THE REAL PROBLEM WITH RESEARCHING TOM DAVIS AND FINANCIAL AND INFLUENCE PEDDLING CORRUPTION, IS THAT THERE IS SO MUCH OF IT; THAT WHEN YOU GET STARTED; IT’S LIKE EATING POTATO CHIPS. YOU JUST CAN’T STOP AT ONE!
“DAVIS DIRT DOESN’T DO THIS JUSTICE.” THIS GUY IS REAL SEWER SLUDGE SUCKING GUTTER RAT. I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT ANYONE BELIEVES THAT THIS MAN IS WORTH EVEN TRYING TO TALK TO, OR LISTEN TO.
WITH SOME MEN YOU CAN GET TO THEM WITH A GOOD MEAL, OR PULLING THEIR ZIPPER DOWN, BUT WITH THIS GUY YOU HAD BETTER HAVE A COUPLE OF GRAND LAYING AROUND YOU’RE WILLING TO PART WITH!
HE IS THE EPITOME OF WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE CONGRESS.
http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4270
Tom Davis has ties to Abramoff's K Street Project though super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon
by: Andrea Chamblee
Mon Sep 04, 2006 at 22:49:09 PM EDT
Tom Davis (VA-11) is another Republican with an Abramoff connection in his closet. Worries about those connections may be behind the recent announcement that the House Government Reform Committee is investigating connections between Jack Abramoff and the White House. Now that's putting some distance between your campaign and GW Bush! Of course Davis has his strongest challenger in years, Democrat Andy Hurst and a District that is turning blue. Help Andy get the red out
In the "Abramoff 53," dengre summarized extensive research on Jack Abramoff connections but asked for help on the "Bench of Nine" that includes Tom Davis (R-11). He is running for reelection against Democrat Andy Hurst. If he wins reelection, Davis has ambitions for the Senate and then the White House.
Davis has ties to Abramoff that inspired Andy Hurst to give Davis his first real challenge in 12 years. There's lots of reasons to vote for Andy Hurst over Davis, not just that Davis's corruption
But those are good reasons.
Public Citizen and CapitalEye have found ties from Tom Davis and Abramoff, especially through super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon, but Davis has somehow escaped scrutiny and has never been held accountable. Virginia can unseat Davis. Contribute to and volunteer for Andy Hurst. Davis has used the millions he has from fundraising to influence races in 40 States, including 42 Districts and 3 senate races, totaling 103 candidates. That doesn't count his NRCC fundraising, His money is in so many states, get their help Kicking Him Out!
Andrea Chamblee :: Tom Davis has ties to Abramoff's K Street Project though super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon Similar story posted here: here on Daily Kos. Tom Davis̢۪s PAC money infects almost every state, so please go over to DailyKos and recommend the diary for more to see.
This diary ties Tom Davis to Abramoff and other corrupt super-lobbyists in 3 ways: through personal donations to Davis, his wife, and his PACs, through donations he solicited through the NRCC, and through donations and actions of Dan Mattoon of the NRCC and the firm of Podesta Mattoon. Also we can't forget Davis's unique position as head of the Government Reform Committee which tied the Committee's hands to prevent investigation of the corruption.
As most of you know, Davis was elected to Congress in 1994 (on the Contract with America) and has risen to lead the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the US Government Reform Committee.
Background and SummaryDuring his tenure, Davis has obtained donations from Abramoff and "Team Abramoff." Even though that's thousands of dollars, it's nothing compared to the amounts donated by the clients, on their lobbyists advice and insistence, including donations to Davis. Even more striking than those thousands of dollars is the amount from all the sources that Davis obtained from Abramoff, other lobbyists, and their clients and client PACs for Davis and for the NRCC when Davis was its head from 1998 to 2002.
This fund raising earned Davis the fear and power he wields today over Republicans that don't vote the party line.
When reporting some of Abramoff's contributions, Davis actually stated that he could not include Abramoff's occupation because it was "unknown" to him and he had used his "best efforts" to find out.
Ironically, as a "reward" for raising so much money for the NRCC, Davis was handed the Chairmanship of the Government Reform Committee by the Republican Majority, over Chris Shays who wanted the job and had more seniority. In his new position on the Reform Committee, Davis would have not only had the responsibility to know what Abramoff and DeLay were up to but Davis would be in a position to decline to exercise oversight to stop the illegal fundraising.
The Democrats have tried to get various hearings on the lobbying abuses and other oversight failures by Davis and his Government Reform Committee.
Since Davis controls the agenda of the Committee, they are powerless to even get the subject on the agenda.
Here are the dollar details:
I.. Personal Donations to Davis
Davis himself received $4,500 from Abramoff.
Donor - Total - Cycle
Abramoff, Jack A & Pamela- $500 - 2000
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians- $1,000- 2002
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana- $1,000- 2002
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe- $1,000 - 2002
Tigua Indian Reservation- $1,000- 2002
I suppose he probably gave the money back after he got caught, but knowing all he knew, why did he take it in the first place?
II.. NRCC Donations under Davis's Leadership
More importantly, Davis was head of the NRCC from 1998 to 2002, when Abramoff was reaching his peak. Davis was in a position to know who Abramoff was and how extensive Abramoff's reach was across the Republican Party.
As the money-go-round went faster, Davis would participate enthusiastically, raising $312,000 from Abramoff's tribal clients for the NRCC during that time.
Donor- Total - Cycle
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2002) $78,500
Scanlon, Michael P (2002) $50,000
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (2002) $35,000
Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana (2002) $35,000
Tigua Indian Reservation (2002) $30,000
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (2002) $25,000
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2002) $25,000
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (2002) $11,000
Tigua Indian Reservation (2002) $2,000
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (2002) $1,000
SunCruz Casinos (2000) $10,000
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2000) $7,500
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (2000) $2,000
Davis left the NRCC, but not until after the stage was set for another $138,500, for a total of $450,500 to the NRCC from Abramoff, according to CapitalEye.org.
Donor - Total - Cycle
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (2004) $50,000
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (2004) $40,500
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2004) $33,000
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (2004) $10,000
Pueblo of Sandia (2004) $5,000
This total doesn't count the additional thousands of dollars added to the NRCC coffers from "Team Abramoff" lobbyists and ARMPAC, Greenburg Traurig PAC, Preston Gates PAC, Bob Ney's American Liberty PAC, Denny Hastert's Keep Our Majority PAC, and the other PACS funded in part by Abramoff and his Team.
III.. Actions and Donations from Dan Mattoon
Tom Davis, Jack Abramoff, and NRCC deputy, lobbyist and major donor Dan Mattoon
According to Public Citizen's Bankroller's Report, only a few lobbyists donate any amounts that require reporting ($200 or more). Nevertheless, Davis has a hand in hundreds of PACS and financial schemes, and he gets a big share of this one:
Lobbyists and the political action committees of their firms have contributed at least $103.1 million to members of Congress since 1998. This figure is more than 90 percent higher than what is reported by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), which has been the most authoritative source to date, because this study's methodology cast a wider net to capture lobbyists' contributions.
The percentage of lobbyists making personal contributions is small. Just 27.1 percent (7,350) of the 27,121 people who registered as lobbyists since 1998 have contributed at least $200 to a single congressional candidate or PAC. Only contributions of $200 or more are reported by the FEC.
Lobbyists who have contributed at least $10,000 to members of Congress comprise only 6.1 percent of all lobbyists and only 22.3 percent of the lobbyists who have made at least one contribution of $200 or more. Nevertheless, they have accounted for more than fourth-fifths (83.4 percent) of all the money contributed to members of Congress by lobbyists since 1998.
The top 8 (now 7)
According to the Public Citizen report, the 36 "members of Congress who took in at least $500,000 from lobbyists and their PACs account for only 5.1 percent of the members of Congress who have received contributions of $200 or more from lobbyists since 1998. Yet, the money they took in - $26.5 million - accounts for more one-fourth of the total in contributions received by members of Congress in the time period studied."
Only 18 received $500,000 or more: 12 Republicans including Tom Davis.
