Exhibits - Anthony Principi, Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs

EXHIBIT 1
Anthony Principi, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 2001-2005 Page 1 of 1
Home > Government
Anthony Principi
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 2001-2005
www.va.gov
Anthony J. Principi was nominated to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs by President George W.

Bush on December 29, 2000, was confirmed by the Senate on January 23, 2001 and served on
the President's Cabinet until January 2005.
As Secretary, Mr. Principi directed the federal government's second largest department,
responsible for a nationwide system of health care services, benefits programs, and national
cemeteries for America's veterans and dependents. With a budget of more than $51 billion, VA
employed approximately 219,000 people at hundreds of VA medical centers, clinics, benefits
offices, and national cemeteries throughout the country.
Prior to his nomination, Mr. Principi was president of QTC Medical Services, Inc., a group of professional service
companies providing independent medical examinations and administration. During the past decade, he was
senior vice president at Lockheed Martin IMS, and a partner in the San Diego law firm of Luce, Forward, Hamilton
& Scripps.
A combat-decorated Vietnam veteran, Mr. Principi has worked on national policy issues and has held several
executive-level positions in federal government throughout his career. He chaired the Federal Quality Institute in
1991 and was chairman of the Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance established
by Congress in 1996.
Mr. Principi served as Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, VA's second-highest executive position, from March
17, 1989, to September 26, 1992, when he was named Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs by President George
Bush. He served in that position until January 1993. Following that appointment, he served as Republican chief
counsel and staff director of the Senate Committee on Armed Services.
From 1984 to 1988, he served as Republican chief counsel and staff director of the Senate Committee on
Veterans' Affairs. He was the Veterans Administration's assistant deputy administrator for congressional and
public affairs from 1983 to 1984, following three years as counsel to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services
Committee.
Mr. Principi is a 1967 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Md., and first saw active duty aboard the
destroyer USS Joseph P. Kennedy. He later commanded a River Patrol Unit in Vietnam's Mekong Delta.
Mr. Principi earned his law degree from Seton Hall University in 1975 and was assigned to the Navy's Judge
Advocate General Corps in San Diego, Calif. In 1980, he was transferred to Washington as a legislative counsel
for the Department of the Navy.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/principi-bio.html 6/9/2008
EXHIBIT 2
FOXNews.com - Principi Resigns as Pfizer VP - Politics | Republican Pa... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,156671,00.html
UREPORT On FOX News CHANNEL:

We Report. Send us your video, STUDIO B
You Decide. SEARCH
photos and news The News Begins Anew! (3:00pm EST)
View Schedule
HOME U.S. WORLD POLITICS BUSINESS HEALTH SCITECH ENTERTAINMENT VIDEO OPINION UREPORT SPORTS
WEATHER
RADIO MOBILE FOX & Friends Live Desk Studio B Your World Special Report FOX Report O'Reilly Factor Hannity & Colmes On the Record FNC iMag FOX Fan
Politics
TOP VIDEO
FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS
Senate Passes Bailout
POLITICS HOME
Principi Resigns as Pfizer VP Congressional leaders hail
Senate's passage of financial
FOX POLLS
bailout bill
Monday, May 16, 2005
AMERICA'S
ELECTION HQ
EYE ON THE
POLITICS
E-Mail Print
ISSUES What goes into debate preparations?
Someone is try to steal Ohio's election
SPECIAL REPORT Share: Obama thriving in battleground states
Rep. Harman: McCain must address Senate
FOX NEWS
SUNDAY WASHINGTON — Anthony Principi (search), chairman of the commission that will
ADVERTISEMENT
EXECUTIVE
review the newly released list of military base closings, has resigned his
BRANCH executive post with the drug manufacturer Pfizer (search) Corp.
U.S. SENATE Principi, a former Veterans Affairs (search) secretary, told the company Friday that
HOUSE OF
he was stepping down in order to fully carry out his responsibilities as chairman of
REPRESENTATIVES the Base Realignment and Closure Commission. He cited the time demands of the
commission job.
SUPREME COURT
Word of Principi's resignation came Monday as the commission was opening
STATE & LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
hearings on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's proposal to close 33 major
facilities and realign hundreds of others to save billions of dollars.
U.S. MILITARY
Principi joined Pfizer as a vice president in March, to run the company's
NEWS ARCHIVE Washington, D.C. office. He is from California, a state that was hard hit in the
HOT TOPICS previous four base closing rounds. And Pfizer has a large research facility in
FOX NEWS Connecticut, a state hurt the most in the Pentagon's base closing recommendations
ELECTION released Friday.
COVERAGE
CELEBRITY "We're very sorry to be losing Mr. Principi, but we respect his commitment to the
GOSSIP
FOX commission and to the president and to the Congress in service of our country," said
MOVIETONE the Pfizer spokesman, Paul Fitzhenry.
NEWS REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION
RCP AVERAGE: MCCAIN +30.4%
SECTION MAP
McCain 56.7%
SEE MORE Huckabee 26.3%
Paul 6.5%
Send news tip to POLL DETAILS >
FOXNews.com DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION
RCP AVERAGE: OBAMA +12.2%
Obama 52.8%
Clinton 40.6%
SUBMIT POLL DETAILS >
PRESIDENT BUSH JOB APPROVAL
RCP AVERAGE: SPREAD -35.4%
Approve 30.4%
Disapprove 65.8%
POLL DETAILS >
CONGRESSIONAL JOB APPROVAL
RCP AVERAGE: SPREAD -56.0%
Approve 17.8%
Disapprove 73.8%
POLL DETAILS >
MOST READ • TOP EMAILED • TOP VIDEOS •

NTSB: Plane Wreckage Found in California May Be
Steve Fossett's
Fact Check: Biden's Chopper Was 'Forced Down' by
Snowflakes
Chicago Woman Wins House on eBay for $1.75
1 of 3 10/2/2008 9:15 AM
RELATED Principi, a decorated Vietnam War veteran, once

served as a chief counsel for the Senate Armed
STORIES Services Committee and Senate Veterans Affairs ADVERTISEMENT
Rumsfeld Defends Base Closing Committee. He also has been a top official with
List
Pentagon Wants 33 Major Military
defense contractor Lockheed Martin.
Bases Closed
Lawmakers to Fight Base Closures
Fast Facts: Base Breakdown
Plan Would Close Walter Reed
Army Hospital
Fast Facts: Pentagon's Proposal
Timeline of Base-Closure Process
Objections Readied Against Base
ONLY ON FOX
Closings
Panel to Recommend Slowing Supreme Court Scorecard
Base Closings A summary of the high court's
Rumsfeld: Fewer Base Closures decisions on 70 cases presented
Expected during the 2007-2008 term
VA Chief: Base Closings Will Hurt
Communities
Pentagon Plan to Pull Troops 2008 Primary Schedule
Laced With Uncertainty A handy list of who voted when
Asia, Europe Brace for U.S. Troop
Realignment
VIDEO
DOD Base Closing Announcement
LINKS Leaving Congress: The Changing

Closures and Realignments by Face of the 110th
State Click here to see the updated list of
lawmakers not returning to their seats
after the 2008 elections
ADVERTISEMENTS
Newt Gingrich Newsletter

Newt Gingrich newsletter
delivered straight to your inbox -
Free!
www.WinningTheFuture.net
Artery Clearing Secret

