Making the case to Congress for your pet project

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following story is the result of collaboration between The Associated Press and the Associated Press Managing Editors association. The national project examines special spending requests members of Congress insert in federal appropriations bills to benefit local interests. In partnership with the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation and Taxpayers for Common Sense, APME trained hundreds of reporters around the country on how to find, analyze and report on the requests, known as earmarks. More than two dozen newspapers contributed to the national project.

WASHINGTON — If you’re a company, nonprofit group, university, hospital or local government and you want Congress to bestow federal dollars on your efforts, how do you go about it?

First, say congressional aides and lobbyists who work on earmarks, have a project that passes the straight-face test. You’ve got to be able to make a case for it and convince people in a position to help you that it’s a good idea.

Start by asking your House representative or senators for help. Meet with them or their aides. Have plenty of facts at your disposal on how your project will help their constituents or create jobs. If you’re a local official seeking a road or to redevelop a city waterfront or some other economic initiative, you should be prepared to put up a portion of the cost.

If you persuade your congressional delegation it’s a worthy project, they’ll send an official request to the House or Senate Appropriations committees or other panels that dole out earmarks. Most often, they’ll rely heavily on information you — or your Washington lobbyist — provides.

It’s one thing to have your congresswoman ask for a project. What you really want is for her to push for your idea and move it to the top of their earmark priority list.

It’s common for lawmakers to ask for many, many more earmarks than they can possibly get in order to go to bat for as many constituents as possible. The real list, the one that tells which projects a lawmaker wants most, is far more secret.

Freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Kan., for example, requested 66 earmarks totaling about $172 million in the upcoming appropriations round. Last year, Boyda obtained $20.7 million in solo earmarks, along with almost $18 million more that she requested with other lawmakers.

Hiring lobbyists helps. They know which buttons to push, and have easier access to key lawmakers on the Appropriations committees and their aides. Lobbyists ride herd on earmarks in ways that out-of-town officials and executives can’t.

The flip side is that lobbyists cost money. The Rochester Institute of Technology, for example, pays $280,000 a year to The National Group, a Washington lobbying firm, to seek earmarks. Over 15 years, the firm says it has helped RIT obtain $60 million for research and education projects.

That fee is on the high end. But lobbying fees of $60,000 to $120,000 a year are common.

What does that money buy?

Basically, expertise and contacts.

“What you get is somebody who knows how to navigate through the system, that knows how to meet deadlines, that knows how the process works,” said The National Group’s Frank Cushing. “You bring (clients) through the process, get them to understand what’s required of them.”

Still, the most effective advocates for a project are lawmakers, not lobbyists. Many lawmakers say the role of lobbyists in the process is overstated. More than a few tell their local cities and counties not to use local taxpayer dollars to hire a lobbyist.

“I’m their lobbyist,” says Rep. John Olver, D-Mass.

“The dirty little secret here is that they’re not successful because of their lobbyist,” says Rep. Jim Walsh, R-N.Y., a prolific earmarker. “They’re successful because of their representative."

IT PAYS TO PLAY: Earmark beneficiaries help benefactors’ re-election

• Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., co-sponsored an $8.3 million earmark for Marine Corps UC-12 replacement aircraft built by Hawker Beechcraft Corp. in Wichita. Company executives have contributed $11,750 to Tiahrt this election cycle.

• Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., delivered $1.6 million for SecuriMetrics Inc., which manufactures biometric identification devices that use iris, fingerprint and facial recognition technology. Employees of SecuriMetrics Inc. have donated $16,090 to Miller and his political action committee since 2004, the Contra Costa Times reports.

• Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, a member of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, obtained a $2.4 million earmark last year for the Greentree Group of Beavercreek, Ohio, for a digital information sharing system. Greentree Group executives, their families and consultants have donated $43,350 to Hobson since 2000, reports The Columbus Dispatch.

• Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Ind., a member of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, sponsored a $2 million earmark to 21st Century Systems last year for a virtual fence demonstration project. 21st Century has opened offices in Visclosky’s district. Its executives have contributed more than $27,000 to Visclosky in 2007-2008. The company’s Washington lobbyist is the PMA Group, a major appropriations lobbying shop whose associates have given his campaign more than $45,000 in 2007-2008. The Indianapolis Star reported that Visclosky also helped Applied Global Technologies obtain a $2 million earmark for video teletraining for the military. Three Applied Global Technologies executives, including Executive Vice President Mike Garvey, each gave Visclosky a maximum $2,300 contribution.

• Rep. Tim Holden, D-Pa., earmarked $3.2 million to Reading-based Fidelity Technologies for the Call for Fire Trainer, a training simulator to help “forward observers” conduct calls for fire missions. The family of its founder, Jack Gulati, has contributed $10,000-plus to Holden’s re-election campaigns over the past six years. Employees of Fidelity’s lobbying firm, PMA Group, have donated $63,225 to Holden campaigns since 2002, the Allentown Morning Call reports.

• Reps. Rob Andrews, D-N.J., and Frank LoBiondo, R-N.J. Since 2003, Andrews — and in some cases LoBiondo — sponsored $24.4 million in federal contracts to Gestalt LLC for work on speedy analysis of ships spotted at sea and teaching robots to work together. Executives of Gestalt contributed more than $14,000 to Andrews since 2002, and $2,500 to LoBiondo. Employees from Gestalt’s lobbying firm, American Defense International, delivered another $11,000 to Andrews and $5,750 to LoBiondo, reports the Courier-Post of Cherry Hill, N.J.

• Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., provided a $1.6 million defense bill earmark to EDO Corp. for “smart rack” weapons release systems that let fighter pilots fire various weapons or drop bombs at separate times. EDO’s political action committee gave Murphy $10,000, the Bucks County Courier Times reports. EDO also hired the PMA Group as its lobbying firm. PMA lobbyists and their spouses have given generously to Murphy, with contributions in the current election cycle totaling $18,500.

New rules force more disclosure of earmarks

The House and Senate in 2007 implemented reforms aimed at adding transparency to the process of earmarking projects, grants and contracts in legislation.

THE HOUSE:

• Requires any bill containing earmarks be accompanied by a list identifying each one and the member or members who requested it.

• Requires a letter from the representative who requested an earmark to provide a letter identifying the earmark and the entity to receive the funds, along with a certification that neither the requesting member nor their spouse would benefit financially.

• Prohibits earmarks from being used to influence other members.

THE SENATE:

• Requires disclosure of earmarks and their sponsors, but it does not require public disclosure of the entities receiving them.

• Prohibits senators from advocating for an earmark in which they might have a financial interest.

REPUBLICAN PROPOSALS NOT ADOPTED:

• In Senate, requiring that earmarks be placed in bill language instead of accompanying reports, guaranteeing opponents a chance to vote them down.

• In House, imposing a moratorium on earmarks until a bipartisan committee proposes new reforms.

Clark County

Search Results

Related Photos

Discussion

Making the case to Congress for your pet project

Site Map

Contact Us