Members of the House Who Received at Least $500,000 from Lobbyists
House Member- Current Leadership Position- Individual Contributions - PAC Contributions- Total
1. Tom DeLay (R-TX)- $944,013- $378,893- $1,322,906
2. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), House Speaker-$643,384- $283,070- $926,454
3. John Murtha (D -Pa.) - $715,550- $153,550- $869,100
4. Jerry Lewis (R -Calif.), Chair, Appropriations Comm- $724,033 - $95,721- $819,754
5. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Minority Whip- $637,936- $142,944 - $780,880
6. John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader - $618,933 - $115,935 - $734,868
7. Michael Oxley (R-Ohio), Chair, Financial Services Comm- $546,088- $165,406- $711,494
8. Tom Davis (R-Va.), Chair, Government Reform Comm- $560,262 - $112,476- $672,738
Davis's biggest lobbyist contributor is Dan Mattoon, a lobbyist who worked with DeLay and Abramoff on the K Street Project and a principal in the 18-year-old firm of Podesta Mattoon, which describes itself as a "bipartisan government relations and public affairs" firm.
Mattoon's online biography says he has worked with Republican representatives for over 30 years. He is a close friend of House Speaker Dennis J. Hastert (R-Ill.) At Hastert's request, Mattoon left BellSouth, where he had been vice president of congressional affairs for 15 years, to help [Davis] run the [NRCC] and help the GOP retain control of the House in 2000.
Mattoon's biography says, "for more than 30 years, he has provided political and strategic legislative counsel to House Republican members, and is a trusted advisor to many of the Washington political elite, including Speaker Hastert, House Majority Whip Blunt, House Republican Conference Chairwoman Pryce, and NRCC Chairman Reynolds."
Each of the four is among the top 10 congressional recipients of campaign contributions from Mattoon.
Mattoon also hired Joshua Hastert, the speaker's son, as a lobbyist.
Mattoon's wife, Jane, once served as treasurer of Hastert's leadership Political Action Committee.
Mattoon was involved in a Republican effort to wring more money out of lobbyists for Republican candidates. He was one of a small group of lobbyists who met with then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) at a dinner hosted by now-disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff at Abramoff's Signatures restaurant in January 2004 to discuss the issue. "There has been a concern that not enough folks who are out there making money based on their relation to the Hill are giving enough of their own money to the Republican Party," a GOP aide said of the initiative to gin up more lobbyist contributions to Republican lawmakers.
While the deputy director of the [NRCC] in 1999, [the same time Davis was NRCC head], Mattoon seems to have been involved in a decision to transfer $500,000 from the NRCC to the U.S. Family Network, a 501(c)(4) group that operated in the same Capitol Hill townhouse as the political action committees of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).
Mattoon said the transfer was made because of the ties former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham had to the group, and with the expectation that the money would be used to aid Republicans in the 2000 elections. "The Family Network is a group that based on our view of Ed Buckham's strengths in the family community and his political strengths will have an equally important impact in the elections, favorably for Republicans," Mattoon said.
In 2004, the FEC fined the NRCC $280,000 for its transfer of the $500,000 and the subsequent use of the money to finance ads attacking vulnerable Democrats.
After DeLay announced plans to resign from Congress, Mattoon continued to praise him, calling him "one of the founding fathers of the Republican majority in the House," and saying that, "Tom has a strong legacy that he should be proud of."
PodestaMattoon's top-paying client since 1998 has been The Science Coalition, which represents 60 universities. The Coalition has paid $2.6 million for the firm's services since 2001.
The Coalition periodically honors members of Congress, typically those serving on appropriations committees, such as Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) and former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, upon whom the Coalition bestowed its "Champion of Science" award in 2004.
Cunningham has subsequently pleaded guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes from contractors and is serving an eight-year prison sentence.
The University of California system, a member of the Coalition, received more than $3.7 million in earmarks in 2005.
Mattoon didn't stop there. When working for Davis at the NRCC, Mattoon donated to Davis's wife and one of Davis's PACs, as well as the State Republican Party.
Devolites Davis, Jeannemarie (2004) $500
Republican Party of Virginia (1999) $200
Tom Davis Va Victory Fund (2001) $5,000
Here is a comparison of the lobbyist money Davis has raked in compared with other Virginia representatives.
Virginia Member of - Rank in - Total Contributions Congress - in House- (including Tom DeLay) Received
Tom Davis (R) 8 $672,769
Jim Moran (D) has infected Government Reform and races all over the country. 11 $644,310
Eric Cantor (R) 22 $448,997
Frank Wolf (R) 27 $362,947
Rick Boucher (D) 49 $255,973
Bob Goodlatte (R) 99 $143,900
Virgil H Goode Jr (R) 249 $57,718
Randy Forbes (R) 255 $55,518
Jo Ann Davis (R) 257 $55,014
Bobby Scott (R) 291 $46,044
Thelma Drake (R) 399 $14,050
(One of the best research diaries on a blog that I've seen in a long time. Great work by Andrea! - promoted by Lowell)In the "Abramoff 53," dengre summarized extensive research on Jack Abramoff connections but asked for help on the "Bench of Nine" that includes Tom Davis (R-11). He is running for reelection against Democrat Andy Hurst.
If he wins reelection, Davis has ambitions for the Senate and then the White House.
Davis has ties to Abramoff that inspired Andy Hurst to give Davis his first real challenge in 12 years. There's lots of reasons to vote for Andy Hurst over Davis, not just that Davis's corruption
But those are good reasons.
Public Citizen and CapitalEye have found ties from Tom Davis and Abramoff, especially through super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon, but Davis has somehow escaped scrutiny and has never been held accountable.
Virginia can unseat Davis. Contribute to and volunteer for Andy Hurst. Davis has used the millions he has from fundraising to influence races in 40 States, including 42 Districts and 3 senate races, totaling 103 candidates. That doesn't count his NRCC fundraising, His money is in so many states, get their help Kicking Him Out!
Andrea Chamblee :: Tom Davis has ties to Abramoff's K Street Project though super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon
Similar story posted here: here on Daily Kos. Tom Davis's PAC money infects almost every state, so please go over to DailyKos and recommend the diary for more to see.
This diary ties Tom Davis to Abramoff and other corrupt super-lobbyists in 3 ways: through personal donations to Davis, his wife, and his PACs, through donations he solicited through the NRCC, and through donations and actions of Dan Mattoon of the NRCC and the firm of Podesta Mattoon.
Also we can't forget Davis's unique position as head of the Government Reform Committee which tied the Committee's hands to prevent investigation of the corruption.
As most of you know, Davis was elected to Congress in 1994 (on the Contract with America) and has risen to lead the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the US Government Reform Committee.
Background and SummaryDuring his tenure, Davis has obtained donations from Abramoff and "Team Abramoff."
Even though that's thousands of dollars, it's nothing compared to the amounts donated by the clients, on their lobbyists advice and insistence, including donations to Davis.
Even more striking than those thousands of dollars is the amount from all the sources that Davis obtained from Abramoff, other lobbyists, and their clients and client PACs for Davis and for the NRCC when Davis was its head from 1998 to 2002. This fundraising earned Davis the fear and power he wields today over Republicans that don't vote the party line.
When reporting some of Abramoff's contributions, Davis actually stated that he could not include Abramoff's occupation because it was "unknown" to him and he had used his "best efforts" to find out.
Ironically, as a "reward" for raising so much money for the NRCC, Davis was handed the Chairmanship of the Government Reform Committee by the Republican Majority, over Chris Shays who wanted the job and had more seniority. In his new position on the Reform Committee, Davis would have not only had the responsibility to know what Abramoff and DeLay were up to. Davis would be in a position to decline to exercise oversight to stop the illegal fund raising.
The Democrats have tried to get various hearings on the lobbying abuses and other oversight failures by Davis and his Government Reform Committee. Since Davis controls the agenda of the Committee, they are powerless to even get the subject on the agenda.
Here are the dollar details:
I.. Personal Donations to Davis
Davis himself received $4,500 from Abramoff.
Donor - Total - Cycle
Abramoff, Jack A & Pamela - $500- 2000
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians - $1,000 - 2002
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana- $1,000- 2002
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe- $1,000- 2002
Tigua Indian Reservation- $1,000- 2002
I suppose he probably gave the money back after he got caught, but knowing all he knew, why did he take it in the first place?
II.. NRCC Donations under Davis's Leadership
More importantly, Davis was head of the NRCC from 1998 to 2002, when Abramoff was reaching his peak.
Davis was in a position to know who Abramoff was and how extensive Abramoff's reach was across the Republican Party.
As the money-go-round went faster, Davis would participate enthusiastically, raising $312,000 from Abramoff's tribal clients for the NRCC during that time.
Donor - Total- Cycle
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2002) $78,500
Scanlon, Michael P (2002) $50,000
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (2002) $35,000
Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana (2002) $35,000
Tigua Indian Reservation (2002) $30,000
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (2002) $25,000
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2002) $25,000
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (2002) $11,000
Tigua Indian Reservation (2002) $2,000
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (2002) $1,000
SunCruz Casinos (2000) $10,000
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2000) $7,500
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (2000) $2,000
Davis left the NRCC, but not until after the stage was set for another $138,500, for a total of $450,500 to the NRCC from Abramoff, according to CapitalEye.org.
