According to The Washington Post, Rubio, who, as Secretary of State, isn’t allowed to fly commercially due to security mandates, has traveled “at least” 10 times to Florida football games on a military aircraft since taking office on January 1, 2025. In that time span, Rubio’s flight costs have accumulated to an estimated $1.2 million, the Post reported.
That figure has tongues wagging in taxpayer advocacy circles.
“If this travel becomes something that is undermining the integrity of your service, are you really taking care of taxpayer dollars the way that you’re obligated to as a public official?” said Cynthia Brown, senior ethics counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, in comments to The Post.
Rubio is not interested in apologies, noting “I have and will continue to try and make it to as many events that are important to me personally and to my family as possible,” in a statement published by The Post.
Family empathy aside, questions mount for the Secretary on the cost issue
Government accountability experts say it’s understandable that Sec. Rubio wants to see his son suit up for games and acknowledge he’s banned from taking commercial flights. That said, Rubio could improve on transparency.
“I understand why Secretary Rubio wants to be in the stands for his son,” Mackenzie Kelly, a former Austin, Texas City Council member who served on the council’s Audit and Finance Committee, told Moneywise. “I also think taxpayers are right to ask what it costs when those trips become routine.”
Kelly noted the Post’s $1.2 million estimate included trips the State Department classified as entirely personal and qualified as trips that merge official and personal business. “The figure I’d want to see is what taxpayers paid for flights or detours that would never have happened without the personal travel, after accounting for reimbursements,” she noted.
National security risks need to be heeded
There’s also the national security reality, where the U.S. Secretary of State may need to be airborne on a moment’s notice.
“The security case is compelling,” Kelly noted. “A crisis can break out while the secretary is in the air, and he needs to be able to receive classified information and respond immediately.”
Those responsibilities are especially clear when one person is handling both diplomacy and national security advice to the president. “That explains why the government may require a military aircraft for a trip,” she added. “The frequency and timing of discretionary trips are still matters of judgment.”
