[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13595-13596]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STOP AWARDING NO-BID CONTRACTS TO PRIVATE COMPANIES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, just moments ago I gave notice of my intent 
to offer a privileged resolution asking that the House Ethics Committee 
look into the relationship between earmarks and campaign contributions 
and the link between PMA, the PMA Group that is currently under 
investigation by the Justice Department.
  Now, it has been raised several times that this privileged resolution 
is a blunt instrument and that the Ethics Committee is really not 
designed to deal with such a resolution. And let me be the first to 
concede that point. These resolutions that I've offered--this is the 
ninth one that was offered tonight--they are a blunt instrument. The 
Ethics Committee is not designed to deal with an investigation of this 
magnitude, but it's the only instrument we've got at this point. We are 
really out of other options.
  Right now as it stands, when Members of Congress request earmarks,

[[Page 13596]]

they have to sign a statement saying that they have no financial 
interest in the earmark that they are pursuing; in other words, that a 
family member doesn't work on or for the firm receiving the earmark. 
But to receive campaign contributions in close proximity to that 
earmark request is not considered financial interest by the House 
Committee on Ethics, and the guidance that they've issued to Members is 
that that does not necessarily constitute financial interest. Yet we 
know that there are numerous investigations going on outside of this 
body by the Justice Department that have to do with earmarks and 
campaign contributions.
  So out of an abundance of caution, I would hope that this institution 
would say we need to stay above this fray, that when you can--when a 
Member of Congress has the ability to award a no-bid contract to a 
private company, and then executives in that private company--and the 
lobbyists that are retained by them--can turn around and make sizable 
campaign contributions to that same Member who awarded the no-bid 
contract, we are going to have problems here and we're going to have 
investigations go on. And it will continue to represent a cloud over 
this body, a cloud that rains on Republicans and Democrats alike.
  This is not a partisan resolution. This is not a partisan problem. No 
one party is above this. Both the Democratic Party and the Republican 
Party have Members who are requesting earmarks for companies who then 
turn around and make sizable--I'm sorry--individuals in those companies 
turn around and make sizable contributions back to those same Members. 
And it is unbelievable that we continue to allow that to happen.
  Now, I have said before, and I will say again, that I will stop 
offering this resolution as soon as we have an agreement not to allow 
the awarding of no-bid contracts for private companies. As soon as the 
leadership--both the Republicans and Democrats--agree in this body to 
stop that practice, to not have Members of Congress have the ability to 
award no-bid contracts--in other words, to get earmarks for private 
companies--then I will stop offering this resolution. It is a blunt 
instrument. I recognize that. The Ethics Committee is not really meant 
to deal with issues of this magnitude, but as long as we continue this 
practice and allow this to happen, then this institution is going to be 
under a cloud, as it is now.
  So, again, I've noticed this resolution tonight. I don't have to call 
it up later this week. I would prefer not to. I would prefer not to 
have another vote on this resolution. But as long as we continue the 
practice of allowing Members of this body to award no-bid contracts to 
companies, private companies, who can then turn around and have their 
executives and the lobbyists they retain make sizable contributions to 
those same Members, and as long as we allow that practice to continue, 
we're going to need to address it somehow; and this is the only forum, 
this is the only vehicle that we're allowed right now.
  So I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that we can bring this resolution to 
some type of conclusion, that we won't have to offer a 10th next week 
or in some week to come, that we can actually deal with this 
meaningfully. This institution deserves far better than we are giving 
it.
  I think when most of us were elected, we believed that we had a 
higher purpose than to come here and grovel for crumbs that fall from 
appropriators' tables, that we're here to debate the great issues of 
our time. And when you have an issue like we have now where Members are 
able to award no-bid contracts to private companies, then we simply 
have to stop the practice.

                          ____________________