Donor- Total- Cycle
Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe (2004) $50,000
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (2004) $40,500
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (2004) $33,000
Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana (2004) $10,000
Pueblo of Sandia (2004) $5,000
This total doesn't count the additional thousands of dollars added to the NRCC coffers from "Team Abramoff" lobbyists and ARMPAC, Greenburg Traurig PAC, Preston Gates PAC, Bob Ney's American Liberty PAC, Denny Hastert's Keep Our Majority PAC, and the other PACS funded in part by Abramoff and his Team.
III.. Actions and Donations from Dan Mattoon
Tom Davis, Jack Abramoff, and NRCC deputy, lobbyist and major donor Dan Mattoon
According to Public Citizen's Bankroller's Report, only a few lobbyists donate any amounts that require reporting ($200 or more). Nevertheless, Davis has a hand in hundreds of PACS and financial schemes, and he gets a big share of this one:
Lobbyists and the political action committees of their firms have contributed at least $103.1 million to members of Congress since 1998. This figure is more than 90 percent higher than what is reported by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), which has been the most authoritative source to date, because this study's methodology cast a wider net to capture lobbyists' contributions.
The percentage of lobbyists making personal contributions is small. Just 27.1 percent (7,350) of the 27,121 people who registered as lobbyists since 1998 have contributed at least $200 to a single congressional candidate or PAC. Only contributions of $200 or more are reported by the FEC.
Lobbyists who have contributed at least $10,000 to members of Congress comprise only 6.1 percent of all lobbyists and only 22.3 percent of the lobbyists who have made at least one contribution of $200 or more. Nevertheless, they have accounted for more than fourth-fifths (83.4 percent) of all the money contributed to members of Congress by lobbyists since 1998.
The Washington Post startied to take notice of the seriousness of this race.
The DailyKos version of this diary made the front page under the Diary Rescue by Susan G.
Chamblee's Tom Davis ties to Abramoff's and K Street Project though Mattoon provides excellent in-depth research on the ties of incumbent Republican Tom Davis in VA-11 to Abramoff money.
In the Abramoff 53, Dengre researched Abramoff connections but asked for help on the "Bench of Nine" that includes Tom Davis (R-11). He is running for reelection against Democrat Andy Hurst. If he wins reelection, Davis has ambitions for the Senate and then the White House.
Davis has ties to Abramoff that inspired Andy Hurst to give Davis his first real challenge in 12 years. There's lots of reasons to vote for Andy Hurst over Davis, not just that Davis's corruption
Public Citizen and CapitalEye have found ties from Tom Davis and Abramoff, especially through super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon, but Davis has somehow escaped scrutiny and has never been held accountable.
The DailyKos community can unseat Davis. Contribute to and volunteer for Andy Hurst. Davis has used the millions he has from fundraising to influence races in 40 States, 42 Districts, 3 senate races, totaling 103 candidates, not counting his NRCC fundraising, His money is probably in your state. Kick him out!
achamblee's diary
·
Davis was elected to Congress in 1994 (on the Contract with America) and has risen to lead the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the US Government Reform Committee.
In sum, Davis has obtained donations from Abramoff and "Team Abramoff." Even though that's thousands of dollars, it's nothing compared to the amounts lobbyists clients themselves gave Davis.
Even more striking is the amount from all the sources that Davis obtained from Abramoff, other lobbyists, and their clients for the NRCC when Davis was its head from 1998 to 2002.
This fundraising earned Davis the fear and power he wields over Republicans that don't vote the party line.
When reporting some of Abramoff's contributions, Davis actually reported that he could not include Abramoff's occupation because it was "unknown" and he had used his "best efforts" to find out.
Ironically, as a "reward" for raising so much money for the NRCC, Davis was handed the Chairmanship of the Government Reform Committee by the Republican Majority, over Chris Shays who wanted the job and had more seniority.
In his new position on the Reform Committee, Davis would have not only had the responsibility to know what Abramoff and Delay were up to, he would be in a position to decline to exercise oversight to stop the illegal fundraising.
The Democrats have tried to get various hearings on the lobbying abuses and other oversight failures by Davis and his Government Reform Committee. Since Davis controls the agenda of the Committee, they are powerless to even get the subject on the agenda.
As the money-go-round went faster, Davis would participate enthusiastically, raising $312,000 from Abramoff's tribal clients for the NRCC during that time,
According to Public Citizen's Bankroller's Report, only a few lobbyists donate any amounts that require reporting ($200 or more). Nevertheless, Davis has a hand in hundreds of PACS and financial schemes, and he gets a big share of this one:
Lobbyists and the political action committees of their firms have contributed at least $103.1 million to members of Congress since 1998. This figure is more than 90 percent higher than what is reported by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), which has been the most authoritative source to date, because this study's methodology cast a wider net to capture lobbyists' contributions.
The percentage of lobbyists making personal contributions is small. Just 27.1 percent (7,350) of the 27,121 people who registered as lobbyists since 1998 have contributed at least $200 to a single congressional candidate or PAC. Only contributions of $200 or more are reported by the FEC.
Lobbyists who have contributed at least $10,000 to members of Congress comprise only 6.1 percent of all lobbyists and only 22.3 percent of the lobbyists who have made at least one contribution of $200 or more. Nevertheless, they have accounted for more than fourth-fifths (83.4 percent) of all the money contributed to members of Congress by lobbyists since 1998.
Davis's biggest lobbyist contributor is Dan Mattoon, a lobbyist who worked with DeLay and Abramoff on the K Street Project and a principal in the 18-year-old firm of Podesta Mattoon, which describes itself as a "bipartisan government relations and public affairs" firm.
Mattoon's online biography says he has worked with Republican representatives for over 30 years. He is a close friend of House Speaker Dennis J. Hastert (R-Ill.) At Hastert's request, Mattoon left BellSouth, where he had been vice president of congressional affairs for 15 years, to help [Davis] run the [NRCC] and help the GOP retain control of the House in 2000.
Mattoon's biography says, "for more than 30 years, he has provided political and strategic legislative counsel to House Republican members, and is a trusted advisor to many of the Washington political elite, including Speaker Hastert, House Majority Whip Blunt, House Republican Conference Chairwoman Pryce, and NRCC Chairman Reynolds." Each of the four is among the top 10 congressional recipients of campaign contributions from Mattoon. Mattoon also hired Joshua Hastert, the speaker's son, as a lobbyist.
Mattoon's wife, Jane, once served as treasurer of Hastert's leadership Political Action Committee.
Mattoon was involved in a Republican effort to wring more money out of lobbyists for Republican candidates.
He was one of a small group of lobbyists who met with then-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) at a dinner hosted by now-disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff at Abramoff's Signatures restaurant in January 2004 to discuss the issue.
"There has been a concern that not enough folks who are out there making money based on their relation to the Hill are giving enough of their own money to the Republican Party," a GOP aide said of the initiative to gin up more lobbyist contributions to Republican lawmakers.
While the deputy director of the [NRCC] in 1999, [the same time Davis was NRCC head], Mattoon seems to have been involved in a decision to transfer $500,000 from the NRCC to the U.S. Family Network, a 501(c)(4) group that operated in the same Capitol Hill townhouse as the political action committees of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).
Mattoon said the transfer was made because of the ties former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham had to the group, and with the expectation that the money would be used to aid Republicans in the 2000 elections. "The Family Network is a group that based on our view of Ed Buckham's strengths in the family community and his political strengths will have an equally important impact in the elections, favorably for Republicans," Mattoon said.
In 2004, the FEC fined the NRCC $280,000 for its transfer of the $500,000 and the subsequent use of the money to finance ads attacking vulnerable Democrats.
After DeLay announced plans to resign from Congress, Mattoon continued to praise him, calling him "one of the founding fathers of the Republican majority in the House," and saying that, "Tom has a strong legacy that he should be proud of."
PodestaMattoon's top-paying client since 1998 has been The Science Coalition, which represents 60 universities. The Coalition has paid $2.6 million for the firm's services since 2001. The Coalition periodically honors members of Congress, typically those serving on appropriations committees, such as Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) and former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, upon whom the Coalition bestowed its "Champion of Science" award in 2004. Cunningham has subsequently pleaded guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes from contractors and is serving an eight-year prison sentence.
