Contractor Proves Key In Two Federal Probes - Investigations Promise to Keep Alive Controversy Over Congressional Earmarks
By SCOT J. PALTROW
Wall Street Journal
January 19, 2007
ETHICS QUESTIONS
• The News: A defense contractor emerges as a key figure in two federal investigations.
• The Debate: Prosecutors are looking into whether a lawmaker improperly helped companies to secure government contracts.
• What's Next: The probes are renewing attention to congressional earmarks and, more broadly, ethics reform.
By SCOT J. PALTROW
A key figure in the case against former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham has become a focus of the federal investigation of another Republican from California, Rep. Jerry Lewis.
The person who has emerged in both probes is Brent Wilkes, a Poway, Calif., entrepreneur, said people with knowledge of the investigation. His firm received defense and intelligence contracts with congressional help from Mr. Cunningham. The former lawmaker pleaded guilty in November to charges that included soliciting bribes from Mr. Wilkes and was sentenced to more than eight years in prison.
Prosecutors in Los Angeles are examining whether Mr. Lewis may have improperly helped Mr. Wilkes's companies obtain government contracts. A spokeswoman for Mr. Lewis declined to comment on the investigation.
Mr. Lewis is under investigation for possible improper conduct in obtaining "earmarks," or legislative language that steers federal funds to specific recipients. The continuing investigation into his actions is significant because the new House Republican leadership decided to keep Mr. Lewis, of California, on the Appropriations Committee as the top minority member, despite the probe. He had been chairman until Democrats took control of the House this month.
Mr. Lewis has represented California's 41st district since 1979. He was chairman of an appropriations subcommittee on armed services before moving up to become chairman of the Appropriations Committee in January 2005.
The inquiry promises to sustain the debate over congressional earmarks, which has been at the center of this year's attempt to enact new ethics rules for Congress. The House has passed a bill imposing major restrictions although a vote yesterday cast doubt on whether a similar bill will be approved by the Senate.
Prosecutors designated Mr. Wilkes an unindicted co-conspirator in the charges against Mr. Cunningham. Mr. Wilkes himself has been under investigation separately, by the same federal prosecutors in San Diego who investigated the Cunningham case. People with knowledge of that investigation said prosecutors are bringing in last-minute witnesses before a grand jury and expect Mr. Wilkes will be indicted early next month. These people said Carol Lam, the U.S. attorney in San Diego who has been asked to resign by the Justice Department, requested that prosecutors on the case wrap up the investigation and bring charges before she officially steps down Feb. 15. The Justice Department has confirmed that several U.S. attorneys were asked to step down for reasons it said were related to performance but has declined to give details.
Mark Geragos, one of Mr. Wilkes's lawyers, said, "We're comfortable that everything Brent Wilkes did was above board and legal and we don't think that there is any cause for anyone to question it, let alone indict him."
Rep. Lewis' close relationship with a Washington lobbying firm, Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton & White, is a subject of the probe. The firm was founded by former congressman Bill Lowery, a friend of Mr. Lewis.
Copeland Lowery flourished by signing up corporate and local government clients, which subsequently won earmarks pushed through with Mr. Lewis' help. One Copeland Lowery client, the Lake Arrowhead Community Services District in California, disclosed that the lobbying firm helped obtain for it federal grants totaling $680,000. After the University of Redlands hired Copeland Lowery, it obtained Mr. Lewis's help in securing $21.5 million in federal money for research and a new science center.
One matter under investigation is the tens of millions of dollars in earmarks Mr. Lewis obtained for clients of the firm, which since has split up. Prosecutors also are focusing on campaign contributions Mr. Wilkes and his associates made to Mr. Lewis, and contracts Mr. Wilkes's companies obtained after hiring Copeland Lowery. Among other things, they are looking for possible evidence that Mr. Lewis directed Mr. Wilkes to hire Copeland Lowery as the price for getting earmarks passed, said the people with knowledge of the case.
Barbara Comstock, a spokeswoman for Mr. Lewis, said she wouldn't have any comment on possible links between Messrs. Lewis and Wilkes.
Prosecutors have cast a wide net, some months ago subpoenaing voluminous records from county and local governments in Southern California and companies, all of which hired Copeland Lowery to lobby for them. Many received federal money for local projects with Mr. Lewis's help. People close to the case said prosecutors have focused heavily on contracts awarded to Mr. Wilkes's companies and large campaign contributions he made.
Records on file with the House clerk show Copeland Lowery lobbied on behalf of one Wilkes company, ADCS Inc., from 1998 to 2000, and from 2002 to 2005. ADCS, or Automated Document Conversion Systems, specialized in converting military documents on paper into computerized records. Beginning in 1997, with help from members of the appropriations committee, including Mr. Cunningham, the Poway, Calif., company began winning multimillion-dollar military contracts. Copeland Lowery disclosed receiving about $160,000 for the work. After Mr. Wilkes' name surfaced publicly last year in connection with the corruption investigations, Copeland Lowery revised its disclosure reports to state that it received more than $340,000 from ADCS. A lawyer for Copeland Lowery said the error was inadvertent.
The Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan organization that focuses on exposing government corruption, last year found a travel report showing that Mr. Lewis traveled from Washington to visit ADCS headquarters in 1998, shortly before ADCS received a government contract. Mr. Lewis' office confirmed that in the early 1990s, he traveled to Belize on a trip sponsored by Mr. Lowery that included Mr. Wilkes, among others.
Federal campaign records also show Mr. Wilkes and five employees or relatives donated on the same date in 1999 a total of $11,000 to Mr. Lewis's campaign fund. Mr. Wilkes and related individuals also contributed $7,000 in early 1998.
On Sept. 18, 2002, Mr. Wilkes, his wife, nephew and two employees donated $10,000 to Mr. Lewis's Future Leaders Political Action Committee. In 2003, Mr. Wilkes donated another $2,000 to the fund. Mr. Lewis, as with many congressional leaders, maintained the PAC to collect funds that then could be doled out to help fellow Republican lawmakers who faced re-election fights. That largess was credited with helping Mr. Lewis get the Republican leadership's backing to become appropriations chairman.
Mr. Wilkes and people associated with him donated in total about $60,000 to Mr. Lewis' campaign fund or political-action committee. (Mr. Cunningham received campaign donations of $84,500 from Mr. Wilkes and associates.)
It is illegal for a congressman to support legislation as a direct quid pro quo for campaign contributions, but direct links between contributions and actions are difficult to prove. The government must show that the lawmaker took official action only because of the donation. The Constitution's "speech and debate" clause also prevents prosecutors from using evidence from congressional debates, and limits their access to records or testimony about meetings lawmakers held to discuss legislation.
The Los Angeles prosecutors examining Mr. Lewis' actions are looking for a possible direct link, the people with knowledge of the investigation said.
In January 2003, longtime Lewis aide Letitia White left his staff to become a Copeland Lowery partner. Another top aide to Mr. Lewis, Jeffrey Shockey, left the congressman's staff in 1999 to work for the firm. He then returned to become the appropriations committee's deputy staff director when Mr. Lewis became chairman.
Through a spokesman, Copeland Lowery principals have denied any wrongdoing. A spokesman for the principals said "the firm's work is consistent with the laws, rules and regulations that govern federal lobbying." He declined to comment further.
The Cunningham case involved soliciting direct bribes for personal use. According to Mr. Cunningham's plea agreement, Mr. Wilkes paid $636,000 in bribes, including $525,000 to pay off a mortgage on Mr. Cunningham's home.
