents show.

As to her daughters' airfares and travel expenses, The Post calls one into question:

One event was in New York City in October 2007, when Bristol accompanied the governor to Newsweek's third annual Women and Leadership Conference, toured the New York Stock Exchange and met local officials and business executives. The state paid for three nights in a $707-a-day hotel room. Garnero said the governor's office has the authority to approve hotel stays above $300.

Asked Monday about the official policy on charging for children's travel expenses, Garnero said: "We cover the expenses of anyone who's conducting state business. I can't imagine kids could be doing that."

As to husband Todd:

The family also charged for flights around the state, including trips to Alaska events such as the start of the Iditarod dog-sled race and the Iron Dog snowmobile race, a contest that Todd Palin won.

Meanwhile, Todd Palin spent $725 to fly to Edmonton, Alberta, for "information gathering and planning meeting with Northern Alberta Institute of Technology," according to an expense report. During the three-day trip, he charged the state $291 for his per diem. A notation said "costs paid by Dept. of Labor." He also billed the state $1,371 for a flight to Washington to attend a National Governors Association meeting with his wife.

Per diems have caused serious problems for other politicians in Alaska:

In the past, per diem claims by Alaska state officials have carried political risks. In 1988, the head of the state Commerce Department was pilloried for collecting a per diem charge of $50 while staying in his Anchorage home, according to local news accounts. The commissioner, the late Tony Smith, resigned amid a series of controversies.

Former Gov. Tony Knowles, Palin's opponent in the 2006 Governor's race, said:

"It was quite the little scandal," said Tony Knowles, the Democratic governor from 1994 to 2000. "I gave a direction to all my commissioners if they were ever in their house, whether it was Juneau or elsewhere, they were not to get a per diem because, clearly, it is and it looks like a scam -- you pay yourself to live at home," he said.

Knowles also questioned Palin's seeking reimbursement for flying her kids around:

Knowles, whose children were school-age at the start of his first term, said that his wife sometimes accompanied him to conferences overseas but that he could "count on one hand" the number of times his children accompanied him.

"And the policy was not to reimburse for family travel on commercial airlines, because there is no direct public benefit to schlepping kids around the state," he said. The rules were articulated by Mike Nizich, then director of administrative services in the governor's office, said Knowles and an aide to another former governor, Walter Hickel.

< Monday Late Night Open Thread | Obama Defends Habeas Corpus for Suspected Terrorists >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    For another take on this article (5.00 / 7) (#4)
    by lizpolaris on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:50:00 AM EST
    you might try this:

    Using other quotes from the WAPO article, it appears that the governor's expenses are in line with state guidelines and she's not been claiming all the expenses she's entitled too.

    Also note that scandals in 1988 oddly out of date and the article notes that her spending is less than her predecessors.

    She has done many things to cut the (3.00 / 3) (#30)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 10:18:47 AM EST
    governor's expenses, not add to them.  

    Wow, Jeralyn (5.00 / 11) (#5)
    by Polkan on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 06:50:21 AM EST
    I really don't recognize you anymore...

    From the same article:

    Gubernatorial spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Monday that Palin's expenses are not unusual and that, under state policy, the first family could have claimed per diem expenses for each child taken on official business but has not done so

    and more:

    Speaking from Palin's Anchorage office, Leighow said Palin dealt with the plane and also trimmed other expenses, including forgoing a chef in the governor's mansion because she preferred to cook for her family. The first family's travel is an expected part of the job, she said.
    "As a matter of protocol, the governor and the first family are expected to attend community events across the state," she said. "It's absolutely reasonable that the first family participates in community events."

    and more:

    But Leighow said many of the hundreds of invitations Palin receives include requests for her to bring her family, placing the definition of "state business" with the party extending the invitation.

    and this:

    Gov. Palin has spent far less on her personal travel than her predecessor: $93,000 on airfare in 2007, compared with $463,000 spent the year before by her predecessor, Frank Murkowski

    And I would like to point out that the block quote you extracted, on Tony Knowles, is misleading. In the article, he was referreing to the 1988 scandal. Your summary makes it seem that he was talking about Palin.