The University of California system, a member of the Coalition, received more than $3.7 million in earmarks in 2005.
by: Andrea Chamblee @ Mon Sep 04, 2006 at 23:35:11 PM CDT
[ Parent ]
by: Andrea Chamblee @ Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 08:46:29 AM CDT
[ Parent ]
by: you @ soon
To post this comment click here:
Otherwise click cancel.
You must enter a subject for your comment
More on Davis and Matoon (4.00 / 2)
As we know, DeLay's legal troubles are related to his use of "pass-through" organizations to raise money from groups who either don't want to be identified, can't donate any more because they are at a cap, or would violate laws such as Texas laws that prohibit certain out-of-state money for state campaigns. Tom Davis and Dan Mattoon colluded to commit that offense as well.
A story about the complaint is here. The FEC findings of guilt against the two conspirators is here: PARTY MISUSE OF SOFT MONEY TO PAY FOR ISSUE ADS RESULTS IN $280,000 CIVIL PENALTY
The DCCC's complaint alleges that Davis and DeLay have essentially created three subsidiaries of the NRCC that are not required to obey campaign finance laws. By doing so, the complaint says, "the NRCC has created a web of organizations to do what it may not do on its own."
The outside organizations named in the complaint -- the US Family Network, the Republican Majority Issues Committee and Americans for Economic Growth -- are all associated with DeLay's and Davis' political operations. None of the groups are required to disclose their donors.
The NRCC gave $500,000 to US Family Network on Oct. 20, the largest single donation the committee has made this year.
The complaint also said the groups "are established, financed, maintained and controlled by the very same individuals who run the NRCC."
by: Andrea Chamblee @ Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 10:10:29 AM CDT
The authors of the last story on Davis corruption are atoharrowr@washpost.com (Robert O'Harrow) andhighams@washpost.com (Scott Highams)
by: Andrea Chamblee @ Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 12:42:10 PM CDT
[ Parent ]
I just found this on DKos, a quote where Abramoff ridicules any politician - like Davis did above - who said they "didn't know Jack":
"Any important Republican who comes out and says they didn't know me is almost certainly lying," he says. Such lies are not just, well, lies, but dumb to boot, he adds, for, as his own humiliations suggest, old e-mails never die; they just sit on hard drives, waiting to be subpoenaed and then to be leaked to the press. "This is not an age when you can run away from facts," he declares. "I had to deal with my records, and others will have to deal with theirs."
Forbes,
NPR
by: Andrea Chamblee @ Thu Sep 07, 2006 at 14:26:44 PM CDT
by: you @ soon
To post this comment click here:
Otherwise click cancel.
You must enter a subject for your comment
Tom Davis has ties to Abramoff's K Street Project though super-lobbyist Dan Mattoon 10 comments
Democrat Andrew Hurst, candidate for the 11th congressional district of Virginia, criticized Congressman Tom Davis (R-11) for accepting a $500 contribution from embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff and waiting five years to return the money. Hurst also demanded to know why Davis' campaign failed to disclose Abramoff's occupation to the Federal Election Commission, as required by federal law.
"The people of the 11th district deserve to know the truth about the relationship between Representative Davis and Jack Abramoff," said Hurst. "The damage has been done here. Votes and legislative action by the Republican majority were influenced by all of the funds paid or solicited by Jack Abramoff, and the money was spent to elect people to office. Giving contributions to charity years after the fact is insufficient to alleviate the Republican culture of corruption. After more than a decade in Washington, Tom Davis is an integral part of that culture."
In a quarterly report dated April 15, 2000 Davis claimed to have made "Best efforts" to determine Mr. Abramoff's employer and occupation,
http://images.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?20035472449 ).
However, Abramoff was a well-known lobbyist by that time with strong ties to the Bush Administration and to Republicans in Congress.
"It's very difficult to believe that Congressman Davis did not know or could not determine Abramoff's occupation. He was a lobbyist and influence peddler with deep ties to the Republican establishment. It appears that Davis has skirted campaign finance law and misled his constituents. He should come clean about his relationship with Jack Abramoff," said James Walkinshaw, Andrew Hurst's campaign manager.
Today’s Tom Davis scandals:
Tom Davis knew about Walter Reed conditions in 2004, but did not want to embarrass his Party or his President. See Congressional Quarterly March 7, 2007.
Davis accepted campaign contributions from the Halliburton-connected contractor for Walter Reed during the decline of the staff and facility.
At GSA, Tom Davis knew Lurita Doan was firing auditors, giving GSA contracts to friends.
Davis forced out previous GSA manager Angela Styles who had been pushing for audits of incompetent contractors, replaced her with David Safavian, a felon who sold access to contracts to Jack Abramoff. See more on Ms. Styles here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Safavian
Tom Davis (R-VA) was responsible for oversight before Henry Waxman (D-CA) took over in January 2007.
DailyKos is tracking the corruption and waste the Oversight Committee has been exposing since the Democrats took over.
See http://on-the-bus.dailykos.com/
What did the Federal Election Commission say about Tom Davis’s diversion of half a million dollars of campaign contributions to an illegal entity? Read here:
Friday, 09 March 2007 Tom Davis scandals 46
Wednesday, 21 February 2007 Davis defends Tom DeLay 47
Thursday, 08 February 2007 Davis and Devolites Enterprises 321
Thursday, 25 January 2007 Tom Davis and the Abramoff tribal clients 46
Monday, 27 November 2006 Tom Davis and Tom Foley 350
Monday, 27 November 2006 The Fan With Subpoena Power 75
Monday, 27 November 2006 Tom Delay choses Tom Davis 83
Tuesday, 21 November 2006 Tom Davis and the Moonies 56
Tuesday, 21 November 2006 David Safavian, Colleague of Davis 108
Saturday, 14 October 2006 Virginian Traffic Woes 392
Wednesday, 06 September 2006 Tom Davis & Jack Abramoff, fined for collusion 171
Sunday, 30 July 2006 Whistleblowers 102
Friday, 14 July 2006 Tom Davis subpoenas Terri Schiavo 1100
Monday, 22 May 2006 Tom Davis and lobbyists 361
Monday, 22 May 2006 Congress asks Davis to Investigate Corruption 353
Tom Davis Reform Committee Hearings Produce Campaign Contributions ( 2 items )
Tom Davis has abused his Chairmanship of the Government Reform Committee. Read how here:
Reform Committee Members Ask Davis to Let the Committee Do Its Job ( 3 items )
A Congressional Report in 2006 identifies 15 key oversight issues involving President Bush and the Administration that the House Committee on Government Reform and Congess has failed to investigate. Tom Davis is head of the Government Reform Committee; Davis has repeatedly refused Democrats requests to schedule investigations of the many instances of incompetence and corruption in Congress and in government.
Instead of investigating government issues, the core repsonsibility of the committee, he has used taxpayer money to investigate baseball and the Terri Schiavo case that have nothing to do with Federal government responsibilities. The subjects requested for scheduling by the Democrats include:
• The role of the White House in manipulating intelligence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda;
• The responsibility of senior Administration officials for the abuse of detainees;
• The role of White House officials in leaking the identity of a covert CIA agent;
• The role of the Vice President’s office in the award of Halliburton contracts;
• The responsibility of senior White House officials in the failed response to Hurricane Katrina;
• The secret wiretapping of U.S. citizens by the National Security Agency;
• The identity of the energy industry contributors who met with the Vice President’s energy task force;
• The role of the White House in withholding key Medicare cost estimates from Congress;
• Evidence of conflicts of interest at multiple federal agencies and the White House;
• The increasing politicization of science-based federal agencies;
• The failure of the Department of Justice to enforce voting rights laws;
• Contract abuses at the Department of Homeland Security;
• The influence of industry lobbyists in writing EPA regulations; • The influence of the tobacco industry lobbyists on U.S. tobacco policies; and
• The role of former Attorney General John Ashcroft in illegal campaign finance activities.
Read the report...
Tom Davis Makes A Fool of Himself
Congressman Davis on a rampage to defend the corruption of Lurita Doan and this administration even publicly released a private email from Scott Bloch of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) to a personal friend mocking Davis.
August 21, 2007
Is Waxman Protecting Tom Davis in His Politicization Investigation?
by emptywheel
In this post I trace the tangled web in which Tom Davis is investigating Scott Bloch (head of the Office of Special Counsel) at the same time as Bloch may be investigating Tom Davis. The short logic goes like this:
Tom Davis is investigating Scott Bloch (and collecting all Bloch emails that refer to any legislator)
The WaPo story on Sunday looks like it was based primarily on leaks from OSC. It included details that extend back to the time Davis worked with Rove on these issues.
