“Early versions of the system are currently limited to certain aircraft, but with further development could be deployed on a variety of platforms, including manned or unmanned aerial vehicles,” Inhofe said. “L-3 Aeromet continues to be a leader in developing this critical technology that can be used to defeat incoming ballistic missiles.”

Records show the Tulsa-based company was awarded a $4.4 million federal contract for development of the technology in 2002. The following year, Aeromet was acquired by L-3 Communications, a major defense contractor based in New York.

In 2003, L-3 Aeromet received an additional $3 million to further its AIRS research, which the company’s literature states “is continually advancing remote sensing capability for the most challenging airborne surveillance missions.” Records show congressional funding continues along with campaign contributions from a number of parties with Aeromet interests.

Records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group that tracks money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public policy, executives at Aeromet and L-3 Communications, the lobbying firms they have hired and the employees of all those entities have been generous donors to a number of elected officials.

During the past few years, Inhofe, Sullivan and Boren have received tens of thousands of dollars from special interests associated with Aeromet, L-3 Aeromet, L-3 Communications and lobbyists hired by the companies.

Contributions tracked through the Center for Responsive Politics’ searchable databases show campaign contributions from Aeromet executives dating back to at least 1994.

Garry Booker, Aeromet’s chief operating officer and vice president before the 2003 acquisition by L-3 Communications, said campaign contributions reported by him and others with connections to the family business were nothing more than financial support for congressional members who have the best interests of their districts in mind.

“I guess there are people who feel that political contributions are a way of doing business in Washington,” said Booker, whose father founded Aeromet in 1974 and sold it in 2003 for $20 million. “But if any of the congressional members I worked with ever said to me, ‘Give me some money and I’ll talk to you,’ those aren’t the kind of people I want to do business with.”

While considering the existence of a “pay-for-play” mentality that critics of earmark spending say clouds the credibility of the process, Booker said he sees three kinds of people holding congressional seats:

• Those who don’t support their local districts and maintain a clean image “by not weighing in on important issues or doing anything to promote” their constituents’ interests.

• Those who trade political influence for campaign contributions.

• Those who know the issues and projects important to their districts and work to get the federal funding necessary to grow the local economies and promote new jobs.

“Those are the kind of people — the third type — we like to do business with,” Booker said. “They are not taking kickbacks or bribes. They keep the two issues (federal funding and campaign contributions) separate and make it clear to their constituents they are separate.”

Boren, in a written statement responding to inquiries about the L-3 Aeromet earmark, said his support of the company’s research stems from his belief “that protecting our nation from long-range missile attacks is critical to the security of the United States.”

With regard to congressional earmarks, Boren said he takes the “process very seriously.” Boren said he works closely with potential earmark recipients to study the merits of any proposed project for which funding is sought.