Hugh Downs reports on
breakthrough from Nobel Prize
Winning Doctor
Healthsecrets.com
ADVERTISEMENTS

Newt Gingrich newsletter delivered straight to your inbox - Free!
www.WinningTheFuture.net

Hugh Downs reports on breakthrough from Nobel Prize Winning Doctor
Healthsecrets.com
Treat Spinal Stenosis

Minimally Invasive Treatment For Spinal Stenosis-Get Your Life Back!
www.laserspineinstitute.com
"Teeth Whiteners Exposed"

7 Teeth Whitening Products Tested, Rated, and Reviewed. A Must Read!
www.best-teeth-whitening.com
Buy a link here
See Next Story in Politics

E-Mail Print
Share:
U.S. • WORLD • POLITICS • HEALTH • SCITECH • ENTERTAINMENT • AP WIRES

Politics Section Palin facing voters who doubt her readiness
Top News Story Featured Content House girds for 2nd try on financial rescue
Alaskans cringe after month of listening to Palin
Extraordinary Coverage FOX Polls
Keep track of all the latest news AP poll: Obama takes a 7-point lead over McCain
America's Election HQ
from the campaign trail with our Jury to hear tapes at Stevens corruption trial
Eye on the Issues
special election section. At Washington gov. debate, economy is No. 1 issue
Special Report
Sweeteners entice lawmakers back to bailout plan
See More
October remains the month for political surprises
Judge: Illinois ballot language 'misleading'
Lawsuits likely over NYC mayor's bid for 3rd term
News Archive
MARKETPLACE
2 of 3 10/2/2008 9:15 AM
AUTOS
MORTGAGES Interest Rates
30 yr fixed 6.02% 48 month new car 6.52% Find a Car Find a Mortgage Get Voicemail Free Credit Score Fox News Shop
15 yr fixed 5.73% 6 month CD 3.17%
$30K home equity loan 7.62% 1 yr CD 3.67%

Celebrity News Try Vonage

Hugh Downs reports on breakthrough from Nobel Prize
Newt Gingrich newsletter delivered straight to your inbox - Free!
Winning Doctor
News Alerts RSS Feeds Podcasts Make FOXNews.com Your Home Page Careers
SEARCH
Home U.S. World Politics FOX News Polls Business Health SciTech Entertainment Video Opinion uReport Sports Weather
Radio Mobile FOX & Friends Live Desk Studio B Your World Special Report FOX Report O'Reilly Factor Hannity & Colmes On the Record RedEye
FNC iMag FOX Fan News Archive FOX Around The World Contact US Upgrade Central FAQs Fox News Video Archive
Advertise on FOXNews.com, FOX News Channel , and FOX News Radio Jobs at FOX News Channel. Internships At Fox News (Deadline for summer applications: Feb. 29, 2008)
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to foxnewsonline@foxnews.com; For FOX News Channel comments write to yourcomments@foxnews.com
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © 2008 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.
3 of 3 10/2/2008 9:15 AM
EXHIBIT 3
Page 1
21 of 107 DOCUMENTS
The Day
Distributed by Knight/Ridder Tribune News Service
March 25, 2006 Saturday
Principi returns to Pfizer

BYLINE: Anthony Cronin, The Day, New London, Conn.
SECTION: BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL NEWS
LENGTH: 377 words
Mar. 25--Pfizer Inc. has named Anthony Principi, the former head of the federal base closure commission, as its
senior vice president for government relations, heading its Washington, D.C., office.
Principi was the chairman of the federal Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, which was the
independent federal agency charged with reviewing the Pentagon's 2005 base closings and consolidation process.
The Pentagon proposed last May that the Naval Submarine Base in Groton be shuttered as part of its nationwide
round of base closings and consolidations. But after an intensive fight that involved local, regional and state officials, as
well as those in the state's congressional delegation, Principi's commission voted in late August to keep the base open --
averting a possible economic shock wave across eastern Connecticut.
The base is one of the region's largest employers, with about 9,000 active-duty personnel and more than a thousand
contractors who work at the Groton base.
Principi had been with Pfizer from March through May of 2005, but left his post to devote his time to the massive
job of reviewing the Pentagon's base closing and consolidation list.
Principi has broad experience in both private industry and public service. He served as secretary of the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs, the federal government's second-largest agency with an annual budget of about $51
billion and more than 200,000 employees. He also served as a deputy secretary within that agency.
Principi, a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, is a Navy veteran who served in Vietnam.
He spent about a decade in the private sector, including serving as an executive with a division of Lockheed Martin
and as the president of a medical services company.
Principi graduated from Seton Hall University's law school and served as a partner with Luce, Forward, Hamilton
and Scripps, a San Diego-based law firm.
To see more of The Day, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.theday.com. Copyright (c) 2006, The
Day, New London, Conn. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. For information on republishing this
content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail
reprints@krtinfo.com.
Page 2
Principi returns to Pfizer The Day March 25, 2006 Saturday
LOAD-DATE: March 25, 2006
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
ACC-NO: 20060325-NL-PFIZER-HEAD-20060325
PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newspaper
JOURNAL-CODE: NL
Copyright 2006 The Day

EXHIBIT 4
Clerk of the House of Representatives Secretary of the Senate
Legislative Resource Center Office of Public Records
B-106 Cannon Building 232 Hart Building
Washington, DC 20515 Washington, DC 20510
http://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov http://www.senate.gov/lobby
LOBBYING REPORT
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
1. Registrant Name ✔ Organization/Lobbying Firm Self Employed Individual

2. Address Check if different than previously reported
Address1
Address2
City
State Zip Code - Country
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
City State Zip Code - Country
4a. Contact Name b. Telephone Number c. E-mail 5. Senate ID#

International Number

7. Client Name ✔ Self Check if client is a state or local government or instrumentality 6. House ID#

TYPE OF REPORT 8. Year Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) ✔
Q3 (7/1-9/30) Q4 (10/1 - 12/31)
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
10. Check if this is a Termination Report Termination Date 11. No Lobbying Issue Activity
INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13

12. Lobbying 13. Organizations
INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period
was: were:
Less than $5,000 Less than $5,000
$5,000 or more $ $5,000 or more ✔

$
Provide a good faith estimate, rounded to the nearest $10,000, 14. REPORTING Check box to indicate expense
of all lobbying related income from the client (including all accounting method. See instructions for description of options.
payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying ✔ Method A. Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
activities on behalf of the client).
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the
Internal Revenue Code
Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal
Revenue Code
Signature

Date
Printed Name and Title

v6.0.1f 1
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name

LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant
engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide
information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code

(one per page)
16. Specific lobbying issues

!!"

#$% &!!

17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None

!"#$#%&#'( )%*" ($#& (*
' +#
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name Last Name Suffix Covered Official Position (if applicable) New

19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above ✔ Check if None

v6.0.1f 2
Page ______ 20
of ______
ADDENDUM for General Lobbying Issue Area:

!!

"#

$
!!

%#

&

'''
'%
'

()*!!


v6.0.1f 3
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)


!"#$%&'
(%%$% )& '
$$)"*) $&
"'


v6.0.1f 4
Page ______ 20
of ______

!
"
#$%&#'%$ !

()*%+%,&'----*..%$%
%%#.-%/ - !
"
'%0 %12* !
"
3-.4*$1#. !

