A relatively unknown private company filing for bankruptcy is not usually a major national news story. When the solar energy firm Solyndra collapsed earlier this fall, however, the media took notice. The company had received a $535 million loan guarantee - potentially wasting millions of taxpayer dollars - and the public wanted to know whether the government had been irresponsible. iWatch News conducted an investigation detailing the facts.

This was undoubtedly a great investigative piece and involved a good deal of skilled journalism. Using this article as a guide, however, it's possible to see how any of us - or you - could do a similar investigation.

The first point of evidence in the story is that in 2009 Solyndra received "a $535 million federal commitment" in the form of an "Obama administration energy loan guarantee." The article later specifies that "The company had received at least $475 million and created just 585 jobs." A search on Recovery.gov - the official government website for tracking Recovery Act spending - for "Solyndra" returns several Recipient Reports from 2009 and 2010. In the most recent report the project's status is "less than 50% completed," and the number of jobs reported is 585. The Department of Energy also makes its loan information available on its website.

The article suggests that there could be a conflict of interest in the Obama Administration awarding the loan to Solyndra, as "One of Solyndra's major investors was George Kaiser, an Oklahoma billionaire who raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for Obama during the 2008 election." A search using the Center for Responsive Politics' list of bundlers for President Obama shows that George Kaiser raised a minimum of $50,000 and a maximum of $100,000.

The article also cites a 2010 Government Accountability Office report assessing the Energy Department's loan program. The full report is available from GAO's website by navigating to "Reports and Testimonies" and browsing alphabetically by agency. After selecting "Department of Energy," you can narrow the search to a custom date range to help find the correct document.

Lastly the article mentions that Solyndra President and CEO Brian Harrison "came to Washington to meet with members of Congress and journalists to tout the company's successes" in September 2011. It is unfortunately impossible to look up who he met with on the Hill, as Members of Congress are not required to publicly disclose their calendars. The Sunlight Foundation has been pushing for this transparency measure for years, but has not succeeded yet. We do know he was there, however, because the House Energy and Commerce Committee lists two hearings about Solyndra held in September where Harrison was a witness. If you wanted to check whether Harrison also visited the White House on his trip you could check the White House Visitor Logs. Harrison, however, does not appear in them.

It's also been reported that proper reporting procedures for the loan guarantee granted to Solyndra were not followed.

---

"The News Without Transparency" shows you what the news would look like without public access to information. Laws and regulations that force the government to make the data it has publicly available are absolutely vital, along with services that take that raw data and make it easy for reporters to write sentences like the ones we've redacted in the piece above. If you have an article you'd like us to put through the redaction machine, please send us an email at mbuck@sunlightfoundation.com.

The congressional debt committee, commonly referred to as the super committee, has been a popular topic in the news since it was created by the Budget Control Act of 2011. We have been tracking lobbyist ties and campaign contributions to members of the committee since August. The Washington Post published an interesting report in early September announcing that many of the super committee members had ties to lobbyists. The Washington Post article uses GE as a case study to discuss the almost 100 registered lobbyists who are former employees of super committee members and are now "representing defense companies, health-care conglomerates, Wall Street banks and others with a vested interest in the outcome of the panel's work." While this article involved some heavy duty investigative journalism, many of its major claims can be substantiated by publicly available data. The article states that Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) "has employed more than a dozen currently registered lobbyists." The Center for Responsive Politics' "Revolving Door" tool allows investigators to search for individuals by former employee or by former employer. A search for "Murray, Patty" as "employment" returns 18 people who have formerly worked for the senator. Clicking on an individual record shows the individual's former position as well as their new employer and title. Digging into the 18 people returned by the initial search gives us 16 former Murray staffers who may currently be working as lobbyists. (See the end of this post for a full breakdown of the 16.)