    Jeralyn, is there really a need to for you to mimic Daily Kos in such selective and possibly misleading copy-paste?

    Your blog has been one of the shining stars for its objectivity and absence of extreme partisanship. But tactics like this actually make me sympathize with Palin.

    Keep it up (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by supertroopers on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:30:51 AM EST
    The more Palin is discussed, the more popular she is. 3 women friends of mine who were not impressed with the Palin pick initially have now come full circle as ardent supporters.

    Keep up the attacks.


    I still can't get over the fact (4.00 / 3) (#7)
    by Dave B on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:37:21 AM EST
    That the idiotic Obama campaign and his supporters opened the door for this.  Good Lord, we wouldn't want Bill wandering the halls of the White house.

    Per diem is not the same as lodging (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Bulging Bracket on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 03:06:47 PM EST
    According to the rules she qualified for a per diem when conducting business away from her duty station of Juneau (given the location of Juneau, it's a horrible location for a state capital,a nd likely cause a much higher than necessary expense budget). She's probably just on the edge of being able to claim for hotel expenses when doing business in Anchorage as it's 45 miles from Wasilla. Instead she just claims the meals & incidentals, with a number of partial days included (average is around $53 vs per diem of $60). Her attempts to save money by staying at home get called bilking.

    Ridiculous charge and if people wanted to effectively attack her they'd look for something real. Instead we're on our 10th day of false and useless attacks against her (the kids and the b-i-l being the best examples of futility regardless of truth). It seems like both the PUMAs and Obama supporters want Barack to lose. McCain's a lucky man!


    WOW, I agree Jeralyn (none / 0) (#31)
    by nycvoter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 10:27:11 AM EST
    what's wrong with you.  We rely on you and BTD for objective information, should we begin to doubt everything you say?

    Jeralyn.. (none / 0) (#40)
    by 18anapple2 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 12:48:46 PM EST
    EXTREMELY disappointing. Thank you Polkan for pointing this out so sucinctly.

    the article said it was a legitimate job expense (5.00 / 6) (#8)
    by dalec on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:47:46 AM EST
    Why wouldn't someone claim an expense that's supposed to be part of the job?  

    She not running the expense of living in the governor's mansion in juneau with things like a chef.  not even counting the $350k reduction in travel expenses from the same article.  and anyone who's remotely inclined to vote for her will see this.

    i'm an obama supporter, but it's posts like this that have me adding right-wing blogs to my reading list to get perspective.  i'm not near voting for mccain, but if my behavior is indicative of others, that's not a good sign.

    is there no favorable political environment democratics can't commit suicide with?  sigh.

    attacking her isn't have the intended effects and needs to stop for purely practical reasons.

    while technically legal- (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by kenosharick on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:02:47 AM EST
    these are the kinds of things that don't look good. This should have been the type of isssue Palin was criticized on from the start, rather than experience, her family, and her religion. I am afraid the media, far left, and some Dems have turned her into a bit of a martyr and no attacks will stick now.

    No law was broken (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by myiq2xu on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:12:00 AM EST
    and she claimed less than she was entitled to.

    This is a big "nothing-burger"

    We keep coming up with ways she is a crook (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Jake Left on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:16:24 AM EST
    and a liar. We talk about it as if it mattered. To those who think of voting republican, it doesn't matter. She could have sex with a page on the Alaska senate floor, shoot her errant child, sign a pact to sell Alaskan oil to Iran. Nothing would matter to those who even contemplate voting republican. They twist it in their minds until it is a good thing. Who said magical realism doesn't exist in American society?

    But she did nothing crooked here (4.57 / 7) (#13)
    by myiq2xu on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:21:53 AM EST
    You can't persuade people she's a crook if your "smoking gun" is just a banana.

    All you will do is persuade people you have no credibility.