3 4*$ #-5+6!
!
"6
7&#, -#!
"
-5-- 87-6!
"
-5-- 87-"!
%-#-*-%
66%-#-*-%
-58- '#
"-58- '#
" "$- --#8--
"$- --#8--
'%*0-% 9*
"
'%'#:- ; / -78: -%.$-&<&4

'*8*--
*%+(-66 )
"" &#.5#--=5 -
" " >$%$34&$(! )
>.8*-7?%#("!)
>*#7?%#-( !)
"6>$ -
@.#+$'#
-$1##*%*$%
%'%$ '%('1)'

v6.0.1f 5
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant PFIZER, INC Client Name PFIZER, INC
ADDENDUM for General Lobbying Issue HCR - HEALTH ISSUES
Name Covered Official Position (if applicable) New
First Last Suffix

Ron Roberts
Printed Name and Title Anthony J. Principi

v6.0.1f 6
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)

!!! ! " !#$



v6.0.1f 7
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)

!"#"

$#

%&'(
#
)'

%&'(
* '%+"!#
,



v6.0.1f 8
Page ______ 20
of ______

!
"#$#%& !

'(
"#$#)% !
*(
+#',' -! +
+ " .

)& /
0
+#'%1% )&

23
"#%% -!(++"1(

v6.0.1f 9
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)

!"
# $ !"
%!
&'( ) (& !"



v6.0.1f 10
Page ______ 20
of ______

!"#

$%

!"#

%&'(
)*+ +
,
)

*-*) .
/*
#
*
#
$'&&(
)*+ +

)

*-*) .
/
*
#
$'0(
)('1

/ ) /
!
**
( ) .2//3
$'405(
-*

) 1

*)
/ )
6
45+

)
7-*
# 809:
$:5
/ !

/:9:
$0&5/
)
/:
004'/
)
/:
%
/;!<
7+2=89:
$05
/;!<

$'%&*"+
=
)
3004'/
)749:8
$0&5/
)

v6.0.1f 11
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)

!! "#$$$% &
'' % ( #)
* +, -.



v6.0.1f 12
Page ______ 20
of ______

!"#$%
$& !"#%

v6.0.1f 13
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)

! "# "" " "$%
&'(!

)*!+$"
"$, -&. %,-/ -

!"#$%&'()* !


v6.0.1f 14
Page ______ 20
of ______

!"##$

% &% %&%
'( )& ) *(+%
% ( *(+% ' %

, % ' *(+
, % '

% %% ! '

!-."/$0% % %
!-1 /21/.$0% 3
% %'% )!
%4
!-""$5 ) & %6 78333
%
%4 % %

) %, ' &% %& %6, % %
'% %
( % 2
-!-/.." % 3)&%, ) % %, %

v6.0.1f 15
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)




v6.0.1f 16
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name

15. General issue area code (one per page)

!"#

$%&'(&$ )* *+",$"-



v6.0.1f 17
Page ______ 20
of ______

!


v6.0.1f 18
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name


(one per page)

!""#
$%#&"'(")*



v6.0.1f 19
Page ______ 20
of ______
Registrant
Client Name

15. General issue area code (one per page)




v6.0.1f 20
Page ______ 20
of ______
EXHIBIT 5
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
● ●
The Library of Congress > THOMAS Home > Bills, Resolutions > Search Results
NEW SEARCH | HOME | HELP | ABOUT SUMMARIES
H.R.2900
Title: To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise and extend the
user-fee programs for prescription drugs and for medical devices, to enhance the
postmarket authorities of the Food and Drug Administration with respect to the safety
of drugs, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Dingell, John D. [MI-15] (introduced 6/28/2007) Cosponsors (34)
Related Bills: H.R.3580, S.1082
Latest Major Action: 7/16/2007 Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on
Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 270.
House Reports: 110-225
Note: For further action, see H.R.3580, which became Public Law 110-85 on
9/27/2007.
SUMMARY AS OF:
7/11/2007--Passed House amended. (There is 1 other summary)
Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 - Title I: Prescription Drug
User Fee Amendments of 2007 - (Sec. 101) Prescription Drug User Fee
Amendments of 2007 - (Sec. 102) Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA) to include postmarket safety activities within the process for the review of
human drug applications or supplements, including: (1) developing and using
improved adverse event data collection systems and improved analytical tools to
assess potential safety problems; (2) implementing and enforcing provisions relating
to postapproval studies, clinical trials, labeling changes, and risk evaluation and
mitigation strategies; (3) preparing and making publicly available a summary analysis
of the adverse drug reaction reports received for recently approved drugs; (4)
conducting screenings of the Adverse Event Reporting System database and reporting
on new safety concerns; and (5) developing postmarket safety performance measures.
Repeals provisions limiting postmarket safety activities to the three years after
approval of a new drug.
(Sec. 103) Reauthorizes prescription drug user fees beginning in FY2008.
Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide a partial refund of an
applicant's user fees if the application is withdrawn without a waiver before filing.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR02900:@@@D&summ2=m& (1 of 12) [10/27/2008 2:47:38 PM]

Sets forth special rules for positron emission tomography drugs, including subjecting
an applicant in an approved human drug application for a positron emission
tomography drug to one-sixth of the annual prescription drug establishment fee.
Establishes the amount of revenue that fees are to generate for FY2008-FY2012.
Requires that such fees be derived equally from fees related to human drug
applications and supplements, prescription drug establishments, and prescription drug
products. Sets forth provisions regarding adjustments to such fees.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2008-FY2012.
Exempts approved prescription drugs or licensed biological products designated for a

rare disease or condition (orphan drugs) from product and facility fees if certain
requirements are met, including having U.S. drug sales that fall below a certain
amount.
(Sec. 104) Requires the Secretary to assess and collect fees for advisory review of
proposed direct-to-consumer television advertisements of prescription drug products.
Sets forth procedures for such review.
Subjects each person that is assessed an advisory review fee to an operating reserve
fee. Establishes the amount of revenue that may be generated from such fees.
Requires the Secretary to annually set the advisory review fee. Sets forth fee limits.
Terminates the advisory review program if revenue falls below a certain threshold.
(Sec. 105) Requires the Secretary to report on the progress of the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) toward achieving goals related to expediting the drug
development process and the process for the review of human drug applications.
(Sec. 106) Terminates provisions related to prescription drug users fees and advisory
review fees on October 1, 2012.
Title II: Medical Device User Fee Amendments of 2007 - (Sec. 201) Medical
Device User Fee Amendments of 2007 - Subtitle A: Fees Related to Medical
Devices - (Sec. 211) Defines terms relating to fees for medical devices, including
defining "30-day notice" as a supplement to an approved premarket application or
premarket report that is limited to a request to make modifications to manufacturing
procedures or methods affecting the safety and effectiveness of the device.
(Sec. 212) Makes changes to medical device fees, including establishing a fee for: (1)
a 30-day notice; (2) a request for classification information; and (3) periodic reporting

for a class III device.
Subjects each medical device establishment to a fee for each initial or annual
registration beginning with its registration for FY2008, except for establishments
operated by a state or federal governmental entity or an Indian tribe.
Establishes the amount of revenue that may be generated from medical device fees.
Makes changes to provisions related to qualifications for fee waivers for small
businesses.
(Sec. 213) Sets forth reporting requirements, including requiring the Secretary to
report to the relevant congressional committees on the FDA's progress in achieving
medical device review goals.
(Sec. 214) Requires the Secretary to consult with the relevant organizations,
individuals, and industry in developing recommendations for meeting goals for the
process for the review of medical devices applications for fiscal years after FY2012 and
for the reauthorization of provisions relating to device fees.
(Sec. 215) Authorizes additional appropriations for FY2008-FY2012 to collect, develop,

review, and evaluate postmarket safety information on medical devices.
(Sec. 216) Makes amendments made by this title effective on the date of enactment of
this title, except that fees shall be assessed for all premarket applications, premarket
reports, supplements, and premarket notifications submissions received on or after
October 1, 2007, regardless of such enactment date.
(Sec. 217) Terminates amendments made by this title on October 1, 2012.
Subtitle B: Amendments Regarding Regulation of Medical Devices - (Sec. 221)