This suggests Bloch may include Davis among his targets
But Waxman, when he sent out a fresh request for this information today, did not request documents that might incriminate Davis
.
As I point out in this post, Davis' demand for Bloch's email--including any emails that reference federal lawmakers--would net emails that refer in any manner to Davis himself. Even if those emails referring to Davis as part of Bloch's investigation into Rove's asset deployment teams!!! If the WaPo story came from leaks from Bloch, the leaks may have been an effort to get Waxman--or someone else--to pick up an investigation stymied by Davis' collection of Bloch's emails.
The whole thing is very twisted ... and troubling.
Update: One more reason to think the leaks in the WaPo came from OSC. There was a report
“It is Congressman Tom Davis, who has been acting like Doan’s defense counsel, saying reckless things about OSC’s report and calling for my resignation. Weird Kabuki theatre, all of this. I am going up for my Reauthorization hearing on July 12, and Davis will either show up as ranking member of the larger committee, or have Cong. Mica do his dirty work of raking me over the coals.”
So Davis is on a mission to prove to the world that he is as silly as Bloch predicted. Does he not get how stupid he looks publicizing someone’s personal email describing just how pathetic he is?
Private E-Mail, Made Public, Trips Up Special Counsel at Hearing
By Stephen Barr
Friday, July 13, 2007; Page D01
Those darn e-mails will bite you every time.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) yesterday surprised Scott J. Bloch, a presidential appointee who heads the Office of Special Counsel, by reading aloud an e-mail Bloch sent to his friends. One of those friends forwarded it to Davis, probably because Bloch criticizes Davis in it.
Before disclosing the e-mail at a House subcommittee hearing, Davis asked Bloch what he would do if he learned of an agency official sending out news clips and personal commentary about agency business during working hours, even if it was done through a private e-mail account.
The e-mail alludes to testimony by a Bush appointee, Lurita Alexis Doan, who heads t he General Services Administration. Bloch's office has sent a report to the White House alleging that Doan violated the Hatch Act when she asked other political appointees at a campaign briefing how the GSA team could help "our candidates" in the next election.
In the e-mail, Bloch referred his friends to a news account of Doan's testimony at a House hearing. He wrote:
"It is Congressman Tom Davis, who has been acting like Doan's defense counsel, saying reckless things about OSC's report and calling for my resignation. Weird Kabuki theatre, all of this. I am going up for my Reauthorization hearing on July 12, and Davis will either show up as ranking member of the larger committee, or have Cong. Mica do his dirty work of raking me over the coals."
Bloch's forecast was correct -- Davis and Rep. John L. Mica (R-Fla.) showed up.
Davis told Bloch that he wanted all e-mails Bloch has sent on his AOL account since Jan. 26 that mentioned the Hatch Act, Doan, Davis, Mica or any other government official or member of Congress.
"It is not going to happen," Bloch responded. "Let's move on to something real."
But Davis did not budge, asking questions suggesting that he thinks Bloch has shown poor judgment and a lack of professionalism in the Doan case.
Bloch protested that his privacy was being invaded and that the matter was inappropriate for a congressional hearing. At one point, he said, "If you want to exchange personal attacks, perhaps we should go outside." That comment elicited nervous laughter from the audience, leading Bloch to quickly clarify that he wasn't making a threat.
Bloch heads an independent agency whose mission is to protect federal employee rights, but he has been under investigation for the past two years because of allegations that he has run roughshod over his staff and allowed politics to play a role in some of his decisions.
The investigation is in the hands of the inspector general at the Office of Personnel Management, and Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.), who chaired yesterday's hearing by the House federal workforce subcommittee, asked Bloch if he was cooperating.
Bloch said he has turned over documents that have been requested. He called the allegations against him "reckless and false and scandalous."
Questions by Davis and others amounted to an attempt to suppress and taint the investigation of Doan, Bloch said. "I will not be intimidated," he said. Davis shot back that the facts will speak for themselves.
« The "I" Doesn't Stand for "Independent" Main Russ Tice: Subpoena=Government Intimidation »
Tom Davis: Cozy With Contractors
The Washington Post ran a lengthy piece today on the relationship between Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) and ICG Government, a consulting firm founded by a longtime associate of Davis’ (pdf) from the Northern Virginia information technology (IT) industry. Adding to a list of government officials or members of Congress and their spouses who have engaged in questionable activity (e.g., Rep. John Doolittle and David Safavian and their wives), the article reported that the firm employs Davis’ wife, Jeannemarie Devolites, whose clients include IT companies hoping to secure federal contracts.
Two months after the founding of ICG Government, Davis secured the chairmanship of the House Government Reform Committee. During this time, he introduced the Services Acquisition Reform Act (SARA), a bill ostensibly intended to streamline federal contracting, but which ended up removing longstanding safeguards (pdf) meant to protect the federal government and taxpayers from contractor fraud and mismanagement. Today’s article calls into question whether Davis’ reforms are pro-taxpayer or pro-contractor.
Davis asked the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to consider whether any of the following was in fact a violation of House rules: his wife’s consulting work with companies seeking federal contracts, his speaking engagements at ICG conferences, and the appearance of ICG clients at witnesses before his own committee. The Committee responded that, on the surface, Davis and his wife had not violated any House rules (pdf). Nonetheless, the article highlights a number of troubling issues which need to be addressed.
First, contracting consultants like ICG are not obliged to disclose their clients, while registered lobbyists must adhere to public reporting requirements. It seems clear that the firm serves as a critical link between contractors and politicians. The article quotes Paul Smith, a sales executive for a North Carolina software company, who called ICG’s employees “door-openers.” POGO has previously recommended that Congress require contracting consultants such as ICG to register with the Office of Government Ethics. So long as ICG continues to “open the door” to the offices of politicians like Davis, the need for transparency remains urgent.
Second, the Post article details ICG’s disturbing role in convincing the Pentagon to continue its contract with Artel, a satellite service company from Reston, VA. After learning that the Pentagon was planning to scrap the contract, Artel’s CEO worked with Senator-turned-lobbyist Tim Hutchinson and ICG’s Donald Upson to draft a memo to the contracting officials on Davis’ official letterhead. The letter, which included Davis’ signature at the bottom, prompted a meeting between Davis and Pentagon officials in the Congressman’s office. A few months later, the Defense Department changed its course and concluded that the contract with Artel was a success. Although Artel’s CEO claims that “none of the companies needed ICG or Upson to get to anyone in Congress,” the decidedly intimate relationship between the contracting consultant and Davis is highly suspect.
Third, despite Davis’ insistence that he and his wife have committed no wrongdoing, one cannot help but be reminded of a previous incident in which lobbyists and defense contractors threw a holiday party for the House Government Reform Committee. Sponsors of the party included Innovative Defense Strategies (IDS), which has had several suspicious connections to Davis.
Last year, for instance, IDS contributed to his wife’s campaign while she was running for a seat on the Virginia State Senate. The firm also employed Peter Sirh, a former Staff Director of Davis’ Government Reform Committee who has spoken numerous times at ICG events about the intricacies of federal contracting. Incidentally, the head of IDS, Richard Carroll, serves on the board of the Small Business Technology Coalition along with Nicholas Karangelen, president of Trident Systems Inc.
In addition to Karangelen’s role in a recent controversy involving Rep. Lewis (R-CA) and his stepdaughter, both have made contributions to Davis and his Future Leaders Leadership PAC (you can check out the FEC filings here and here). As a whole, the IT and telecommunications industries have been undeniably kind to Rep. Davis over the years.
With all the recent news about cozy dealings between contractors, consultants and elected officials like Davis, taxpayers have every right to demand greater oversight for federal acquisition and contracting.
Michael Smallberg
Hey K Street Buddy –
Calm down. You’ve going to too many of those Tom Davis/Steve Kelman/Stan Soloway (the “trifecta”) contractor sponsored confabs -- the old “What’s good for the contractors is good for the American people” meetings. No one doubts that most contractors are honest. However, there are a bunch of favored large defense, IT and consulting contractors, who dictate policies and requirements to the government. And believe me, these contractors place the interests of their shareholders over those of taxpayers. Tom Davis is their chief Congressional “enabler.”
To “H. Kline” – Tom Davis went after Angela Styles because she resisted his contractor-inspired initiatives, and she understood more about the issues, than either Davis, his staff, or the contractor lobbyists. What amazed me more than anything was how little the Washington Post article focuses on Davis’ attempts to force Styles out, and the Davis’ staff direct interference in the operations of her office. Essentially, Davis forced OMB to shed any meaningful procurement oversight or regulatory role.
