The U.S. Coast Guard is shelling out a staggering $200 million for two shiny new private jets for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi L. Noem and other top brass.
The deal, unearthed by The Washington Post, covers not just the aircraft but also training, custom paint jobs, and cabin upgrades for an elite travel experience, all while a government shutdown looms and service members’ needs take a backseat.
The Coast Guard’s plan to acquire two Gulfstream G700 jets—touted by the manufacturer as the “pinnacle of business aviation excellence”—comes with a price tag that dwarfs the $50 million they initially requested for a single new jet.
This isn’t the first time Noem’s use of Coast Guard resources has raised eyebrows. Back in August, The Post reported she was staying rent-free in a residence meant for the Coast Guard’s top admiral, a perk that didn’t sit well with many.
Then there’s her history of using the Coast Guard’s current jet for personal trips, a habit that has drawn sharp rebukes from Democrats and ethics watchdogs who question her priorities.
Now, with this $200 million contract—first noted by The New York Times—critics are doubling down, arguing that such extravagance is a slap in the face to fiscal responsibility and operational necessity.
These aren’t just any jets; the Gulfstream G700 boasts a 7,750-mile range and the largest cabin in the company’s lineup, with space for up to five living areas. While that sounds impressive for a cross-country jaunt, one has to wonder if such opulence is justified for government use.
Congressional Democrats aren’t holding back their dismay. “The procurement of new luxury jets for your use suggests that the USCG has been directed to prioritize your own comfort above the USCG’s operational needs,” wrote Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut) and Rep. Lauren Underwood (D-Illinois) in a pointed letter to Noem dated Saturday.
Let’s unpack that critique: in a time of budget constraints and a government shutdown, spending hundreds of millions on plush aircraft does seem like a questionable allocation of resources, especially when Coast Guard personnel face real challenges on the ground.
The same letter from DeLauro and Underwood didn’t stop at comfort concerns. “We are deeply concerned about your judgment, leadership priorities, and responsibility as a steward of taxpayer dollars,” they added, laying bare their frustration with Noem’s oversight.
That’s a hefty charge, but it’s hard to ignore the optics when the cost of these jets balloons well beyond initial projections, and the public is left footing the bill for what looks like a high-flying luxury perk.
DHS, for its part, has stayed mum on this latest contract, with a spokesperson declining to comment when approached. Past statements from the department claimed Noem’s use of the Coast Guard residence was temporary and that she reimbursed the government for personal travel on their aircraft. Still, the silence on this $200 million deal speaks volumes.
From a conservative vantage point, this situation reeks of the kind of government overreach and misplaced priorities that fuel distrust in Washington.
While Noem and DHS officials surely need secure and efficient travel, couldn’t a less extravagant option suffice without draining taxpayer coffers?
Let’s be fair—leadership roles demand mobility, and security is no small matter for top officials. But when the price tag hits $200 million for jets with bespoke cabins while essential services struggle, it’s tough to argue this aligns with the fiscal restraint conservatives champion.
Ultimately, this controversy isn’t just about jets; it’s about trust in how our hard-earned dollars are spent. The criticism from Democrats might carry a partisan edge, but the core question remains: should personal comfort ever trump the broader needs of those who serve?