Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) improperly billed his campaign fund for $600 pet in cabin fees for his family’s rabbit according to a report by the Office of Congressional Ethics (which will live to see another day).
Hunter, though, was doing it wrong. Had he simply claimed to be transporting an emotional support rabbit he wouldn’t have had to pay any fees at all and wouldn’t have gotten into this ethics mess.
The Air Carrier Access Act of 1986 prohibits airlines from discriminating against passengers with disabilities, and thus they must make reasonable accommodations for them which allow them to fly — like having access to their emotional support animals.
Of course his emotional issues could become an issue in an upcoming campaign. But if his constituents re-elect him after he had to reimburse the campaign $49,000 last year for “groceries, fast food and items in connection with a trip to Italy Hunter took with his wife” then they will probably be accepting of his emotional need to travel with a rabbit.
Apparently the rabbit’s fees charged to his campaign was all a giant misunderstanding.
“(The office) has in their report $600 in campaign expenditures for in cabin rabbit transport fees,” Kasper said. “Since travel is often done on (airline) miles – which is entirely permissible – the credit card connected to the account was charged several times even when his children were flying.”
- His credit card was in his airline account because frequent flyer miles
- His children were flying and the airline just billed that card
- Or something
- Copyright: tan4ikk / 123RF Stock Photo
Even though of course pet in cabin fees are generally due at the airport, with a card swipe taken at that time.
Congressman Hunter’s office uses the rabbit incident, bizarrely, as justification for placing new restrictions on the Office of Congressional Ethics.
“This was nothing more than an oversight. In fact, it’s such an obvious example of a mistake being made but (the office) wants to view it through a lens of possible intent. The same goes for many other expenditures.”