Extends the authority of accredited persons to review premarket reports for devices
and make recommendations to the Secretary regarding the initial classification of
devices.
(Sec. 222) Requires any establishment within a foreign country engaged in the
manufacturing, propagation, compounding, or processing of a drug or device that is
imported or offered for import into the United States to annually register with the
Secretary.
(Sec. 223) Requires registered device producers to annually report to the Secretary
with a list of new devices introduced by the registrant for commercial distribution,
devices discontinued, a notice of resumption of processing of a device, and any

material change in information previously submitted.
(Sec. 224) Requires registrations and listings to be submitted to the Secretary

electronically unless the Secretary grants a waiver of such requirement.
(Sec. 225) Directs the Comptroller General to study the appropriate use of the process
requiring registrants to report to the Secretary before introduction of a device into
interstate commerce on the classification of the device.
(Sec. 226) Requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations establishing a unique

identification system for medical devices.
(Sec. 227) Makes changes to reporting requirements for devices that have
malfunctioned and would be likely to cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if
the malfunction were to recur.
(Sec. 228) Requires a person accredited to conduct inspections of device

establishments to notify the Secretary within 30 days of any withdrawal, suspension,
restriction, or expiration of certificate of conformance with the quality systems for any
inspected establishment. Sets forth conditions that a device establishment must meet
to be eligible for inspections by accredited persons.
(Sec. 229) Directs the Comptroller General to study and report on nosocomial
infections attributed to new and reused medical devices and the causes of such
infections.
Title III: Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act of 2007- (Sec.
301) Pediatric Medical Device Safety and Improvement Act of 2007 - (Sec. 302)
Requires applications for a humanitarian device exemption, an application for
premarket approval of a medical device, or a product development protocol for a
medical device to include, if readily available: (1) a description of any pediatric
subpopulations that suffer from the disease or condition that the device is intended to
treat, diagnose, or cure; and (2) the number of affected pediatric patients.
Requires the Secretary to submit to the relevant congressional committees an annual

report that includes: (1) the number of devices approved in the preceding year for
which there is a pediatric subpopulation that suffers from the disease; (2) the number
of approved devices labeled for use in pediatric patients; (3) the number of fee-
exempt devices approved; and (4) the review time for each approved device.
Authorizes the Secretary to conclude that adult data on medical devices may be used
to support a determination of a reasonable assurance of effectiveness in pediatric
populations if the course of the disease or condition and the effects of the device are
sufficiently similar in adults and pediatric patients.

(Sec. 303) Excludes a person granted a humanitarian device exemption from the
prohibition against selling such a medical device for an amount that exceeds its
research and development, fabrication, and distribution costs if: (1) the device is
intended to treat or diagnose a disease or condition that occurs in pediatric patients;
(2) the device was not approved for pediatric patients prior to enactment of this Act;
(3) the number of devices distributed does not exceed an annual distribution number
specified by the Secretary; and (4) the request for exemption is submitted on or
before October 1, 2013.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) refer any adverse event report related to a device to
the Office of Pediatric Therapeutics for review; and (2) provide for an annual review by
the Pediatric Advisory Committee of all devices subject to the humanitarian device
exemption to ensure that such exemption remains appropriate for the pediatric
population for which it is granted.
Directs the Comptroller General to report on the impact of allowing persons granted a
humanitarian device exemption to profit from such a device.
(Sec. 304) Requires the Director of National Institutes of Health (NIH) to designate a
contact point to help innovators and physicians access funding for pediatric medical
device development.
Requires the Commissioner of Food and Drugs to report to the relevant congressional
committees a plan for expanding pediatric medical device research and development.
(Sec. 305) Requires the Secretary to award grants or contracts for demonstration
projects to promote pediatric device development.
(Sec. 306) Includes as a duty of the Office of Pediatric Therapeutics increasing

pediatric access to medical devices.
Expands the duties of the advisory committee on pediatric therapeutics to include

providing advice and recommendations on matters relating to medical devices.
(Sec. 307) Allows the Secretary to require: (1) postmarket surveillance as a condition
to approval or clearance of certain medical devices; (2) postmarket surveillance on
class II or class III medical devices that are indicated for, or have significant use in,
pediatric populations; and (3) a prospective surveillance period of more than 36
months for a device that is expected to have significant use in pediatric populations.
Title IV: Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2007 - (Sec. 401) Pediatric Research
Equity Act of 2007 - (Sec. 402) Requires an applicant seeking to defer submission of
some or all pediatric assessments of the safety and effectiveness of a new drug or

biological product to submit to the Secretary a timeline for the completion of pediatric
studies. Sets forth annual reporting requirements for an applicant following the
approval of such a deferral.
Requires an applicant seeking a full or partial waiver of pediatric assessment

submission requirements to submit to the Secretary documentation detailing why a
pediatric formulation cannot be developed.
Authorizes the Secretary to require submission of a pediatric assessment if the

Secretary finds that: (1) adequate pediatric labeling could confer a benefit on pediatric
patients; or (2) the absence of adequate pediatric labeling could pose a risk (currently,
significant risk) to pediatric patients.
Directs the Secretary to utilize an internal committee to consult with reviewing

divisions on: (1) all pediatric plans and assessments prior to approval of an application
or supplement for which a pediatric assessment is required; and (2) all deferral and
waiver requests granted.
Requires the Secretary to track and make publicly available information related to
pediatric assessments, including: (1) the number of assessments conducted; (2) the
specific drugs and biological products and uses assessed; (3) the number of deferrals
requested and granted; and (4) the labeling changes made as a result of such
assessments.
Considers a supplement to any new drug or biological license application proposing a

labeling change as a result of any pediatric assessments to be a priority application or
supplement. Sets forth dispute resolution procedures if the Commissioner and the
sponsor are unable to reach agreement on appropriate labeling changes for such drug.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) order the label of a product to include information about
the results of the assessment and a statement that a pediatric assessment does or
does not demonstrate that the drug is safe and effective in pediatric populations; (2)
make publicly available the pharmacology reviews of pediatric assessments; (3)
require the sponsors of the assessments that result in labeling changes to distribute
such information to physicians and other heath care providers; and (4) ensure that all
adverse event reports that have been received for a drug are referred to the Office of
Pediatric Therapeutic for review.
Requires the Secretary to contract with the Institute of Medicine to study and report to
Congress regarding the pediatric studies and the labeling changes made as a result of
such studies.
(Sec. 403) Requires the Comptroller General to submit a report to Congress that
addresses the effectiveness of FFDCA pediatric research provisions in ensuring that
medicines used by children are tested and properly labeled.