Posted by: Connie the Contractor Aug 3, 2006 2:33:55 PM
Tom Davis sucks and is one of the Biggest LIARS congress has ever seen, the very sight of that jerk makes my stomache turn, I sent him an email some time ago regarding the steriod scandal in baseball and he blocked out my email simply because i had a differnt oppinon, Davis sucks and always will.
The congressman's defense in the Washington Post article was that his wife got the lobbying job "before we were engaged." What he left out was the obvious that basically everyone in Northern Virginia knows -- before they were engaged but after they were openly having an affair that began when they were both still married to their former spouses. Who does he think he is fooling? Giving Jeanemarie Devolites a job before she was engaged to Tom Davis was tantamount to getting an audience with Tom Davis.
GOT TO LOVE THOSE OLD TIME RELIGIOUS VALUES.
Tom Davis (R-VA):
“[I’m] very disappointed in Libby, and the White House, and the vice president and the president. They should have taken care of this a long time ago. They should have done their own investigation. They’re going to get very little sympathy on Capitol Hill, at least from me…They brought this on themselves.” October 29, 2005 9:56 am Comment (8)
Davis’s statement is two dollars short and several days late. Where was he weeks, months and years ago? But that was then and this is now; what is Davis going to do for us today?
Wife, Friend Tie Congressman to Consulting FirmCompany's Clients Say They Get Access to Va. Republican
By Robert O'Harrow Jr. and Scott HighamWashington Post Staff WritersFriday, July 28, 2006; A01
Two months before Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.) became chairman of the powerful House Government Reform Committee in January 2003, one of his close friends formed ICG Government, a consulting company for technology firms seeking government contracts.
Donald W. Upson had risen with Davis through the burgeoning Northern Virginia technology community, where they worked side by side as executives at a company that sold computer systems to the government.
Davis went on to Congress, where he became a leading voice on government contracting and an advocate for his technology industry constituents in Fairfax and Prince William counties. Upson became the top technology official for the Virginia government before reentering the private sector and starting ICG.
From the beginning, Upson worked with Davis and his staff as he built his consulting business, which holds seminars on procurement and advises clients on winning government technology contracts worth billions of dollars. Those contracts often came under the oversight of Davis's committee. One of Upson's first hires was Jeannemarie Devolites, a Virginia politician who later married the congressman.
ICG has a record of satisfied clients, who say the firm has provided them with access to the congressman and his staff.
In an opinion issued this week, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct told the congressman that his wife can work for the consulting firm as long as the couple does not personally benefit from any official acts by the congressman. The committee told them to take care to "avoid a claim that you are allowing your official title to be used for private gain."
Davis, 57, acknowledged that Upson, 51, is "a very close confidant and political ally." But the congressman said that Upson did not have "unique access" to his office and that his wife has no business on Capitol Hill. Davis added that he had broken no laws and saw no ethics or disclosure violations.
ICG's relationship with Davis has played out on a number of levels. The firm has arranged for clients to meet with Davis in his congressional office. Upson has set up dinners and receptions with the lawmaker for his clients. And ICG has arranged for clients to testify before Davis's committee. In one case, Upson's team wrote the testimony. Some of those clients, who pay ICG about $8,000 per month, have told The Washington Post that their testimony was a part of marketing strategies developed by ICG to bolster the clients' "clout" and "visibility" on Capitol Hill and with government contracting officials.
On one occasion, Upson helped a client write a threatening letter to the Pentagon that was then sent out with Davis's signature on his committee's letterhead.
Davis's wife, a part-time ICG consultant, has contacted senior government technology officials on behalf of clients, including an undersecretary at the Department of Homeland Security. Upson paid her $78,000 last year for working "10 to 20 hours a week," primarily at home on her cellphone, she said. She makes $18,000 a year as a Virginia legislator.
"I think you'd be hard pressed to say that we started to take sides in something in any kind of manner, undue manner, where we used the power of this committee to alter a decision that was against the interests of the American people or the taxpayers," Davis said in a two-hour interview at his Capitol Hill office July 11. "I don't think Don's ever abused this in his relations with me."
Davis said that Upson hired his wife before they were engaged and that she is entitled to earn a living. He said the couple takes steps to ensure that she does not appeal to him on behalf of ICG clients.
Upson's firm is part of a cottage industry of former government officials and others who hire themselves out as "contracting consultants" to firms seeking government work. Although they do some of the same things as lobbyists, they do not register with Congress or publicly report their activities, as lobbyists are required to do.
Federal law generally requires people to register as lobbyists if they approach lawmakers or government officials with the intent to influence the "formulation, modification or adoption" of legislation, regulation or policy. Congress said it passed the law to "increase public confidence in the integrity of Government." Failure to register can result in civil fines.
Unlike lobbyists, contracting consultants such as Upson and Devolites Davis do not publicly disclose their clients' identities because they do not register as lobbyists. They also do not reveal the issues they have handled or the fees they have been paid. But they offer some of the same services traditionally provided by lobbyists.
"The issue is: Are they lobbying?" said Jan Baran, a former general counsel of the Republican National Committee who specializes in lobbying and ethics law. "Their activities strongly resemble what lobbyists here in Washington do every day."
Upson said he had not registered because less than 20 percent of his business is lobbying.
"There have been a limited number of instances when I have had contact with Congress or the Executive Branch in the course of conducting my broader work; but this contact constitutes a small and episodic part of the services ICG has provided its clients," Upson said in a statement. "I have engaged an attorney who is an expert regarding the lobbying statute. He has advised me that such de minimus activities -- an occasional meeting with an Executive branch official or Congressional staff or a draft of a document -- does not require registration."
A day after receiving questions from The Post last week about his business practices and his relationship with Davis, Upson consulted with his attorney and filed a lobbying report disclosing his work on behalf of one of his clients, Juniper Networks Inc. He declined to identify his other clients.
A Friend to Contractors
Davis's tenure in Congress has been marked by a series of accomplishments. He enacted the D.C. Financial Control Board Act and urged reforms of the District's troubled child-protection system. Davis has used his committee to hold numerous oversight hearings into issues such as the war against narco-terrorists and the Food and Drug Administration's ability to protect the public from harmful prescription drugs.
Davis also stands as one of the most knowledgeable members on technology issues in Congress.
"I come out of the contracting business," said Davis, a former procurement attorney for two government contractors in Northern Virginia. "I know a lot about it. I litigated this stuff. I obviously have a philosophy and a bent on this that other members don't. But I also have an understanding that goes four decimal points deep."
A graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law, Davis served on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors in the 1980s and early 1990s, rising to chairman. He gained a reputation as a moderate, brilliant political strategist.
At the time, Davis also served as corporate attorney for two companies, including PRC Inc., a technology contractor in McLean where Upson worked. In 1994, Davis was elected to Congress to represent Northern Virginia. Upson served as his political adviser.
In Congress, Davis has been a leader in reshaping the nation's procurement system, pressing to overhaul what he considers to be the government's inefficient contracting rules. He has been recognized as a "True Blue Reformer" by Public Citizen, a good-government group, for what his biography calls "his consistently strong support of political and ethics reforms."
But to some, Davis's persona as a reformer does not square with his close relationship with technology corporations, many of them based in Northern Virginia, that have greatly increased their federal contracting business since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
In the past five years, technology and telecommunications companies have been the largest contributors to Davis's and his wife's separate campaigns and political action committees. Those companies and their employees have donated more than $1.1 million of the $6.4 million given to the couple's campaigns, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics and the Virginia Public Access Project.
A former top contracting official for the Bush administration who clashed with Davis repeatedly over procurement policy wrote a stinging e-mail about him to her boss in May 2002.
"The businesses in Mr. Davis district are primarily government contractors and he wants to make sure the $$ are free flowing without much regard to the fiscal consequences," said the e-mail written by Angela B. Styles, who was chief of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at the Office of Management and Budget at the time.
'My Niche'
Devolites Davis, 50, said she made it on her own as a consultant for ICG. She cited her experience as a state lawmaker who has worked for years on technology policy, including anti-spamming legislation and procurement issues in Virginia.
"This is just my area of expertise and my niche," she said in an interview last week. "With a deep interest in technology, math and science, certainly it was something that I came to understand, the business and the industry."
When Devolites Davis joined ICG in 2003, she was listed on the firm's Web site as a senior associate. Her biography on ICG's Web site now lists her as a partner. She said in the interview that she is not a partner but a salaried employee. Her pay rose last year to $6,500 from $4,000 a month.
