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

Comments

[Posted on: Sep 17, 2007 at 11:44 AM]

The qustions I would ask about Tom Davis are about his ties with the Cunningham's. I've heard that Davis helped his old co-worker from Fairfax County, William Leidinger get an appointment at the US Department of Education. Ledieinger then hired Nancy Cunningham as his Chief of Staff and then sought millions dollar of computer contracts to comply with the 2002 bill Davis introduced for the Federal Information Security Act. (Leidinger had aslo been fired from Fairfax County for a blotched computer contract)The feds started to investigate Duke Cunningham, Nancy left Education and so did Liedinger. In 2002 and 2003 a contractor, Accenture gave more than $70,000 in contributions to Davis. Then also had millions of dollars in contracts with Education. What's up with all this?

[Posted on: Aug 03, 2006 at 02:33 PM]

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 on: Jul 30, 2006 at 11:15 AM]

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

[Posted on: Jul 29, 2006 at 11:20 PM]

The big problem with what Davis did was the Agency DIDN'T WANT the contract, and in fact determined it was ineffective and a waste of taxpayer money - and Davis threatened an investigation if the contract didn't continue.
This is not the first time Davis abused his positon on the Reform Committee. Read more at www.TomDavisTruth.com
There is a terrific alternative Democrat running, Andrew Hurst, www.hurstforcongress.com.

[Posted on: Jul 29, 2006 at 08:55 PM]

There you go again. POGO. Never has your black & white view of the world been clearer than your posing "pro-taxpayer" vs. "pro-contractor" at the end of the second paragraph above. Do you really think they are mutually exclusive? The governmet desperately needs contractors because it lacks enough know-how, bodies, and just plain competence. Taxpayers need a fair deal--value for their money. Do you believe all contractors are filthy swine, ripping off the government, or would you allow that most companies earn their pay? Every basket has a few bad apples--and they need to be identified and dealt with.

I completely agree with you in the sense that if Davis and wife did something ethically stinky, even within the rules, they should be held to account in elections, or the rules should be changed. Just being held up to the breast-beating lense of the haughty, often wrong Washington Post is part of a punishment.

But please don't tar all contractors blindly. You don't spend nearly enough time uncovering waste, fraud, and abuse by government employees and agencies--by the tens and hundreds of billions of dollars

[Posted on: Jul 29, 2006 at 12:40 AM]

This whole story came as a shock and is very disappointing. Perhaps the most troubling thing is Tom Davis' attitude of "so what". I thought the way he went after Angela Styles was very bad form. She is well respected in the contracting community and to say that she didn't have adult supervision is borderline slanderous. Not sure why he would do that.

[Posted on: Jul 28, 2006 at 09:28 PM]

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.