H.Res.286 - Raising a question of the privileges of the House.111th Congress (2009-2010)
|Sponsor:||Rep. Flake, Jeff [R-AZ-6] (Introduced 03/25/2009)|
|Latest Action:||House - 03/25/2009 On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 223 - 182, 16 Present (Roll no. 155). (All Actions)|
|Roll Call Votes:||There has been 1 roll call vote|
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
Text: H.Res.286 — 111th Congress (2009-2010)All Information (Except Text)
There is one version of the bill.
Text available as:
- PDF (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?
Laid on Table in House (03/25/2009)
[Congressional Bills 111th Congress] [From the U.S. Government Printing Office] [H. Res. 286 Laid on Table in House (LTH)] 111th CONGRESS 1st Session H. RES. 286 Raising a question of the privileges of the House. _______________________________________________________________________ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 25, 2009 Mr. Flake submitted the following resolution; which was laid on the table _______________________________________________________________________ RESOLUTION Raising a question of the privileges of the House. Whereas The Hill reported that a prominent lobbying firm specializing in obtaining defense earmarks for its clients, the subject of a ``federal investigation into potentially corrupt political contributions'', has given $3.4 million in political donations to no less than 284 Members of Congress; Whereas multiple press reports have noted questions related to campaign contributions made by or on behalf of the firm; including questions related to ``straw man'' contributions, the reimbursement of employees for political giving, pressure on clients to give, a suspicious pattern of giving, and the timing of donations relative to legislative activity; Whereas Roll Call has taken note of the timing of contributions from employees of the firm and its clients when it reported that they ``have provided thousands of dollars worth of campaign contributions to key Members in close proximity to legislative activity, such as the deadline for earmark request letters or passage of a spending bill.''; Whereas CQ Today specifically noted a Member getting ``$25,000 in campaign contribution money from [the founder of the firm] and his relatives right after his subcommittee approved its spending bill in 2005.''; Whereas the Associated Press also noted that Members received campaign contributions from employees of the firm ``around the time they requested'' earmarks for companies represented by the firm; Whereas clients of the firm received at least $300 million worth of earmarks in fiscal year 2009 appropriations legislation, including several that were approved even after news of the FBI raid of the firm's offices and Justice Department investigation into the firm was well known; and Whereas the persistent media attention focused on questions about the nature and timing of campaign contributions related to the firm, as well as reports of the Justice Department conducting research on earmarks and campaign contributions, raise concern about the integrity of Congressional proceedings and the dignity of this institution: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That-- (1) the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, or a subcommittee of the committee designated by the committee and its members appointed by the chairman and ranking member, shall immediately begin an investigation into the relationship between the source and timing of past contributions to Members of the House related to the raided firm and earmark requests made by Members of the House on behalf of clients of the raided firm; and (2) the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct shall submit a report of its findings to the House of Representatives within 2 months after the date of adoption of this resolution. <all>