She said she got a raise "as the company grew and its resources grew."
ICG collected $830,000 in revenue last year, Devolites Davis said. The firm, based in Tysons Corner with an office in Richmond, has seven employees. Upson declined to discuss the firm's finances.
"She has a couple of little clients she does, and she doesn't touch the federal sector," Davis said. "We've tried to put up bars in this case where she doesn't bring anybody up here."
But Devolites Davis told The Post that she does represent clients with interests in the federal sector -- three of her four assignments involve reaching out to federal officials.
Davis's staff director, David Marin, later said the lawmaker "misspoke" because he "is so far removed from Jeannemarie's work at ICG that he did not know exactly who her clients were, what she does for them or who she reaches out to on their behalf. He just knew she has no business before Congress."
Devolites Davis said she does not interact with her husband on ICG business.
"There is a firewall between me and Tom, and I would never take an action that would raise a question of unethical behavior on the part of either Tom or myself as elected officials," she said.
Upson said Devolites Davis has been careful to follow the rules.
"To the best of my knowledge, Jeannemarie has never dealt with Tom Davis or his staff about anything related to ICG or its clients, or any business arrangement not related to ICG," Upson said in his statement. "Jeannemarie works hard for every dollar she is paid."
Devolites Davis said her ICG work is not lobbying because she does not try to influence votes or the awarding of contracts.
"We help make connections so that folks can build relationships on their own," she said, adding that the firm's main business is educating industry and government officials.
After questions from The Post, Davis requested an opinion from the House ethics committee on whether Devolites Davis's work for ICG violates House rules.
"Generally the answer is 'no,' " the committee members said in their response Wednesday. But they told Davis that the rules could be violated if his wife invoked his name or position when "soliciting clients or conducting other activities on behalf of the firm, whether or not the client was previously known to you or your wife."
The committee told Davis that compensation to his wife could be considered indirect compensation to him and that he needs "to bear in mind" that issue when he considers any efforts "that may benefit your wife's business interests." Davis should contact the ethics committee for "particular guidance" about requests to appear at conferences sponsored by ICG that might benefit his wife, the letter said.
Devolites Davis, who has served in the Virginia General Assembly since 1998, worked closely with Davis as she built her political career.
In 1995, the married mother of four decided to run for a seat that became vacant after Davis left the Fairfax board for Congress. She was a mathematics major at the University of Virginia. While running for office, she highlighted her work as a "super volunteer" for the Girl Scouts of the USA, the PTA and other organizations. She lost the race.
Two years later, she ran for the General Assembly and won, with Davis as her campaign manager. Davis began to direct tens of thousands of dollars from political action committees under his control to her campaign. Over the next decade, as she moved from being a delegate to a leader of the Virginia Senate, Davis's political action committees gave her more than $172,000.
'They're Door-Openers'
From the start, ICG openly touted its ties to Davis. The firm's Web site featured a photograph of the congressman speaking in front of an ICG banner.
Davis and his current and former staffers have appeared at least 15 times as featured speakers or participants at seminars organized by ICG and affiliated firms at places such as the Ronald Reagan Building in the District or the Tysons Corner Ritz-Carlton. At least two ICG-organized events were held in the Government Reform Committee chambers.
Some ICG clients said they sponsored the seminars so they could appear as experts alongside Davis, his staff or government officials. The sessions cost as much as $895 per day and cover such topics as Homeland Security contracts or computer security mandates. They are marketed to company executives and government officials, with the latter reimbursed at taxpayer expense by their agencies.
"This is not something we do exclusively for ICG," Davis said in the interview. "I do this routinely for a lot of companies. Okay? And I think the record is very clear on this. If I did this for two or three or a couple of select people, I think you could make a reasonable inference that I am using my office to talk to a select few for pay. But I talk to a lot of groups."
Companies said they were pleased with the services ICG delivered, which included dinners with Davis at upscale steakhouses such as Morton's, receptions with the congressman and his wife, and meetings with senior government officials.
Paul Smith, a sales executive for Red Hat Inc., a software company based in Raleigh, N.C., said ICG and other consultants are an integral part of the contracting business.
"Don't take this wrong, they're doing some influence-peddling," said Smith, adding that Red Hat officials have participated in events organized by ICG. "They're door-openers."
NetSec was among ICG's earliest clients. Ken Ammon, the former president of NetSec, said the Herndon computer security firm turned to ICG and Upson because it was having a tough time selling its services to the government.
NetSec signed a year-long consulting deal with ICG worth close to $100,000 in June 2003. ICG worked with NetSec to craft a "product marketing" plan, Ammon said in an e-mail to The Post. As part of the plan, ICG also pledged to organize one major and four minor events focusing on NetSec's services. At one of the events, Davis was a keynote speaker.
Ammon also testified before Davis's Government Reform Committee in October 2003.
"Our ability to stand before the committee and bring to light what we thought were areas which needed improvement greatly increased our clout with our customer base in government," Ammon said.
Davis said he did not know the executives who testified were ICG clients because those arrangements were made by his staff.
"We're not doing anything in a conscious way to help anybody make a profit," Davis said. "But we want to get good companies up here, and I think it's important to note that companies come up here all the time and meet with us without [Upson] or any representative. And we'll say, 'Do you want to testify?' So, yeah, we do that.
"That doesn't deliver a contract to them. That doesn't get them a nickel from the government. That doesn't put pressure on anybody to hire them. They are simply getting up and telling their story."
An Official Letter
Artel Inc., a small satellite service company based in Reston, hired ICG in June 2005 when a federal contract worth up to $2.2 billion over 10 years faced possible termination at the Pentagon, a company official said. The contract, which Artel and two other firms won in 2001, represented nearly 70 percent of Artel's revenue, company officials said.
Congress had requested that the secretary of defense study whether the military could save money on its satellite services. Department of Defense officials were considering a plan to scrap the contract and give the work to larger companies.
Artel's chief executive, Abbas Yazdani, said he hired a registered lobbying firm that included former senator Tim Hutchinson, who arranged a meeting with Davis. Yazdani said he also turned to Upson, who Yazdani said was initially under contract with Artel to work on state and local issues.
Yazdani said in an interview that he needed help because he believed his company was being outmaneuvered by lobbyists representing the larger companies.
Upson sent Hutchinson a memo spelling out steps to stop the contract change by the Pentagon's Defense Information Systems Agency, according to a copy of the e-mail obtained by The Post.
Upson also offered to help craft a letter that could be sent to Davis for his signature.
"He volunteered," Yazdani said. "He said he had some experience."
Several weeks later, Upson, Yazdani, Hutchinson and others were at work on a letter that would be signed by Davis and sent to Charles Croom, the lieutenant general in charge of the satellite program.
"Abbas and I have made edits on the attached, now designated as Ver 3. Most are wordsmithing," Artel executive William Schmidt wrote in an Aug. 9 e-mail to Upson and Hutchinson with the subject line "RE: Draft of Davis letter."
After Upson edited the letter, he replied the following day.
"Here are my changes that I will submit to Ellen in 30 minutes unless stopped in my car with major objections," Upson wrote to the Artel executives and their lobbyists.
"Ellen" is Ellen Brown, Davis's legislative director.
Marin, Davis's staff director, said the office had no record that Brown received that e-mail from Upson.
On Aug. 24, a letter bearing Davis's signature was sent to Croom. Much of the language was identical to the draft prepared by Artel, its lobbyists and Upson.
The two-page letter was clear: It said Davis was concerned about the Pentagon's plan to change the satellite contract.
"It is my intention to fully explore these and related issues in my Committee," the letter to Croom said. "I have requested support from the Government Accountability Office. I urge that further action be withheld."
On Sept. 8, Croom responded to Davis, defending his agency's procurement strategy. A few days later, John Brosnan, a procurement specialist on Davis's committee staff, faxed Croom's letter to Artel's lobbyists.
"I haven't had a chance to talk with John about this, but I should be able to get his feedback tomorrow," a colleague of Hutchinson, the senator-turned-lobbyist, wrote in an e-mail to Artel's executives Sept. 12.
On Oct. 13, Davis signed another letter to Croom. This time, the letter said that "since you have chosen not to provide me with substantive responses to my questions, I will be required to get the information I need in another manner." The letter does not specify what "another manner" meant.
On Feb. 19, Croom and John G. Grimes, the assistant secretary of defense for networks and information integration, met with Davis in his office for a half-hour, a Pentagon spokesman said.
Four months later, on June 6, the Defense Department released a study that analyzed spending on the satellite contract. The conclusion: The existing contract with Artel and the two other companies was working well and saving the government money.
