more on Kuhl’s credit card debt
In March of 2005, the Hill reported that Randy Kuhl carried over $10,000 in credit card debt in 2003 or 2004 (or both). Kuhl was quoted as saying:
“A credit card can be advantageous if you use it the right way,” he said, noting that he had financed his son’s college tuition with credit cards with low introductory rates. “For me, at some point last year, I utilized what was a better deal than going into the bank,” he said. Kuhl estimated that currently he has “less than $5,000″ in credit-card debt.”
Yet now we learn (again from The Hill, as mentioned in a previous post) that Randy Kuhl once again a massive amount of credit card debt:
Reps. Randy Kuhl (R-N.Y.) and Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) have both expanded their liabilities. They were in the $40,000-$115,000 range in 2003, but Kuhl now has racked up $55,000-$165,000 in debt.
Does that mean that after paying his balance down to $5000, he went out and put another fifty to one-fifty on the card? Does that strike anyone as at all plausible? And how about the college tuition story? Isn’t that a little too convenient and wholesome?
We will try calling the Kuhl campaign to nail some of this down. Don’t hold your breath on us getting answers. Is Randy Kuhl sitting on a mountain of debt waiting until he can leave Congres via a Billy Tauzin-style golden parachute? That’s what it looks like, frankly.
Updated: The following was removed, since it is largely irrelevant, as it applies only to government-issued credit cards, not personal credit cards (hat tip to Rottenchester.)
It’s worth noting that Kuhl co-sponsored the so-called Government Credit Card Sunshine Act which makes government employees’ credit card information available, but with the provision:
he Federal department or agency shall remove the account number of the credit card and any information that personally identifies the employee involved.
Doesn’t sound like much of a “sunshine act” to me.
Well said.
The Credit Card Sunshine Act is about credit cards that are issued by the government, not government employees’ personal credit cards. So I don’t see the relevance to this post. The purpose of the act is to make public the items that government employees are charging on government-provided credit cards. So, for example, if there’s a $5K charge at a strip bar, that’s in the public record, and reporters can find it and ask what government employees are doing charging up lap dances on their agency’s credit card. And it makes perfect sense that the credit card number and employee personal info shouldn’t be published –that would just be fodder for identity theft.
So, I don’t see the relevance of Sunshine Act to your post, and it also looks like the act is actually a reasonable piece of legislation.
You’re right. I’ll correct the post.
Geez, I’ve thought this before, but this confirms it: Rottenchester is a one-man (woman?) encyclopedia. Thanks for the peer review, Rottenchester!