A congressman, a lobbying firm and a swift path to earmarks

Washington Post ^ | October 25, 2009 | Paul Kane and Carol D. Leonnig

[La Lydia]

It takes a while for most start-up companies to gain the confidence of a U.S. congressman and the promise of federal funds. But last year, a small Illinois company accomplished its goal in 16 days with the help of Rep. Peter J. Visclosky, a little-known Indiana Democrat who sits on the House committee that funds the Pentagon. In rapid succession, the three-employee technology firm, NanoSonix, filed its incorporation papers in Skokie, Ill., and hired a Washington lobbying firm, K&L Gates, which boasted to clients of its close relationship with Visclosky. A week later, Visclosky wrote a letter of support for a $2.4 million earmark for NanoSonix from the House Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee.

"I understand how this can look from the outside," NanoSonix chief executive Sean Murdock, describing his company's rush to get research funding to develop night-vision goggles. "My belief was we had to pursue government funding if this technology was going to see the light of day."

Murdock's company was not the only one to find a winning formula in pursuit of federal earmarks through Visclosky. The congressman sponsored or supported at least $44 million in earmarks in fiscal years 2008 and 2009 for more than 15 technology firms that had hired K&L Gates as lobbyists. None of the companies operated in Visclosky's home state, but nearly all of them donated to Visclosky's campaign just before or soon after receiving the promise of federal money.

K&L Gates used its relationship with Visclosky as a marketing tool, a document obtained by The Washington Post reveals....

A Post review shows that the K&L Gates clients winning Visclosky's support, along with their lobbyists and investors, donated almost $200,000 to Visclosky and an additional $130,000 to the House Democratic campaign committee since 2005...

[La Lydia]

Another day, another crook: $44 million worth of earmarks in exchange for $200,000 in direct donations and another $130,000 for the HDCC, and that's just ONE lobbying firm. And that begs the question how how much the lobbying firm was paid for this "assistance."

[Wolfie]

I think we need publicly funded campaigns, and NO private donations of any kind. Support your candidate in the voting booth.

[Howie]

"According to an internal letter given to The Post by a potential client, K&L Gates hoped to share a cut of its clients' earmark success. K&L's Olivares offered a menu of pricing options, including a "success fee" in which the client would pay 7.5 percent of its earmark haul to K&L Gates, on top of a $6,500 monthly retainer. "

from the article. (doesn't include usual hidden perks)

[WesternPacific]

My father in law, who owned a telephone company, use to complain all the time about having to pay under the table to get the government to do anything. He had to "Gain Favor" with 2 different Senators to get his Federal Franchise approved by the Senate. But then again, that was in the Philippines.

Someone please tell me we have not become a Third World country.