Croom and Grimes declined to comment for this article. Yazdani declined to disclose how much the company paid ICG.
Yazdani said his dealings with ICG and Davis were proper. "None of the companies needed ICG or Upson to get to anyone in Congress or to Jeannemarie," Yazdani wrote in an e-mail to The Post. "We all had full access to Congressman Davis and had already met with him on more than one occasion."
'For the Record, I Didn't Write the Letter'
When asked by The Post about the Aug. 24 letter, Davis professed little knowledge of it and deferred to his staff.
"I don't think you'll find any letters that I write," the congressman said. "The staff writes them all. That doesn't mean I don't mark them up sometimes."
At first, Brosnan, Davis's procurement specialist, said he wrote the letter to Pentagon officials.
"As I recall, they weren't being as responsive as they probably should have been," Brosnan said. "They were kind of jerking me around."
When reporters showed Davis and Brosnan the draft letter, Brosnan acknowledged using the company's draft.
"If I misspoke, I'm sorry," Brosnan said. "But I'm responsible for the letter."
Davis said, "For the record, I didn't write the letter."
Brosnan said Davis's committee had used letters written by companies before, "but not very often."
Davis said that the practice "happens every day up here" and that it did not matter who actually wrote the letter.
"If my signature is on it at the end, I'll stand by it, whether I signed it or they signed it," he said. "But the reality is: So what?"
Rep. Donald Manzullo (R-Ill.), chairman of the House Small Business Committee, was among other lawmakers who wrote to the Pentagon expressing concern about the satellite contract. A spokesman for Manzullo said the congressman and his staff wrote their own letters.
Letters sent out on official stationery are never "ghost written" for Manzullo by corporate executives or their lobbyists, spokesman Rich Carter said. "We like to do our own research."
Kenneth A. Gross, former general counsel of the enforcement division at the Federal Election Commission and a specialist in congressional ethics law, said: "Mere reproduction can certainly look bad, but the practice is not legally actionable if the letter, in fact, reflects the views of the member."
Davis said he believed in the sentiments expressed in the letter and said he did not know that Artel was an ICG client. He said that it was Hutchinson who first brought the company's concerns to him and that he was simply sticking up for a local firm.
"You got a company here that thinks they're getting screwed by an agency, okay?" he said. "So we write a letter to the agency asking, 'What's your explanation?' "
'The Hearing Was a Deliverable'
In January, ICG and its business partners hosted a gathering of "more than 400 senior executives from the Executive Branch, Congress, state government and industry in a high energy environment" at the annual Consumer Electronic Show (CES) in Las Vegas, an ICG Web site said.
Davis, who appeared as a featured speaker, was accompanied by his wife. She later said she helped arrange for government officials to attend the event.
Over three nights and days, political luminaries mingled with senior government officials and industry executives along the Las Vegas strip at the event ICG called "CES Government."
Attending the conference led Juniper Networks to Davis and his committee. Juniper's director of business development, Chris Blake, met Upson in Las Vegas.
In February, Lou Anne Brossman, the public sector marketing director for Juniper, joined Blake and Upson for breakfast at the Hyatt Regency in Reston. In March, Juniper, which is based in Sunnyvale, Calif., and has an office in Herndon, signed a consulting agreement with ICG.
Brossman recalled in a recent interview that her company and ICG began working on an 18-month plan to create a reputation for Juniper in Congress as a "thought leader" on technology issues.
Brossman said Upson suggested that the company would benefit if Juniper chairman and chief executive Scott Kriens became more of a "talking head" on technology issues, such as teleworking. Upson said one way to do that was to testify before Davis's committee, according to Brossman.
On April 19, Upson called a Juniper executive to say that Davis was holding a hearing and that Kriens could be invited to testify. The subject: coping with a possible bird flu pandemic. Upson said Kriens could speak about the benefits of teleworking during a national crisis, Brossman said.
Two days later, officials at Juniper and ICG began to discuss Kriens's testimony, Brossman said. Upson arranged for Kriens and Brossman to meet Davis in his Capitol Hill office the night before the hearing.
"There's no way we would have gotten into his office otherwise for a relaxed five o'clock powwow," Brossman said.
"It's all about relationships and who you know," she said. "ICG knows what's important to the congressman."
On May 11, Kriens testified about "Working Through an Outbreak: Pandemic Flu Planning and Continuity of Operations." In a news release, Davis's staff said the aim was to examine how teleworking and other strategies could help keep the government operating in the event of a flu outbreak.
Brossman said the hearing was the result of a well-executed marketing plan that came with "detailed, expected deliverables."
Said Brossman: "The hearing was a deliverable."
Juniper declined to disclose how much it has paid ICG.
"That kind of puffery happens each and every day in Washington," Marin, Davis's staff director, wrote in a statement to The Post. "That Don [Upson] or his clients might be touting a meeting with Tom as a 'deliverable' is not only out of our control, but beyond our imagination, as access is our business."
Lobbyists Hold Holiday Party for House Govt Reform Committee
Deploying his deep pockets, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-VA) throws the annual holiday party for his committee staff. Some committees in Congress have their staff members cover the costs of their holiday party.
But House Government “Reform” Committee Chairman Tom Davis (R-VA) has come up a more creative arrangement. Lobbyists and defense contractors threw the annual holiday party for the Committee which, coincidentally, oversees federal agency contracting. Here's the invite.
Who needs Santa Claus when contractors have Chairman Tom Davis to thank for opening up the government’s coffers! By our calculation following the House gift rules, each of the nine sponsors could spend up to $450 per staff or member of Congress. That’s quite a party!!!
The December 15, 2005 bash was held in 2154 Rayburn House Office Building and was sponsored by:
-- McGuire Woods Consulting which employs former Tom Davis staffer Barnaby Harkins. Harkins worked for Davis for four years, “specifically focused on education, federal procurement and appropriations.” Harkins lobbies for one of the largest foreign-owned defense contractors, shipping giant Maersk. In addition, one of the firm's clients is defense contractor Northrup Grumman Mission Systems.
-- Patton Boggs, which, in 2005, retained Peter Sirh, the former Staff Director for Davis’ House Government Reform Committee and former Chief of Staff to Davis. Sirh helped Patton Boggs rake in a hefty $260,000 lobbying fee from MCI in the first six months of 2005, in part to “Assist MCI with contract issues relating to specific government contracts…” MCI is competing for a $20 billion telecommunications con tract which has been a pet project of Tom Davis. Committee staff members strenuously deny that Davis has a hand in choosing who gets the contract but a recent article suggested that contractors think otherwise.
Sirh’s access to Tom Davis was a hot commodity for Patton Boggs. While there, Sirh also lobbied for:
the DC government ($140,000 in fees in Jan-June, 2005)
Defense contractor ADS ($20,000 in fees from Jan-June, 2005)
Defense contractor DDL Omni Engineering ($20,000 in fees from Jan-June 2005)
PriceWaterhouseCoopers ($100,000 in fees from Jan-June 2005)
-- Innovative Defense Strategies, where Peter Sirh also worked in 2005, also sponsored the party. It’s an awfully strange coincidence that the firm gave a $5,000 political contribution to Tom Davis’ wife in 2003, although Jeanmarie Devolites and Tom weren’t married at that point.
--PodestaMatton which lobbied on behalf of the government’s #1 defense contractor, behemoth Lockheed Martin ($140,000 in fees from Jan-June 2005) as well as the Native American Contractors Association ($100,000 in fees from Jan-June, 2005). Hey, whatever happened to the Committee’s investigation into abuses in Native American contracting?
--Defense contractor BearingPoint which reported a whopping $500,000 in lobbying expenses in 2005 (that’s a lot of Christmas parties!) including on “Govt. Contracting issues.” BearingPoint (previously KPMG) has supported Tom Davis’ annual legislative goody bag of contractor favors (known in shorthand as SARA and ASIA), some provisions of which he has succeeded in attaching to Defense Authorization bills.
--Holland and Knight which openly brags about joining in a “drafting summit… with members of industry” held by Davis’ staff to draft that contractor legislation.
--Defense contractor General Dynamics, which opened a production facility in Tom Davis’ district a few years back. At the time, Davis bragged of playing “a pivotal role in bringing the project to Northern Virginia.” has infected Government Reform and races all over the country. But those are good reasons. has infected Government Reform and races all over the country. two months ago of OSC asking 18 agencies to save records going back to 2001. At the time, Waxman was only investigating 15 agencies.
We got rid of both the husband and wife team!
