IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 295 

Raising a question of the privileges of the House. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 30, 2009 

Mr. FLAKE submitted the following resolution; which was laid on the table 

RESOLUTION 

Raising a question of the privileges of the House. 

Whereas The Hill reported that a prominent lobbying firm 

specializing in obtaining defense earmarks for its clients, 

the subject of a ‘‘federal investigation into potentially 

corrupt political contributions’’, has given $3.4 million in 

political donations to no less than 284 Members of Congress; 

Whereas multiple press reports have noted questions related 

to campaign contributions made by or on behalf of the 

firm; including questions related to ‘‘straw man’’ contributions, the reimbursement of employees for political 

giving, pressure on clients to give, a suspicious pattern 

of giving, and the timing of donations relative to legislative activity; 

Whereas Roll Call has taken note of the timing of contributions from employees of the firm and its clients when it 


SMARTINEZ on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

HRES 295 LTH 

reported that they ‘‘have provided thousands of dollars 

worth of campaign contributions to key Members in close 

proximity to legislative activity, such as the deadline for 

earmark request letters or passage of a spending bill.’’; 

Whereas CQ Today specifically noted a Member getting 

‘‘$25,000 in campaign contribution money from [the 

founder of the firm] and his relatives right after his subcommittee approved its spending bill in 2005.’’; 

Whereas the Associated Press noted that Members received 

campaign contributions from employees of the firm 

‘‘around the time they requested’’ earmarks for companies represented by the firm; 

Whereas the Associated Press highlighted the ‘‘huge amounts 

of political donations’’ from the firm and its clients to select Members and noted that ‘‘those political donations 

have followed a distinct pattern: The giving is especially 

heavy in March, which is prime time for submitting written earmark requests.’’; 

Whereas clients of the firm received at least three hundred 

million dollars worth of earmarks in fiscal year 2009 appropriations legislation, including several that were approved even after news of the FBI raid of the firm’s offices and Justice Department investigation into the firm 

was well known; 

Whereas the Associated Press reported that ‘‘the FBI says 

the investigation is continuing, highlighting the close ties 

between special-interest spending provisions known as 

earmarks and the raising of campaign cash.’’; and 

Whereas the persistent media attention focused on questions 

about the nature and timing of campaign contributions 

related to the firm, as well as reports of the Justice DeVerDate Nov 24 2008 01:58 Apr 01, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR295.LTH HR295

SMARTINEZ on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

HRES 295 LTH 

partment conducting research on earmarks and campaign 

contributions, raise concern about the integrity of Congressional proceedings and the dignity of the institution: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) the Committee on Standards of Official 

3 Conduct, or a subcommittee of the committee des4 ignated by the committee and its members appointed 

5 by the chairman and ranking member, shall imme6 diately begin an investigation into the relationship 

7 between the source and timing of past campaign 

8 contributions to Members of the House related to 

9 the raided firm and earmark requests made by 

10 Members of the House on behalf of clients of the 

11 raided firm; and 

12 (2) the Committee on Standards of Official 

13 Conduct shall submit a report of its findings to the 

14 House of Representatives within 2 months after the 

15 date of adoption of the resolution. 

Æ 


SMARTINEZ on PROD1PC64 with BILLS