    Thanks for the example. nt (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Jake Left on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 10:01:23 AM EST
    This certainly doesn't sound like it... (none / 0) (#34)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 11:11:06 AM EST
    ...is all that "straight" and aboveboard:

    'In separate filings, the state was billed about $25,000 for Palin's daughters' expenses and $19,000 for her husband's.

    Flights topped the list for the most expensive items, and the daughter whose bill was the highest was Piper, 7, whose flights cost nearly $11,000, while Willow, 14, claimed about $6,000 and Bristol, 17, accounted for about $3,400.

    One event was in New York City in October 2007, when Bristol accompanied the governor to Newsweek's third annual Women and Leadership Conference, toured the New York Stock Exchange and met local officials and business executives. The state paid for three nights in a $707-a-day hotel room. Garnero said the governor's office has the authority to approve hotel stays above $300.

    Asked Monday about the official policy on charging for children's travel expenses, Garnero said: "We cover the expenses of anyone who's conducting state business. I can't imagine kids could be doing that."'


    But Leighow said many of the hundreds of invitations Palin receives include requests for her to bring her family, placing the definition of "state business" with the party extending the invitation.

    Donald, please stop insulting (none / 0) (#39)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 12:43:34 PM EST
    other commenters and accusing them of being ignorant. You repeatedly do this and further such comments will be deleted. Please state your disagreement and your comment without attacks.

    Thank you. n/t (none / 0) (#59)
    by tree on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 12:14:56 AM EST
    crook? (none / 0) (#16)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:30:29 AM EST
    where, pray tell?

    When I ran errands for the group (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:29:39 AM EST
    my mother worked for, I got paid out of petty cash for my travel expenses and a soda/lunch if the trip was a longer one.

    And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

    Sounds like the same thing...

    State Government... (none / 0) (#43)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 01:07:28 PM EST
    ...is just a little different than "the group my mother worked for".  It may sound like the same thing, but it is not.  

    When you're doing official biz (none / 0) (#45)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 01:38:35 PM EST
    you get can file for travel, per diem, and so on. Oh...and I've filled out similar paperwork when I worked at NIH for those folks who went on various trips...including clean up after Andrew.

    Wow... (none / 0) (#49)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:02:46 PM EST
    ...I've filled out paperwork too!  For my own State expenses and as such, have a REAL good understanding of how things work on a State level.  

    We're not talking about getting reimbursed for lunch and a cup of coffee here--you simply can't fly your family all over and expect to get paid for it.


    If you read the whole article... (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:15:16 PM EST
    you'll note that the times in which she flew her family involved invitations that included her family...or sent the first spouse.

    Note the "official" part?

    That first spouses often do go on trips shouldn't be all that surprising. Family members also go on these trips.

    Remember when HRC took Chelsea overseas to an international women's conference? It was covered in all of the papers...


    Also note... (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:26:01 PM EST
    1. Jeralyn herself notes that everything "seems" legal. And I suspect that if she scours Alaska rules, she'll find out that it probably "is" legal.

    2. The article points out that even with these expenses:
      Gov. Palin has spent far less on her personal travel than her predecessor: $93,000 on airfare in 2007, compared with $463,000 spent the year before by her predecessor, Frank Murkowski.

    That looks like she spent less that a fourth of what Murkowski spent in a single year.

    If it's legal under AK rules, and she's spending less...where is the "Gotcha"?


    The fact is... (2.00 / 0) (#53)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:45:01 PM EST
    ...you don't know for sure if it was legal or not, do you?  Most states do not publish their internal policies on this, so there is no way to be sure without seeing them.  That's why this could be an issue.  

    Also, is there a part of "her personal travel" that is confusing?  It is not "her family's personal travel".  They are not elected officials.  They are most likely not eligible for reinbursement for anything--"invited" or not.  


    oh... (none / 0) (#54)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:47:43 PM EST
    you don't have an answer on the "Gotcha" bit, do you?

