IV 
111TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. RES. 265 
Raising a question of the privileges of the House. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 19, 2009 
Mr. FLAKE submitted the following resolution; which was laid on the table 
RESOLUTION 
Raising a question of the privileges of the House. 
Whereas Mr. Paul Magliocchetti, a former Appropriations 
Committee staffer, founded a prominent lobbying firm 
specializing in obtaining defense earmarks for its clients 
and whose offices—along with the home of the founder— 
were recently raided by the FBI; 
Whereas the lobbying firm has shuttered its political action 
committee and is scheduled to cease operations at the 
end of the month but, according to the New York Times, 
‘‘not before leaving a detailed blueprint of how the polit-
ical money churn works in Congress’’ and amid multiple 
press reports that its founder is the focus of a Justice 
Department investigation. (The New York Times, Feb-
ruary 20, 2009); 
Whereas CQ Today noted that the firm has ‘‘charged $107 
million in lobbying fees from 2000 through 2008’’ and 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
23:35 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR265.LTH
HR265
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
HRES 265 LTH 
estimates of political giving by to the raided firm have 
varied in the press, with The Hill reporting that the firm 
has given $3.4 million to no less than 284 Members of 
Congress. (CQ Today, March 12, 2009; The Hill, March 
4, 2009); 
Whereas The Hill reported that Mr. Magliocchetti is ‘‘under 
investigation for [the firm’s] campaign donations’’, the 
Washington Post highlighted the fact that Federal inves-
tigators are ‘‘focused on allegations’’ that he ‘‘may have 
reimbursed some of his staff to cover contributions made 
in their names . . .’’, and the New York Times noted 
that Federal prosecutors are ‘‘looking into the possi-
bility’’ that he ‘‘may have funneled bogus campaign con-
tributions’’ to Members of Congress. (The Hill, February 
20, 2009; The Washington Post, February 14, 2009; The 
New York Times, February 11, 2009); 
Whereas Roll Call reported on ‘‘the suspicious pattern of giv-
ing established by two Floridians who joined [the firm’s] 
board of directors in 2006’’ and who, with ‘‘no previous 
political profile . . . made more than $160,000 in cam-
paign contributions over a three-year period’’ and ‘‘gen-
erally contributed the same amount to the same can-
didate on the same days.’’ (Roll Call, February 20, 
2009); 
Whereas The Hill also reported that ‘‘the embattled defense 
lobbyist who led the FBI-raided [firm] has entered into 
a Florida-based business with two associates whose polit-
ical donations have come into question’’ and is listed in 
corporate records as being an executive with them in a 
restaurant business. (The Hill, February 17, 2009); 
Whereas Roll Call also reported that it had located tens of 
thousands of dollars of donations linked to the firm that 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
23:35 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR265.LTH
HR265
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
HRES 265 LTH 
‘‘are improperly reported in the FEC database.’’ (Roll 
Call, February 20, 2009); 
Whereas CQ Today recently reported that Mr. Magliocchetti 
and ‘‘nine of his relatives—two children, his daughter-in- 
law, his current wife, his ex-wife and his ex-wife’s par-
ents, sister, and brother-in-law’’ provided ‘‘$1.5 million in 
political contributions from 2000 through 2008 as the 
lobbyist’s now-embattled firm helped clients win billions 
of dollars in federal contracts’’, with the majority of the 
family members contributing in excess of $100,000 in 
that timeframe. (CQ Today, March 12, 2009); 
Whereas CQ Today also noted that ‘‘all but one of the family 
members were recorded as working for [the firm] in cam-
paign finance reports, and most also were listed as hav-
ing other employers’’ and with other occupations such as 
assistant ticket director for a Class A baseball team, a 
school teacher, a police sergeant, and a homemaker. (CQ 
Today, March 12, 2009); 
Whereas in addition to reports of allegations related to reim-
bursing employees and the concerning patterns of con-
tributions of business associates and board members, 
ABC News reported that some former clients of the firm 
‘‘have complained of being pressured by [the firm’s] lob-
byists to write checks for politicians they either had no 
interest in or openly opposed.’’ (ABC News The Blotter, 
March 4, 2009); 
Whereas Roll Call has taken note of the timing of contribu-
tions from employees of Mr. Magliocchetti’s firm and its 
clients when it reported that they ‘‘have provided thou-
sands of dollars worth of campaign contributions to key 
Members in close proximity to legislative activity, such as 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
23:35 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR265.LTH
HR265
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
HRES 265 LTH 
the deadline for earmark request letters or passage of a 
spending bill.’’ (Roll Call, March 3, 2009); 
Whereas reports of the firm’s success in obtaining earmarks 
for their clients are widespread, with CQ Today reporting 
that ‘‘104 House members got earmarks for projects 
sought by [clients of the firm] in the 2008 defense appro-
priations bills’’, and that 87 percent of this bipartisan 
group of Members received campaign contributions from 
the raided firm. (CQ Today, February 19, 2009); 
Whereas clients of Mr. Magliocchetti’s 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 and 
Justice Department investigation into the firm and its 
founder was well known; 
Whereas the Chicago Tribune noted that the ties between a 
senior House Appropriations Committee member and Mr. 
Magliocchetti’s firm ‘‘reflect a culture of pay-to-play in 
Washington’’, and ABC News indicated that ‘‘the firm’s 
operations—millions out to lawmakers, hundreds of mil-
lions back in earmarks for clients—have made it, for 
many observers, the poster child for tacit ‘pay-to-play’ 
politics . . .’’ (Chicago Tribune, March 2, 2009; ABC 
News The Blotter, March 4, 2009); 
Whereas Roll Call has reported that a ‘‘handful of lawmakers 
had already begun to refund donations tied to’’ the firm 
‘‘at the center of a federal probe . . .’’ (Roll Call, Feb-
ruary 23, 2009); 
Whereas the persistent media attention focused on questions 
about the nature and timing of campaign contributions 
related to Mr. Magliocchetti, as well as reports of the 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
23:35 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HR265.LTH
HR265
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
HRES 265 LTH 
Justice Department conducting research on earmarks 
and campaign contributions, raise concern about the in-
tegrity of Congressional proceedings and the dignity of 
the institution; and 
Whereas the fact that cases are being investigated by the 
Justice Department does not preclude the Committee on 
Standards from taking investigative steps: Now, there-
fore, be it 
Resolved, That— 
(1) the Committee on Standards of Official 
Conduct, or a subcommittee of the committee des-
ignated by the committee and its members appointed 
by the chairman and ranking member, shall imme-
diately begin an investigation into the relationship 
between the source and timing of past campaign 
contributions to Members of the House related to 
the founder of the raided firm and earmark requests 
made by Members of the House on behalf of clients 
of the raided firm; and 
(2) the Committee on Standards of Official 
Conduct shall submit a report of its findings to the 
House of Representatives within 2 months after the 
date of adoption of the resolution. 
Æ 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
23:35 Mar 20, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\HR265.LTH
HR265
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS