Vice President Kamala Harris’ debt-ridden presidential campaign spent $2.6 million on private flights during the final weeks of the election season, according to newly released documents.
The findings come as Harris’ financially struggling campaign, which spent $1 billion on the trail, faces heightened scrutiny for its spending decisions after losing the Nov. 5 election to President-elect Donald Trump. The campaign is reportedly $20 million in debt.
Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings obtained by Fox News Digital reveal that in October alone, the Harris campaign disbursed $2,626,110 for private flights. The costs per disbursement ranged from $3,500 to $940,000, with $2.2 million going to Private Jet Services Group and $430,000 paid to Advanced Aviation Team, a charter flight broker.
In September, the campaign spent an additional $3.1 million on private flights, pushing the total spent on such expenses since July to more than $10 million.
These expenditures are part of a broader pattern of financial decisions that have drawn intense criticism. For instance, the Harris campaign paid Oprah Winfrey’s production company $1 million after the media icon appeared at an Oct. 15 rally. Additionally, the campaign allocated $4 million to Village Marketing Agency, a firm that connects clients with social media influencers, and at least $15 million on “event production,” according to FEC records.
The use of private jets has sparked backlash for both financial mismanagement and environmental concerns. Private jets emit significantly more greenhouse gases per passenger than commercial flights, conflicting with Harris’ previous statements on the urgency of addressing climate change.
“There’s no question we have to be practical. But being practical also recognizes that climate change is an existential threat to us as human beings,” Harris told CNN in 2019. “Being practical recognizes that greenhouse gas emissions are threatening our air and threatening the planet and that it is well within our capacity as human beings to change our behaviors in a way that we can reduce its effects.”
This revelation has intensified questions about the campaign’s priorities and financial stewardship during its ultimately unsuccessful run.