    It is silly... (2.50 / 2) (#55)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:57:17 PM EST
    ...to shape a "gotcha" issue when you don't know if it is legal or not.  

    Good day.


    Heh... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 03:02:57 PM EST
    The whole thing is silly...considering that even Jeralyn points out it "seems" legal...indicating that she doesn't know if it's legal or not...

    Thus...my question.


    The process is different... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kredwyn on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 01:42:54 PM EST
    but the basic idea is similar.

    Man (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Steve M on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:51:22 AM EST
    I wonder about some people.  If the Governor's husband wants to participate in a snowmobile race, the taxpayers should pay for his expenses because it's state business?  Is that really the position you want to go with?

    And getting paid a per diem to live at home is a real issue even if it's technically within the letter of the regulations.  Voters are entitled to know if you're the type of politician who will milk the regulations like that.  Everyone knows the intent of a per diem is not to pay you for living at home.

    Nothing technical about it (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by myiq2xu on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:07:22 AM EST
    She did nothing illegal or unethical here, and she was entitled to the money as part of her compensation package.

    I don't agree (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Steve M on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:40:00 AM EST
    Is there any arbiter of the ethics involved other than your own opinion?  Because it seems clearly unethical to me to use taxpayer money to go participate in a snowmobile race, even if you can cabin it within the wording of some regulation.

    arbiter of ethics? (3.66 / 3) (#32)
    by progrocks on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 10:34:55 AM EST
    many commenter's here are members of the Palin fan club.  As long ass she is not Obama, she does no wrong.  If this was Obama doing, this thread would erupt with disgust.  Ethics are merged depending on who you are criticizing.

    Alaska is pretty generous, (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by KeysDan on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 10:08:52 AM EST
    the state in which I was on state commission did not reimburse for meals, if the meeting was held in the same city in which you lived.  Oh, these tax and spend Republicans.

    I read that she makes 125k per (none / 0) (#44)
    by hairspray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 01:26:10 PM EST
    year and has  big travel needs because the state is so big.  Anyone know how much other governors make in a comprable situation?

    Mayor Bloomberg.... (none / 0) (#48)
    by kdog on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 01:49:16 PM EST
    takes a salary of a dollar a year, fwiw.

    Yeah, I know he's loaded, but still a nice gesture to the taxpayers under his thumb.

    For somebody touting her savings to her constituents, taking your family along to conferences in NY, aka "free family vacation", looks kinda shady.  Though I'm sure 99% of elected officials do it, not just Palin.  


    The New York event was the Conference on (none / 0) (#52)
    by hairspray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 02:39:13 PM EST
    Women and leadership and I would venture to guess that there were breakouts that at least the older girls were involved in. I know that "bring your daughter to work days" as well as leadership events for young women are always part of the agenda in these events. In fact women leaders always have the issue of how to balance family and career needs. So before we get too flip I think this one should be reviewed more dispassionately.

    Another reason... (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by ctrenta on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 08:58:07 AM EST

    ... not to pay attention to Sarah Palin's woes. This is about winning in November. The focus should be on McCain and his policies. This Palin stuff is still a distraction for rabid lefty bloggers to go ape-** over. Remember do we want four more years of the same? Do we want to stay in Iraq "for another 100 years" as McCain said? It's time we as bloggers leave the Palin thing alone and move on to get the Dem nominee elected as president.

    I have been to Alaska (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:15:56 AM EST
    It is a little different for us city or rural people to understand. I might pass cows, goats, sheep and buffalos on my way to the grocery store but I can be in a major city in 30 minutes. That's Pennsylvania. Alaska is like vast chains of mountains and mountains and glaciers. In Alaska, and I looked at a map to make sure, Wasilla is above Ankorage but within driving distance.  Juneau is a lot harder to get to. She would have to fly there a lot. Juneau is most accessible by boat and air. Think of Ankorage being NYC and Juneau Atlanta. She could move her family to Juneau but it most likely is more cost saving to work out of the Ankorage office which has better access for traveling. It is one of these 'you have to be there' to understand. I hope the WaPo writers did travel there to see for themselves before they just wrote an article from what they found on the internet. BTW, I think everyone should take a trip there at least once. It is something to remember, especially if you like the Colorado mountains.

