Embattled Senator Champions Transparency, Yet Hypocritically Refuses To Release Details Of Travel Billing Practices & Delaware-Based Company

Last week, U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill’s (D-MO) office insisted emphatically that her decision to bill taxpayers for travel on her personal aircraft did not violate any ethics rules, at the same time claiming that neither she nor her family personally profited from this behavior.

But just 24 hours later, McCaskill’s office admitted that, in fact, she did bill taxpayers for “purely political travel on a private plane co-owned by her family, a violation of Congressional ethics rules that deepened questions around her use of the plane.” What’s more, McCaskill’s own 2007 personal financial disclosure report directly contradicts the second half of her statement, showing that, in fact, she did earn a profit of between $50,000 and $100,000 from the Delaware-based aircraft company owned by her and her husband (click here to view).

Yet, despite fashioning herself as a champion of transparency in the Senate and criticizing lawmakers who live in an “alternate reality,” McCaskill has steadfastly refused to release any additional information on her Delaware-based LLC, or any additional information on the other 88 taxpayer-funded flights.

In light of this growing scandal, we hope you will consider asking Claire McCaskill the following questions during her weekly press conference call, which according to her Senate website, is held on Wednesdays: 

1. In 2007, you charged the taxpayers over $25,000 to reimburse your travel on your private plane, which is registered through a shell company in Delaware. In the same year, you reported making between $50,000 and $100,000 in profit from that same company. So how does your own 2007 personal financial disclosure square with the statement from your office last week that you never earned any profit off this aircraft?

2. If you are going to continue to maintain that you did not earn a profit from Sunset Cove Associates, the parent shell company of Delaware-based shell company, Timesaver LLC, will you release the tax returns of these two entities? If not, why not?

3. Last week, your office said none of these 89 taxpayer-funded flights were improper, but we now know that statement is also false. Will you release detailed information on these other 88 flights for which you billed taxpayers? If not, why not? 

4. Shortly before your election to the Senate, your husband formed Timesaver LLC, which owns your plane, and based it in Delaware. Why is this company based in Delaware, and not Missouri? Was Delaware chosen to avoid additional corporate income taxes on your private plane?

5. Is your private plane used for any other purposes than flying you or your husband around the state? Do others pay your husband’s company for use of the plane? If so, who are they?

6. Your fellow Democrat Robin Carnahan campaigned for Senate using her private plane last year, and clearly indicated on her financial disclosure that she owned a plane and that it was registered in Missouri. Why does your financial disclosure not look similar?

7. While your office falsely insisted you broke no ethics rules, and that you made no profit from this arrangement, you attributed your reimbursement of the treasury to an “abundance of caution.” Did you, in fact, have reason to believe at that point that you had acted improperly? What was this “abundance of caution” for if you were confident you had not acted improperly? 

8. After writing a check back to the federal government last week your office claimed transparency worked, saying “She’s glad there’s transparency — that’s why people can see this information.” In fact, the average voter would not immediately see this information because the reimbursements are buried behind two separate shell companies, and only after researching state records would it be seen that they are owned by you and your husband. Do you still stand by this statement from your office last week? 

9. If Politico had not brought this matter to your attention as they prepared to publish a report on your actions, isn’t it safe to presume you would not have reimbursed taxpayers?

10. How can you continue to preach accountability and transparency for others if you refuse to abide by these same principles by allowing the public to see for themselves whether or not you profited from your own taxpayer-funded travel?