Universities get bad advice from inside the beltway - law firm offer indicates hopes of cashing in on routine congressional inquiry
September 12, 2006
Nixon Peabody LLP has apparently decided to cash in on the recent publicity surrounding the exploits of the one time Rep. Duke Cunningham, and former lobbyist Jack Abramoff. In an insider newsletter obtained by the Federal Financial Management Subcommittee, the firm provided unsolicited advice to universities on recent oversight work by the subcommittee and mischaracterized routine congressional oversight. The firm recommends that the universities seek counsel in responding to the subcommittee, and provides a list of Nixon Peabody lawyers available for contact. According to a notation on the document, Nixon Peabody acknowledges that "this publication may be considered advertising under applicable laws." It is an unfortunate sign of the times that simple questions about how federal funds are being spent stirs alarm among the recipients and opportunistic maneuvering among Washington lobbyists.”
• As part of routine oversight, the subcommittee is looking at how academic institutions manage federal earmarks: The Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information and International Security, under the leadership of Dr. Coburn, practices rigorous oversight of the federal government. The subcommittee has conducted 45 oversight hearings in less then two years. Dr. Coburn is surveying certain institutions regarding their handling of federal earmarks, including the universities receiving the largest earmarks for the last year data are available, as well as NSF top-ranked universities for R&D for the same year, some of which do not lobby for earmarks. The inquiry has been public since the beginning, and results will be posted on the following website: http://www.coburn.senate.gov/ffm/
• Some successful research institutions refuse to earmark: While some universities aggressively lobby Congress for earmarks, others have strict anti-earmarking policies, and choose to compete for federal research funds available through the peer review system, the dominant mode of federal research funding.
• Earmarks in appropriations bills continue to skyrocket: In 1996, CRS counted 3,023 earmarks worth $19.5 billion in spending bills. By 2006, the number had climbed to 12,852 earmarks valued at $64 billion. In addition, the number of lobbyists registered with Congress on budget and appropriations has more than doubled since 1998, from 1,665 to 3,759 in 2004, according to the Center for Public Integrity.
• Despite tough times in the federal budget, R&D earmarks set a new record in 2006: R&D earmarks climbed to $2.4 billion in final FY 2006 appropriations, up 13 percent from 2005’s previous record, according to an estimate by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Furthermore, even as the overall federal R&D investment stagnates, R&D earmarks show remarkable growth, up 63 percent in just three years since 2003.
• Companies, labor unions, and other organizations spend billions of dollars each year to lobby Congress and federal agencies: According to reports based on Senate Office of Public Records, $2.22 Billion was spent on lobbyists in 2005. $11.48 billion has been spent on lobbyists since 2000.