    "most accessible by boat and air" (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by DaveOinSF on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:22:56 AM EST
    More specifically Juneau is ONLY accessible by boat or air.  Cars have to take a ferry.

    That was how it was in 1999 (none / 0) (#25)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:38:08 AM EST
    But I was not sure if anything changed since then. I took a Sea Plane to an island next to a glacier for a salmon lunch in a log cabin. Yes, that is the extreme remote but it was so interesting that there could be ssoooooooooooo much land and mountains as we traveled along the Snake River. Last frontier is right. I think people have no idea how large and vast Alaska is.  

    This needs more investigation. (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by jsj20002 on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:29:22 AM EST
    As a former federal employee who had occasion to discipline people who abused the federal travel reimbursement rules, I think this issue needs much more investigation.  For one, the State of Alaska has a Governor's mansion in downtown Juneau.  It is a lovely old Victorian building that probably is very expensive to heat and maintain.  If Governor Palin had stayed overnight in the official residence, she would not have collected a per diem for doing so.  While I can understand the Governor wanting to live at her original home in Wasilla whenever she is doing state business in Anchorage, I do not think the citizens of Alaska should have to pay her a per diem allowance for her choosing to spend a lot of nights at her home in Wasilla. Note I did not say the taxpayers of Alaska had to pay, since Alaskan's do not pay state taxes, but the citizens of Alaska will certainly receive a smaller Alaska Permanent Fund dividend because the governor chose to submit her claims for per diem that directly resulted from her personal choice to stay in Wasilla overnight.  

    This so reminds me of what the Republicans, (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by hairspray on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 01:40:01 PM EST
    and the news media did to Bill Clinton starting in 1992.  Almost every week there was a "new" scandal. There were dissections just like this thread in the mainstream media.  It was like a feeding frenzy.  The repubs and news media still hate him, but the folks back home just loved him more and more.

    i don't know if (3.50 / 2) (#27)
    by cpinva on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:50:02 AM EST
    gov. palin is a crook, but i know for certain she's a flat out liar.

    1. she didn't sell the "executive jet" on ebay, as she claimed. it was listed on ebay (as is standard policy by the state of alaska, not something unique gov. palin came up with), but it was a loss leader. it was eventually sold through a plane broker.

    2. she didn't "fire" the executive chef, his hours were reduced, to only those days the legislature is in session. gov. palin isn't making pb&j sandwiches for her kids.

    do these items (among many others) constitute indictable offenses? nah, probably not. however, they are indicative of the fantasy being woven about gov. palin, both by her, and the RNC.

    oh, and the small matter of the 22 mill in debt she left the town of wasilla in, as part of her mayoral legacy...........................

    all the obama campaign need do is point out the truth. no need to be nasty.

    Check again (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by vatar on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 12:23:04 PM EST
    She didn't say she sold it on eBay. She said "I put it on eBay," which is exactly what you said.

    Sigh. I wish we would stop with this. (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by tree on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 12:37:19 PM EST
    1. She said she "put the plane on Ebay." She did. The jet was a boondoggle that the previous governor bought, it was highly unpopular among Alaska voters, she vowed to sell it and she did. Parsing words because it eventually got sold through a broker after failing to sell on Ebay really makes us look petty and highlights that she kept her campaign promise and saved the state of Alaska lots of money by selling it, clearly shown by the fact that her yearly air travel expenses were one fifth of Murkowski's. This is a non-issue.

    2. The Alaska legislature meets for 90 days per year. Even if its true that she has a chef for those 90 days, it sounds like you are grasping at straws.

    oh, and the small matter of the 22 mill in debt she left the town of wasilla in, as part of her mayoral legacy.....