1. Douglas Clapp, a former Aide to Murray, now works as the director of Washington state's Washington, DC office.
2. Rick Desimone, Murray's former Chief of Staff and former Vice Chair and Chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, is now an Executive Vice President at McBee Strategic Consulting.
3. Carrie Desmond, a former Legislative Assistant to Murray, now works at Lockheed Martin's Washington Operations organization.
4. Christy Gullion, a former Northwestern Regional Director for Murray, now works as chief federal lobbyist for the University of Washington.
5. Shay Michael Hancock, a former Legislative Assistant to Murray, is now a Senior Vice President at the lobbying firm Denny Miller Associates.
6. James Jones, Murray's former Speechwriter (as well as Sen. John Kerry's former Communications Director), now works as a Manager of Integrated Communications at Exxon Mobil.
7. Joy Langley, a former Legislative Assistant to Murray, now works as the Assistant Director of Government Affairs at J Street.
8. Dale Learn, a former Senior Legislative Assistant to Murray, is now the President of Gordon Thomas Honeywell's Governmental Affairs.
9. Justin LeBlanc, former Senior Staffer to Murray, is now the President of LeBlanc Government Relations.
10. Eric Masten, former Legislative Assistant to Murray, now works as a Public Policy Associate at the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network.
11. Ben Lee McMakin, former Legislative Director to Murray, is now the Managing Director of Government Issues at Van Ness Feldman.
12. Heather Meade, former Deputy Scheduler/Assistant to the Chief of Staff for Murray, is now the Senior Manager at Washington Council Ernst & Young.
13. Nate Potter, former LA to Murray, is now a Federal Affairs Consultant for Gordon Thomas Honeywell.
14. Casey Sixkiller, former Policy Advisor to Murray, is now a Senior Advisor at SNR Denton's Indian Law and Tribal Representation practice.
15. Karen Waters, Murray's former Deputy State Director, is now a Senior Vice President at Strategies 360.
16. Todd Webster, Murray's former Communications Director, launched his own strategic communications firm, Webster Strategies.

---

"The News Without Transparency" shows you what the news would look like without public access to information. Laws and regulations that force the government to make the data it has publicly available are absolutely vital, along with services that take that raw data and make it easy for reporters to write sentences like the ones we've redacted in the piece above. If you have an article you'd like us to put through the redaction machine, please send us an email at mbuck@sunlightfoundation.com.

Do you remember the AT&T/T-Mobile merger that dominated the news earlier this fall? It caused quite the stir in Washington, with numerous outlets reporting on AT&T's massive lobbying efforts to push through the merger. Bloomberg was one such news outlet, reporting a story of expensive steaks and 'lobbyist's libations' in early September. The story focused on the numerous swanky fundraisers AT&T was hosting as well as their generous campaign donations to key lawmakers. This was undoubtedly a great investigative piece and involved a good deal of skilled journalism. Using this article as a guide, however, it's possible to see how any of us - or you - could do a similar investigation. Fundraisers The article begins describing the lavish fundraisers AT&T had been hosting for lawmakers, citing Sunlight's Party Time data.

• "AT&T hosted at least nine fundraising receptions and dinners since the deal was announced on March 20."
• One of which was held at Charlie Palmer Steak, where "AT&T and one of its outside firms, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, shared hosting duties for a June 14 fundraising dinner for Representative Henry Waxman, of California."
• Another was held at BLT Steak. The article says it "was the scene of a June 21 fundraising dinner hosted by AT&T for Representative Peter Roskam, an Illinois Republican who sits on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee."

Sunlight's Party Time data is free and available for anyone to use. We manually collect fundraiser and event invitations and put them online. They are searchable by a variety of of criteria including committee, leadership PAC, beneficiary, host, and venue. For example, a PartyFinder search for "AT&T" as a "Host" returns a list of all the fundraisers hosted by AT&T's Federal PAC. The most recent one was September 20th. A PartyFinder search for "Charlie Palmer Steak" as "Venue Name" returns a list of all the fundraisers held at the restaurant mentioned in the article. It's a popular locale - already three fundraisers are scheduled to be held there next month. Campaign Donations The article makes a number of points that suggest AT&T exerted its political influence through campaign donations. The article notes the following, frequently citing data obtained from the Center for Responsive Politics:

• "AT&T's political action committee gave $805,500 to federal candidates."
• The company's PAC "was the most generous corporate PAC this year."
• "House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Representative Fred Upton... each received $5,000 from AT&T’s PAC."
• During the past year AT&T Senior Executive Vice President Jim Cicconi donated "$1,500 to Boehner, $2,000 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and $1,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee."
• Since 2009, AT&T Chief Executive Officer Randall Stephenson has donated "$2,000 to Boehner, $6,000 to the Republican senatorial committee and $4,000 to the Republican congressional committee."
• "AT&T’s contributions this year have split 64 percent to Republicans and 36 percent to Democrats, compared with... 55 percent Republican and 45 percent Democratic in the previous election cycle."
• "AT&T’s PAC has given Waxman $4,000 so far this year, and Akin Gump’s PAC gave him $1,200."
• "Roskam received $3,500 from AT&T’s PAC."