Title V: Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act of 2007 - (Sec. 501) Best
Pharmaceuticals for Children Act of 2007 - (Sec. 502) Amends the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act to revise provisions regarding market exclusivity for pediatric drug
studies on new or already approved drugs, including to: (1) change the definition of
"pediatric studies" to authorize the Secretary to include preclinical studies; (2) require
that the studies are completed using appropriate formulations for each age group for
which such a study is requested; (3) require that appropriate labeling changes are
made within a time frame requested by the Secretary; and (4) prohibit the Secretary
from extending the period of market exclusivity later than one year prior to the
expiration of the period.
Requires an applicant or holder that does not agree to the request for a pediatric study
to submit to the Secretary the reasons such pediatric formulations cannot be
developed. Requires an applicant or holder that agrees to such a request to provide
the Secretary with all postmarket adverse event reports regarding the drug.
Extends to 180 days (currently, 90 days) the period the Secretary has to accept or
reject reports on pediatric studies and notify the sponsor or holder.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) publish a notice identifying any drug for which a pediatric
formulation was developed, studied, and found to be safe and effective in the pediatric
population if the pediatric formulation is not introduced onto the market within one
year after the determination regarding market exclusivity; (2) establish an internal
committee to review all written requests for pediatric studies issued; (3) track and
make publicly available information on the pediatric studies conducted; (4) order the
labeling of a product to include information about the results of the study and a
statement that a pediatric study does or does not demonstrate that the drug is safe
and effective in pediatric populations; and (5) ensure that all adverse event reports
that have been received for a drug are referred to the Office of Pediatric Therapeutics.
Sets forth actions for the Secretary to take if pediatric studies have not been
completed and there is a continuing need for information relating to the use of the
drug in the pediatric population.
Requires the Secretary to contract with the Institute of Medicine to study and report to
Congress regarding written requests for pediatric studies made and the studies
conducted.
Requires the Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH, to: (1) develop and publish
a priority list of needs in pediatric therapeutics, including drugs or indications that
need study; and (2) study and report to Congress on the feasibility of establishing a
compilation of information on pediatric drug use.
Authorizes appropriations.
Includes activities relating to the support of studies of drugs on pediatric populations

within the process for the review of human drug applications.
Authorizes the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health to solicit and accept
gifts, grants, and other donations, establish accounts, and invest and expend funds in
support of activities relating to studies on the Secretary's priority list of needs in
pediatric therapeutics.
Amends the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act to require the advisory committee
on pediatric therapeutics to continue to operate for five years after enactment of this
Act. Requires the Pediatric Subcommittee of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee
to: (1) provide recommendations to the internal committee that reviews pediatric
research requests with respect to the treatment of pediatric cancer; and (2) continue
to operate for five years after enactment of this Act. Sets forth reporting requirements.
Directs that the proposed rule issued by the Commissioner entitled "Toll-Free Number
for Reporting Adverse Events on Labeling for Human Drug Products" take effect on
January 1, 2008, unless the final rule is issued before such date.
Title VI: Reagan-Udall Foundation - (Sec. 601) Establishes the Reagan-Udall

Foundation for the Food and Drug Administration as a nonprofit corporation to advance
the mission of the FDA to modernize medical, veterinary, food, food ingredient, and
cosmetic product development, accelerate innovation, and enhance product safety.
Requires the Foundation to: (1) identify unmet needs in the development,
manufacture, and evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of such products; (2)
establish goals and priorities; (3) identify federal research and development programs
and minimize duplication; (4) award grants to scientists and entities to efficiently and
effectively advance such goals and priorities; and (5) provide objective clinical and
scientific information to the FDA and other federal agencies.
(Sec. 602) Requires the Secretary to establish an Office of the Chief Scientist to: (1)
oversee, coordinate, and ensure quality and regulatory focus of FDA intramural
research programs; (2) track and coordinate intramural research awards made by
each FDA center or science-based office; (3) develop and advocate for a budget to
support intramural research; (4) develop a peer review process by which intramural
research can be evaluated; and (5) identify and solicit intramural research proposals
from across the FDA.
(Sec. 603) Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner, to enter into
Critical Path Public-Private Partnerships with eligible entities to implement the Critical
Path Initiative of FDA by developing research, education, and outreach projects to
foster medical product innovation, accelerate medical product development, and
enhance medical product safety.
Title VII: Conflicts of Interest - (Sec. 701) Directs the Secretary, through the Office

of Women's Health, the Office of Orphan Product Development, the Office of Pediatric
Therapeutics, and other relevant offices within FDA, to develop and implement
strategies on effective outreach to potential members of advisory committees.
Requires the Secretary to review the expertise and financial disclosure report of an
individual when considering an appointment to an advisory committee.
Prohibits any member of an advisory committee from voting on any matter in which
the member has a financial interest without a waiver by the Secretary.
Title VIII: Clinical Trials Databases - (Sec. 801) Amends the Public Health Service
Act to require the Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH, to establish and
administer a clinical trials registry database and a clinical trials results database.
Requires the responsible party for an applicable clinical trial to submit the relevant
information and periodic updates to the Director of NIH for inclusion in the databases.
Sets forth penalties for failure to submit the required clinical trial information and for
the submission of false or misleading information.
Authorizes appropriations.
Prohibits a state or political subdivision from establishing any requirement for the
registration of clinical trials or for the inclusion of information relating to the results of
clinical trials in a database.
(Sec. 802) Requires the Comptroller General to study whether information on the trials
registry and database is considered promotional and to evaluate the implementation of
the database.
Title IX: Enhanced Authorities Regarding Postmarket Safety of Drugs - (Sec.

901) Prohibits a responsible person from introducing into interstate commerce a new
drug if the person is in violation of a requirement related to postapproval clinical trials
or labeling changes.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) require a responsible person for a drug to conduct a
postapproval study or clinical trial of the drug to assess a known serious risk or signals
of serious risk or to identify such a risk; (2) require a postapproval study or trial for an
already approved drug only if the Secretary becomes aware of new safety information;
and (3) issue an order directing a responsible person to make a labeling change to
address new safety information. Sets forth procedures for dispute resolution.
Prohibits a person from introducing into interstate commerce a new drug or biological
product for which a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy is required if: (1) the
person fails to maintain compliance with the requirements of such strategy; or (2)
does not cooperate in developing such a strategy.
Prohibits the Secretary from approving the application for a new drug or a biological
products license unless the person involved has submitted a statement as to whether a

risk evaluation and mitigation strategy and a postmarket study or clinical trial should
be required.
Requires a person to submit a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy as part of the
application if determined necessary to ensure that the benefits of the drug involved
outweigh the risks. Sets forth factors the Secretary must consider in making such a
determination.
Requires a proposed risk evaluation and management strategy to include a timetable

for assessment of the strategy. Allows the Secretary to require such a strategy to
include additional elements, including: (1) distribution to each patient of a Medication
Guide and a patient package insert; (2) a communication plan to health care
providers; and (3) restrictions on distribution.
Requires the elements of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy to be

commensurate with a specific serious risk listed in the labeling of the drug.
Establishes the Drug Safety Oversight Board.
Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) require the submission of any television
advertisement for a drug for review before dissemination; (2) recommend but not
require changes in such advertisements; and (3) require inclusion in advertisements of
certain disclosures about a serious risk listed in the labeling of the drug.
Requires the Secretary to establish a permanent advisory committee to advise the

Secretary on a report to Congress on direct-to-consumer advertising and its ability to
communicate to subsets of the general population.
(Sec. 902) Deems to be misbranded a drug: (1) subject to an approved risk evaluation
and mitigation strategy if the responsible person fails to comply with the strategy's
requirements; or (2) if the responsible person is in violation of a requirement relating
to postmarket studies and clinical trials or labeling.
(Sec. 903) Authorizes the Secretary to withdraw or suspend the approval of a new
drug application without first ordering the applicant to submit an assessment of the
approved risk evaluation and mitigation strategy.
(Sec. 904) Directs the Commissioner to report to Congress on how best to

communicate to the public the risks and benefits of new drugs and the role of the risk
evaluation and mitigation strategy in assessing such risks and benefits.
(Sec. 905) Requires the Secretary to establish public-private partnerships to develop

tools and methods to enable the Secretary and others to use available electronic
databases to create a robust surveillance system that will support active surveillance
on important drug safety questions.

