It would probably be difficult to go back and check to see just how full the hotels were on the dates in question, but at least for Boston, he doesn’t say that he couldn’t find less expensive lodging, just that he couldn’t find a room at the government rate. My experience in this area is that there are a limited number of hotels that offer the government rate, but that is just a small subset of the available hotels. I’d be really surprised if the only decent room available that night in Boston was the Nine Zero Hotel at $449.

Orlando has (due to Disney World) an enormous number of rooms available, and I’ll bet he could have found a very nice room for far less than $300. I’m guessing that he took advantage of government rate rooms not available to park himself in luxury hotel room at taxpayer expense.

I note for the record, children, that in my last four trips to Boston as a Government attorney, I had a choice of hotels ranging between a Holiday Inn and . . . the Nine Zero. All of which were at the negaotiated Government contract rate. ($128 per night, I believe -- yes, even at the Nine Zero).

Christie's expense record is not outside the mainstream of what a lot of attorneys for the government do -- or attorneys in the private sector for that matter or, for that matter, anyone who travels with an expense account.

I haven't had to do it, but I can imagine a government attorney trying to book a room at one of the government contract rated hotels, finding the ones close to the courthouse or program booked up, and book stay at a more expensive hotel closer to the court or the event, even if there is a government rated hotel available -- all the way on the other side of town.

I am not saying his record is clean on this: it looks like he took advantage of a lack of space and upscaled it a couple of times. But is this good ammunition for Democrats? No.

What's the "government rate?" I know what my "bosses rate" is for my lodging, and although I never stay in dumps, I think if I spent $109 for a room in Warsaw, Indiana (where I've stayed in the past, myself) - that I'd be staying in one of the pricier rooms in the area. I'd say offhand that one could find a very decent room with free internet, cable, and free breakfast, in Warsaw, Indiana, for $59 - $79 per night any day of the week or weekend.

Depends on your idea of fancy, I guess. At taxpayers' expense, I guess attorney's should be able to afford something better than a mere national sales manager for a successful, medium-sized company (like I am).

Sorry, I see in an earlier post that the government negotiated rate is $128 per night.

There probably wasn't anything available anywhere near Warsaw, IN, for that much, so Mr. Fancypants, Esq., took the best room available.

These people all have staffs and access to Travelocity or the like. If they gave a s#)t about us poor, taxpaying schlubs, their staff could book lower-rate arrangements (as easy as booking any other arrangements) and save us many thousands of dollars per traveling federal official per year.

But why economize when they can get $500 per day hotel rooms on the backs of we peasantry.

And this waste crosses party lines, is going on today, at an annual cost to us of, I dunno How many government employees are in the air every day would you guess?

Anyhow, you know the saying, a million here, a million there - pretty soon you're talking real money!

As a senior level federal traveler, I can say with a great deal of confidence that Christie is providing a line of baloney. First, there are federal guidelines and a website to help travelers out. Anyone can simply go to GSA dot gov and take a look. The linked website Fedrooms is pretty good in most larger cities including DC. Secretarial staff and Carlson-Wagonlit's federal travel people handle that stuff all the time. Were his secretaries incompetent? Was Carlson-Wagonlit? (OK, don't answer that last question; I've had some trouble with them myself, though they've also done very good work.) It's not a problem to stay within established per diem, except possibly in emergency situations.

Assuming Christie actually has traveled during high occupancy periods as he claims, that simply means he has to stay a little further from the office he is visiting. Nothing stopped him from renting a car or taking a taxi from his more remote hotel room. (Taxi is usually cheapest, primarily because of parking expenses and taxes.)

I know he was a presidential appointee, but that does not mean he is entitled to stay at the most expensive places in town. It looks to me, as one who follows the rules, that the rules meant little to him. Rules are meant for everyone else, don'cha know?

I'd be willing to bet that if you looked at other US Attorneys, they didn't have the hotel problems he did.

So he's been pulling the wool over the eyes of the DOJ travel approval people. Good reason not to vote for him. If he chisels on the small stuff for prideful reasons, what will he do as governor?