Lobbying Efforts

The article notes that AT&T "boosted lobbying spending by 30 percent to $11.7 million in the first six months of 2011 compared with a year earlier" and that the company "supplemented its own in-house lobbyists with 18 outside firms pushing for the merger." The article specifically notes:

• "The firm of former U.S. senators John Breaux [ ... ] and Trent Lott [ ... ] received $240,000."
• "A company headed by former U.S. Representative J.C. Watts [ ... ] got $100,000."
• "Former House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin’s firm was paid $50,000"
• "Wiley Rein LLP, a law firm [ ... ] co-founded by former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Richard Wiley, received $160,000."
• "Clyburn Consulting LLC, where the principal [ ... ] a cousin to Representative James Clyburn [ ... ] received $60,000"
• "Akin Gump received $240,000 this year to lobby on behalf of the merger and other issues."

Last month the New York Times looked into whether there was a conflict of interest regarding Representative Shelley Berkley's (D-NV) support for kidney care programs and her husband's business. Her husband, Dr. Larry Lehrner, operates numerous dialysis centers in the state and engages in lobbying on behalf of kidney care providers. We investigated and found that most of the article's claims can be supported by evidence publicly available online, although some was obtained through FOIA requests and in-person investigation.

The article provides evidence that Berkley may be catering to the kidney industry, saying that Berkley has "co-sponsored at least five House bills that would expand federal reimbursements or other assistance for kidney care." 

• GovTrack provides a list of sponsored and cosponsored bills listed by member of Congress. A search for Berkley finds 191 bills that she has cosponsored in the 112th Congress, one of which contains the word "kidney." A search for cosponsored bills in the 111th Congress returns 530 bills, seven of which contain the word "kidney."

The article notes that Berkley's husband's nephrology practice has a $738,000-a-year contract with the University Medical Center in Las Vegas partly due to his wife's influence. The article also notes that the couple "holds assets valued from $7 million to $23 million."

• This information could be obtained using the personal financial disclosure forms for members of Congress, available from the Center for Responsive Politics site, OpenSecrets.org. Berkley's disclosures are available through 2010 (filed in 2011).

The article claims that Dr. Lehrner has "played a central role in an industry campaign to lobby members of Congress -- including his wife -- on behalf of kidney care providers."

• OpenSecrets' lobbying data indicates that 61 clients have lobbied for specific issues around kidney care since 2005, obtained by searching the database by issue area "kidney." DaVita, Inc. is the client which mentioned the word "kidney" the most - 183 times - in its lobbying disclosure forms.

Berkley's husband co-owns several dialysis centers with DaVita, which the article claims happens to also be "one of Berkley's biggest campaign contributors."

• CRP data shows that DaVita donated $19,400 to Berkley in 2012 and $6,550 in 2010. The health care industry overall contributes a significant amount to Berkley, second only to the gambling industry.

The article discusses the amount the federal government spends on kidney care such as that advocated by Berkley and her husband, saying that "The Medicare system spends an estimated $27 billion a year, or about 6 percent of overall Medicare spending, to help some of the approximately 550,000 Americans who have so-called end-stage kidney disease."

• These statistics are available in the annual data report published by the United States Renal Data System.

The article makes the point that there are concerns regarding the quality of medical care being provided despite these federal funds, citing the case of Shawn Rowlett, who died after a kidney transplant at the University Medical Center. Subsequently "the hospital settled a malpractice suit for $77,500 - the maximum amount allowed in Nevada" and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued injunctions against the hospital.

• The malpractice suits can be searched online using Clark County Court's website, but the actual records are only available in person at the court. Doctor licensing records in Nevada are also searchable online and include records of disciplinary action against doctors, investigative committee results, and complaints against pharmaceutical manufacturers.
• The information regarding the CMMS injunctions was obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, according to the author of the piece, Eric Lipton.

Moving forward from this scandal, Berkley has since said that she, "should have more fully disclosed" the details of how her husband's work overlapped with the University Medical Center program she helped save. She said she thought it was generally known that her husband was involved with the hospital in question, but that she would now "take further actions to publicize the connection." Interestingly, while numerous newspaper outlets have run commentary on the New York Times accusatory piece, only the Las Vegas Review-Journal mentions her attempts to apologize.

The Nevadan Republican Party has filed an official complaint against Berkley, and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has included her on their list of "Most Corrupt" politicians.

---

"The News Without Transparency" shows you what the news would look like without public access to information. Laws and regulations that force the government to make the data it has publicly available are absolutely vital, along with services that take that raw data and make it easy for reporters to write sentences like the ones we've redacted in the piece above. If you have an article you'd like us to put through the redaction machine, please send us an email at mbuck@sunlightfoundation.com.

The New York Times published an article last December investigating the U.S. government’s approval of American companies doing business with countries blacklisted for sponsoring terrorism, such as Iran. According to the article, the Treasury Department has granted almost 10,000 licenses for business deals involving these blacklisted nations, some of which were impacted by political influence.