Requires the Comptroller General to evaluate data confidentiality and security issues
relating to collection, transmission, and maintenance of data for the surveillance
system under this Act and make recommendations to relevant congressional
committees regarding the need for any additional legislative or regulatory actions to
ensure confidentiality and security.
(Sec. 907) Deems a drug or device to be misbranded if a direct-to-consumer

advertisement does not include a specified statement related to reporting adverse
effects.
(Sec. 908) Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner, to issue
guidance for the conduct of clinical trials with respect to antibiotic drugs.
(Sec. 909) Prohibits the introduction into interstate commerce of any food to which
has been added an approved drug, a licensed biological product, or certain other drugs
or biological products unless: (1) such drug or biological product was marketed in food
prior to approval, licensure, or clinical investigation; or (2) the Secretary has issued a
regulation approving the addition of such drug or biological product to food.
(Sec. 910) Requires the Secretary to: (1) develop standards to secure the prescription
drug distribution system against counterfeit, diverted, subpotent, substandard,
adulterated, misbranded, or expired drugs; (2) prioritize and develop standards for the
identification, validation, authentication, and tracking of prescription drugs; and (3)
expand the Office of Regulatory Affairs of the FDA to protect the prescription drug
distribution system.
(Sec. 911) Directs the Commissioner to convene a public meeting regarding which
serious and life threatening infectious diseases potentially qualify for available grants
and contracts under the Orphan Drug Act or other incentives for development.
Amends the Orphan Drug Act to reauthorize appropriations for grants and contracts to
defray the costs of: (1) qualified testing expenses incurred in connection with the
development of drugs for rare diseases and conditions, (2) developing medical devices
for rare diseases or conditions, and (3) developing medical foods for rare diseases or
conditions.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2008-FY2012 for grants under the Orphan Drug Act.
(Sec. 912) Prohibits the Secretary from delaying approval of an application on the
basis of a citizen petition unless the Secretary determines that a delay is necessary to
protect the public health and provides the applicant with a written explanation of the
reasons for the delay.

(Sec. 913) Authorizes additional appropriations for FY2008-FY2012 for carrying out
this title.
(Sec. 914) Makes this title effective 180 days after enactment. Deems already
approved drugs to have an approved risk evaluation and mitigation strategy if
specified restrictions on distribution or use are in effect, but requires the holder of
such an approved drug application to submit a proposed risk evaluation and mitigation
strategy within 180 days.
THOMAS Home | Contact | Accessibility | Legal | FirstGov

EXHIBIT 6
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/rx/report.aspx?aid=985
A Record Year for the Pharmaceutical Lobby in '07

Washington's largest lobby racks up another banner year on Capitol Hill
By M. Asif Ismail
Data analysis by Helena Bengtsson
Washington, June 24, 2008 – Washington's largest lobby, the pharmaceutical industry, racked up another banner year on
Capitol Hill in 2007, backed by a record $168 million lobbying effort, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of
federal lobbying data. Among the industry's successes: getting two controversial laws extended and thwarting congressional
efforts to restrict media ads for prescription drugs.
The spending represents a 32 percent jump over 2006. Driven in part by a busy legislative calendar dominated by issues
critical to the industry, the effort raised the amount spent by drug interests on federal lobbying in the past decade to more than
$1 billion. Pharmaceutical, medical device, and other health product manufacturers, together, spent more than $189 million on
lobbying last year, another record and nearly three times the $67 million they spent in 1998, the first full year for which complete
records and totals are available.
More than 90 percent of the total was spent by 40 companies

and three trade groups: the Pharmaceutical Research and
Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the Biotechnology Industry
Organization, and the Advanced Medical Technology
Association.
The spending binge last year may have also been fueled by the
previous November's Democratic takeover of Congress. After
the Democratic sweep of the House of Representatives,
several long-standing critics of the industry, such as
Representative Henry Waxman of California, assumed
leadership roles of powerful committees. Intent on closer
oversight of the industry, they conducted a series of hearings
on issues such as drug safety, pharmaceutical pricing, and
availability of generic medicines. Waxman and some fellow
Democrats also tried to give more regulatory power to the
Food and Drug Administration and revisit the Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act, a law
that came into being in 2003 after heavy industry lobbying. The
legislation, which resulted in the largest overhaul of Medicare in
its history, provides prescription drug coverage through the
program.
"After the Democratic victory in November 2006, [the industry]

had to scramble," says Ira Loss, a pharmaceutical analyst with
Washington Analysis Corporation. "They had to hire more
Democratic lobbyists." Ken Johnson, senior vice president of
communications at PhRMA, acknowledged that the industry
faced "a difficult political environment." But he maintained that
PhRMA doesn't see having a Democratic Congress as a
disadvantage. "We don't look at it through the prism of
Democrats and Republicans. We look at it in terms of those
who support free market policies and those who don't."
A review of campaign contributions reveals that the industry has

dramatically increased donations to the Democrats since their
victory in November 2006. In the current election cycle so far,
for the first time on record, the pharmaceutical and health
products industry has given slightly more money to Democrats
than Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive
Politics. In the 2006 cycle, Democrats received only 31
percent of the contributions from the industry, while the Republicans received 67 percent.
1 of 3 11/13/2008 4:22 PM
More than $6.8 million of the $14.4 million the pharmaceutical and health product industry gave in contributions went to
members of three committees that regulate the industry: the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, House Committee
on Ways and Means, and Senate Committee on Health, Education, and Labor.
As in previous years, the trade group PhRMA led the drug industry in lobbying, spending close to $23 million in 2007, a 26
percent jump over 2006. Among drug companies, Amgen Inc., a biomedical firm based in Thousand Oaks, California, led by
spending more than $16.2 million, and Pfizer, the world's largest pharmaceutical company, notched second with $13.8 million.
Other big spenders last year included Roche Holding AG ($9 million), Sanofi-Aventis ($8.4 million), GlaxoSmithKline ($8.2
million), Johnson & Johnson Inc. ($7.7 million) and the trade group Biotechnology Industry Organization ($7.2 million).
The Industry Agenda
Lobbying disclosure reports filed with Congress reveal that pharmaceutical interests lobbied on an array of issues. Among the
industry's top achievements:
blocking the importation of inexpensive drugs from other countries;