    The numbers keep getting larger every time I hear this one. The "debt" you speak of was primarily incurred as a capital expenditure for building the Wasilla Sports Center, a multiuse indoor sports center that was supported by most of the community, and was funded by a bond and a half cent increase in the sales tax, after being put to a public vote of the citizens of the town. The center has been widely popular since its opening, has come in under budget, despite a slip up that increased the cost of the land purchase, and is well ahead of schedule towards paying back its cost.  Another non-issue if you look at the total picture instead of blindly repeating talking points without researching the details behind it.


    The problem with posting falsehoods (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by tootired on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 12:58:08 PM EST
    about Palin is that it makes those of us who feel an obligation to maintain the standards of this blog by posting corrections look like shills for McCain/Palin when we aren't. If we can't beat McCain/Palin based on policies and truth, than we are no better than the Republicans, and what difference would it really make who wins? As I've said, I want to vote for Obama, but I am unwilling to do it if the way he plans to win is by crucifying the only woman in the race. Take the high road. It's the one that leads to the White House.

    I agree but think that the more important (none / 0) (#58)
    by tree on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 12:13:08 AM EST
    problem with the falsehoods is it totally undermines credibility. I'm not going to believe anything from someone whom I know has posted lies. At least not without researching the subject myself, and I will assume that someone who lies once about this will lie again.

     If we want to stop the lies we don't do it by lying ourselves. If we are willing to lie about our opponents then we've forfeited any right to outrage when our opponents lie about us.


    is himself speaking untruths on the very points he accuses Palin of.

    My understanding of my employer's policy... (none / 0) (#1)
    by jerry on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 04:31:48 AM EST
    Is that it would be fine to take family on business trips, and in no way acceptable to ask the company to pay for them.  Where I'm fuzzy is in the sharing of a hotel room.  I am pretty sure that if I were within the per diem rate of the hotel, it would be no problem.  But that it would be almost certainly unacceptable to exceed the per diem rate for a larger hotel room made for a family without my reimbursing the company.  I'd never have the balls to do that, so I have to give Palin credit for chutzpah.  (Do fundamentalists have chutzpah?)

    Full disclosure I ain't never stayed in a $700 a day hotel.  In fact, I have to take oxygen before I can pay for a $70 a day motel.

    Alaska Rules governing state employees (none / 0) (#2)
    by wasabi on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 05:41:29 AM EST
    From the Alaska Administrative Manual

    Per diem, travel allowances, and reimbursements stop the hour a traveler interrupts business travel for personal reasons and resumes the hour the traveler returns to duty or resumes route of travel required by state business. For example, a traveler (Anchorage duty station) is traveling on state business (in Seattle) and the business is concluded at noon on Wednesday. For personal reasons the traveler will not return to the duty station until the following Monday. In this example, the traveler's entitlement to per diem, mileage, and other travel expenses reimbursements end at noon on Wednesday and would start two hours before flight time from Seattle to return to the duty station, subject to the limitations in 1 above.

    Perhaps the Governor has different rules than state employees.

    They probably do. (5.00 / 0) (#3)
    by RoboDruid on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 05:53:11 AM EST
    Since I dont think the federal travel regs apply to memberos of the legislature, judiciary, or executive branches.

    (JTR)=joint travel regulations


    her duty station is juneau (none / 0) (#9)
    by dalec on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 07:49:03 AM EST
    Her duty station is Juneau

    Some people earn 14K in a whole year (none / 0) (#19)
    by Exeter on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:04:33 AM EST
    I understand the concerns about coming off as petty, but all criticisms of Palin are not equal. Right now McCain-Palin are attacking Obama on earmarks specifically and fiscal responsability / clean gov generally.  It by no means is a knock-out punch, but it let's Obama emerge from this round tied in points.

    More trivialities (none / 0) (#21)
    by lambert on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 09:08:20 AM EST
    Now here's something worth looking into.

    Palinphoney (none / 0) (#33)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Tue Sep 09, 2008 at 11:04:38 AM EST
    If this were a Democratic VP nominee, Bill O'Reilly's head would explode.