In addition to good reporting, the availability of data was essential to making this such a good investigative piece. That said, much of the underlying data for this article was hard to obtain, and the article itself says that even after the Times filed a FOIA request, “The process took three years, and the government heavily redacted many documents. . . ”

We investigated and have highlighted what data is publicly available and what data isn’t, but in some cases can be obtained through FOIA.

Publicly Available Data

The article highlights how much less business the United States did with Iran than China or Europe did, pointing out that “…in the first quarter of this year, 0.02 percent of American exports went to Iran.” The U.S. Census Bureau provides monthly and annual datasets detailing American foreign trade which provides information such as the data point used in the article. The annual report for 2010 is available here and can be viewed as a PDF or as a zip file for text or excel formats.

The article demonstrates how American exports to Iran have dramatically increased since the passage of legislation in 2000 exempting agricultural and medical humanitarian aid from trade sanctions, explaining that, “While Cuba was the primary focus of the initial legislative push, Iran, with its relative wealth and large population, was also a promising prospect. American exports, virtually nonexistent before the law’s passage, have totaled more than $1.7 billion since." The U.S. Census Bureau also provides data regarding U.S. foreign trade that is organized by country and year. The website provides a downloadable excel document with comprehensive data for all countries and years. The data for U.S. trade with Iran is located here.

The article suggests a connection between licenses granted that allow companies to trade with blacklisted countries and campaign donations, relating that, “While his electrodes were at sea, Mr. Liu had made his first ever political contribution, giving the senator’s campaign $2,000…Two months later, Mr. Liu sent the senator another $2,000 contribution, the maximum allowable.” Campaign donations are public information. Using Sunlight's Transparency Data you can find campaign contributions based on who gave, when they gave, and how much they gave. A search for Samuel Liu’s contributions between 2003-2004 immediately brings up his $2,000 campaign donations to Senator Inouye: one in August of 2003 and the other in February of 2004.

Information Not Made Available to the Public

Much of the data in the article is based on Treasury Department records providing the details of individual licenses granted to companies. To try to find the data we ran a search based on the terms "mccormick" "OFAC" and site:treasury.gov, to limit the search to within the Treasury website. We were able to find heavily redacted lists of licenses granted from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) under the Department of the Treasury. The spreadsheets provide the names of companies which have received licenses from OFAC, but do not provide substantive details about the reason for the license, or the amount or type of purchases made. We also found blank reporting and license applications, but not the completed applications from individual companies.

The Treasury Department did not return numerous messages left requesting additional insight into what information is and is not publicly available. More specific information may be available through individual FOIA requests, several of which are currently pending according to FOIA logs provided by Treasury. Based on how little information the Treasury provides online regarding this topic, it is likely that most of the following claims in the article are based on information obtained through FOIA, or just good investigative skills:

• “…the Treasury Department has granted nearly 10,000 licenses for deals involving countries that have been cast into economic purgatory…”
• “…records show that the United States has approved the sale of luxury food items to chain stores owned by blacklisted banks…”
• “In its application to sell salt substitutes, marinades, food colorings and cake sprinkles in Iran, McCormick & Co. listed a number of chain stores that planned to buy its products.”
• “On July 28, 2003, the plant’s owner, Samuel Liu, ordered 200 graphite electrodes from a Chinese government-owned company, China Precision Machinery Import Export Corporation.”
• “Records show that the bank had agreed to confirm a letter of credit guaranteeing payment to a Malaysian exporter upon delivery of what were described as split-system air-conditioners to a Turkish importer.”

Additionally, The article cites phone and e-mail records. According to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), certain executive branch phone and email records are publicly available through FOIA requests. Frequent requests are supposed to be published in the online reading room, but research shows that not everything is always posted. Congressional and Judicial communication records are not required to be publicly released. The following data points from the story could possibly be obtained through FOIA:

• “Records show that an Inouye aide called the licensing office on Mr. Liu’s behalf the same day that Mr. Palmiero recommended denying the application. The senator himself wrote two days later.”
• “The following day, the licensing office’s director at the time asked the State Department to reconsider in an e-mail that prominently noted the senator’s interest.”

Our Policy Intern Eric Dunn contributed research assistance to this post.

---

"The News Without Transparency" shows you what the news would look like without public access to information. Laws and regulations that force the government to make the data it has publicly available are absolutely vital, along with services that take that raw data and make it easy for reporters to write sentences like the ones we've redacted in the piece above. If you have an article you'd like us to put through the redaction machine, please send us an email at mbuck@sunlightfoundation.com.