protecting pharmaceutical patents both within the United States and abroad; and
ensuring greater market access for pharmaceutical companies in international free trade agreements.
Apart from these subjects, which have become "bread and butter" issues for the industry in recent years, lobbyists focused on
a handful of legislation. One such law they pushed forcefully was the reauthorization and expansion of the State Children's
Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, a federal plan that provides insurance to children. "They lobbied very hard for SCHIP,"
says analyst Loss. "More children insured means using more drugs." The industry had pressed to reauthorize the program for
five years and expand it to cover an additional 4 million children — at a cost of $35 billion in new funding. In a rare defeat for the
industry, the measures were vetoed by President Bush, who in December extended the current program for 18 months.
The industry had better luck with two other laws it lobbied robustly to extend, the Prescription Drug User Fee Act and the Best
Pharmaceuticals for Children Act. Both were reauthorized in the Food and Drug Administration Amendment Act of 2007, which
became law last September. The User Fee Act was enacted in 1992 in response to complaints from drug companies and
patients rights advocates about long lags in drug approval. It allows the FDA to collect funds — so-called "user fees" — from
the industry to employ additional drug reviewers and bring medicines faster to the market.
The law's supporters point out that, since it was enacted, the average drug review time has considerably shortened. "In my
opinion, that law has worked very well," says Washington Analysis's Loss. A September 2002 study by the U.S. General
Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office) stated that "the median approval time for new drug applications
for standard drugs dropped from 27 months to 14 months" from 1993 to 2001.
2 of 3 11/13/2008 4:22 PM
But critics contend that the emphasis on faster

approval time has resulted in a watering down of
safety issues. The same GAO study also found
that "a higher percentage of drugs has been
withdrawn from the market for safety-related
reasons since PDUFA's enactment than prior to
the law's enactment." The FDA disagreed with that
conclusion, but critics argue that the User Fee Act
creates a built-in conflict-of-interest by making the
FDA dependent on the industry it regulates for
budgetary resources. "The FDA should be
"completely funded by the taxpayers," says
Melody Petersen, author of the book Our Daily
Meds. "With the user fee, the FDA has two
customers — us and the drug industry."
This much is clear: The FDA's reliance on user

fees has increased markedly over the years, rising
17-fold since 1993. According to the 2009 budget
request, the agency is slated to collect $628
million in user fees, an increase of $79 million
from this year and more than a quarter of the
agency's overall budget of $2.4 billion.
Another lobbying target was extension of the Best

Pharmaceuticals for Children Act, a law designed
to give the industry incentive for testing medicines
in children by granting additional patent protection
for six months. According to the agency's website,
labels of 148 drugs have been changed to include
the findings of pediatric tests. First enacted in
1997, the law has allowed companies to reap
windfall profits while delaying the entry of low-cost generic drugs. A joint investigation by the Center and HDNet's Dan Rather
Reports last year found that half of the top 20 blockbuster drugs in 2006 were given six month extensions under this law.
Included were drugs not usually associated with children's health, among them two top-selling anti-cholesterol drugs, Pfizer's
Lipitor and Merck's Zocor, and Sanofi-Aventis's popular sleep inducer Ambien.
Last year, some lawmakers tried to trim the windfall. Three Senate bills would have capped the additional time given to protect a
company's patent, depending on how lucrative the drug was. Drugs projected to earn more than $1 billion per year would get
three months — not six — of market exclusivity. The Senate passed one of these bills, but the House took no action on it. When
another bill did clear both houses, the industry managed to get the exclusivity provision reauthorized without significant changes,
just as it had with the User Fee legislation.
Drug companies also fought to keep Congress from limiting advertising aimed directly at the public. Consumers are hit with a
daily barrage of ads for prescription drugs, targeting every condition from depression to erectile dysfunction. Industry spending
on these so-called direct-to-consumer ads has jumped more than 20-fold in the past decade, helping push prescription drug
sales to a record $286.5 billion last year, according to IMS Health, a consulting firm. Consumer groups have long complained
that the ads have led to widespread over-prescribing of drugs.
Last June, Representative Pete Stark, an industry critic, tried to reign in the direct ads, but ran into the pharmaceutical industry's
powerful lobby. The law he introduced, the Fair Balance Prescription Drug Advertisement Act of 2007, never came out of
committee. The industry argued that the ads help inform patients of potential diseases and encourage people to seek treatment
at an early stage. But critics were not appeased. "All you have to do is watch the ads," says author Petersen. "It is not about
educating the public. It is about selling drugs."
Michael Pell, Tuan Le and Mary Beth Lombardo contributed to the story.
Funding for this report was provided by the Nathan Cummings Foundation.
3 of 3 11/13/2008 4:22 PM
EXHIBIT 7
Page 1
13 of 49 DOCUMENTS
Salon.com
November 20, 2007 Tuesday
Corporate profiteering against Iraq vets?

BYLINE: Mark Benjamin
SECTION: FEATURE
LENGTH: 1496 words
HIGHLIGHT: Bush's nominee to head the Department of Veterans Affairs is the second to come from a private
company that rakes in millions from VA contracts.
President Bush late last month nominated retired Lt. Gen. James Peake to be the next secretary of the Department
of Veterans Affairs. It is not an inconsequential wartime post: The department is the second-largest government agency
after the Defense Department. And the VA faces the awesome responsibility of caring for several generations of
veterans, including the crush of American service members back from Iraq and Afghanistan.
On paper, Peake seems qualified. Wounded twice in Vietnam, he retired in 2004 from his post as Army surgeon
general, the Army's top medical officer, with 40 years of experience in the field of military medicine.
But Bush plucked Peake directly from a private company that has raked in hundreds of millions of dollars from
contracts with the VA -- and Peake himself helped develop proposals for the company to contract with the VA. That has
raised questions about conflict of interest, potentially pitting veterans' care against corporate profits. Moreover, if he is
confirmed, Peake will be the second head of the VA under the Bush administration to come from that same private
contractor, QTC Management Inc.
Observers say QTC Management has performed high-quality work, and its former president, who also headed the
VA under Bush, withstood past scrutiny by congressional investigators. But ever since Dick Cheney left Halliburton to
become vice president, Bush administration critics have sounded the alarm about war profiteering seeping into the heart
of the U.S. government. The changing leadership at the VA represents a little-known turn of the revolving door between
contractors and the Bush administration. Veterans' advocates also worry that Peake's nomination suggests the White
House may be interested in privatizing veterans' healthcare to an unhealthy degree.
The Veterans Affairs Department runs more than a thousand hospitals and outpatient clinics to care for veterans,
including the influx of hundreds of thousands of veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and are now out of the
military and want to see a VA doctor.
Those veterans also seek disability checks as remuneration for their service-related ills. Every year the VA hands
out over $40 billion in checks to veterans as compensation for everything from missing limbs to post-traumatic stress
disorder.
Page 2
Corporate profiteering against Iraq vets? Salon.com November 20, 2007 Tuesday
When a veteran first applies for that compensation, a doctor conducts a physical to help determine how much
money he or she deserves. Historically, VA doctors do most of those examinations. But increasingly they are being
performed by QTC Management, the for-profit contractor that employed Peake as its chief operating officer from 2006
until now.
The company has a virtual lock on the expanding business of performing the physicals on veterans, which help
determine how much they should get in disability checks from the VA. The company first started conducting the
examinations in the late 1990s, part of a smaller effort to help the department alleviate a backlog of veterans awaiting
benefits. This year the VA will farm out 100,000 to 150,000 of these examinations to QTC Management, according to
the company's chairman. A 2005 report from the VA's inspector general says the company charges around $590 for
each exam, making the contracts worth at least $88 million this year alone.
The first VA chief selected by Bush to come directly from QTC Management was Anthony Principi, then
president of the company, who served as VA secretary from 2001 until 2005. During those years, the company
reportedly hauled in hundreds of millions of dollars conducting examinations for the VA.
And now Principi is back at QTC Management again, serving as chairman of the board. (Before returning to
QTC Management after serving at the VA, Principi did a stint at pharmaceutical giant Pfizer and was a commissioner
on a panel studying the closure of military bases.)
That the revolving door has come full circle in Principi's case deepens suspicions among veterans' advocates. "It is
a little bit troublesome that a company may be a farm team for the VA," said Paul Rieckhoff, executive director of Iraq
and Afghanistan Veterans of America. "I want to know why [Peake] and Principi both came from there," Rieckoff said.
"I want to know how directly they are involved in VA contracts."
Rieckoff also wondered: "If you are bringing people from the private sector, is that because you feel they are going
to bring a greater level of efficiency -- or is it because you want to move toward privatizing care?"
When a veteran walks in the door to see a doctor, the focus should be on the veteran and not the bottom line, said
Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, who until March 2006 was a project manager at the
VA in charge of data on returning veterans. "The veteran absolutely must come first, and with QTC, profits come first
and that is wrong," said Sullivan. "We do not want a Blackwater getting anywhere near our veterans," he said, referring
to the notorious private security firm that operated with no clear accountability in Iraq.
In a telephone interview with Salon, Principi, the former VA secretary and current QTC chairman, argued that the
company is not providing healthcare, since the medical examinations conducted by his company help determine how
much each veteran should get in disability payments. "I am personally and philosophically opposed to the privatization
of VA healthcare," he told Salon. "QTC does no treatment," he said. "We do a medical disability evaluation. I
distinguish that from the treatment and the care that VA provides."
And Principi said he has gone to great lengths to minimize any perception of a conflict of interest in going from
the company to the VA and then back again. He said he recused himself from any issues involving QTC Management
while he was in charge of the VA. And although government ethics rules say he is allowed to contact the VA on
business one year after leaving the government, Principi said he continues to steer clear. "I try to avoid an appearance
of a conflict of interest. I have not stepped foot inside the VA on business-related matters since I was secretary," he said.
"I have not engaged in any lobbying phone calls. I have not directly or indirectly tried to be involved in that."
Principi said Peake, the former Army surgeon general, also did not engage in direct lobbying of the government to
bring in cash for the company. However, Peake did help the company develop proposals to do work for the VA,
Principi acknowledged. "Jim would have the team work on the proposal and make sure it was a good proposal and make
sure all the i's were dotted and the t's were crossed, and that the technical proposal looked good, and it read well, and the
pricing was good," Principi explained. "He didn't go lobby the VA or anything." (QTC Management may have had
Page 3
Corporate profiteering against Iraq vets? Salon.com November 20, 2007 Tuesday
that ground covered without Peake: Disclosure records show QTC Management paid Jefferson Consulting Group, a
lobbying firm, $20,000 in 2003.)
Principi's behavior has been above board, according to a 2006 congressional investigation. In April 2006, the Los
Angeles Times reported that the company collected $246 million from the VA while Principi was secretary, and that the
company's contracts with the VA could eventually be worth $1 billion. The House Committee on Government Reform
subsequently launched an investigation. California Rep. Henry Waxman, then the committee's ranking member, wrote
the VA on June 9, 2006, that he was "satisfied that Secretary Principi's actions were proper and ethical."
And QTC Management has performed well, according to Joseph Violante, national legislative director of Disabled
American Veterans. "According to our service officers out in the field, they feel that QTC does a much better job than
VA," he said. "They do more thorough exams and they do them properly."
But the cross-pollination between the company and the VA still creates the perception of a conflict of interest and
raises questions about proper government oversight, said Dina Rasor, author of "Betraying Our Troops: The Destructive
Results of Privatizing War." Rasor said veterans worried about privatizing VA healthcare probably do have something
to fear, since all of the Blackwater contractors careening around Baghdad in SUVs are a testament to the Bush
administration's zeal for privatization, even while oversight and accountability are lacking. "This administration, besides
the cronyism, they have this ideologue thing that government is bad and privatization is good," she explained. "They
take it to the absurd."
Rieckhoff, the veterans' advocate, said Congress needs to take a very close look at the Peake nomination. Congress
should make sure the contracting issues are kosher and that privatization of veterans' healthcare is not looming on the
horizon. "Those are all legitimate questions," he said. "This is the part of his record that I think really needs to be
explored during these Senate confirmation hearings."
LOAD-DATE: November 21, 2007
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
PUBLICATION-TYPE: Web Publication
Copyright 2007 Salon.com, Inc.

All Rights Reserved
EXHIBIT 8
VA was overbilled by firm, audit says - Los Angeles Times Page 1 of 3
National
Return to your last page
VA was overbilled by firm, audit says

By Walter F. Roche Jr.
March 29, 2008
The California company headed by former Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony J. Principi overcharged the agency
some $6 million under a long-term contract to conduct physical evaluations on veterans applying for disability
benefits, an audit has found.
The report, released Thursday, also questioned a proposal by the Department of Veterans Affairs to amend the
contract with the company – QTC Management Inc., based in Diamond Bar – to charge higher rates than
currently authorized.
“The contract clearly limits the base rate” for these services, the 43-page report by the department’s inspector
general’s office states.
The audit also said the proposed amendment amounts to a major or “cardinal change” under federal contracting
laws, which can trigger a requirement for a new bidding process.
The report also found evidence that the VA may still be paying too much to the company for a variety of services on
the multiyear contract.
The audit was triggered by a call to a government hotline. It followed an internal review of QTC’s billing practices and
a review of the contract by a private firm for the VA.
As a result, QTC already has agreed to repay about $3 million.
But a company executive said Friday that QTC “strongly disagrees” with the new audit’s conclusion that it should
repay roughly $3 million more.
“We just got the audit, and we’re still reviewing it,” said Senior Vice President Marjie Shahani. “Our initial review of
the report shows that it has numerous errors and inaccuracies, and we strongly disagree with many of
its conclusions.”
QTC was paid a total of $267 million by the VA from May 1, 2003, through April 30, 2007, the period covered by
the audit.
The company remains under contract with the agency. And, because of good performance reviews, it is to get an
additional year tacked on to the current agreement, pushing the end date to April 2009.
The Times reported in 2006 that Principi’s firm had benefited from a series of contract awards and revisions to those
awards by the department he once headed. The article noted that a congressionally mandated review of QTC’s
performance had found that the costs of the contract were much higher than expected and did not produce
anticipated savings.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/29/nation/na-principi29 6/9/2008
The VA never performed a follow-up to that study, though one was recommended by the private firm doing
the review.
Principi, in response to questions from The Times in 2006, said he took no actions relating to QTC while he served
as VA secretary.
Principi was the head of QTC when Bush named him to the top veterans post in 2001. He returned to the company
four years later after stepping down from the Cabinet post. He now is chairman of the board.
James B. Peake, a retired Army general who now heads the VA, also worked for QTC as an executive immediately
prior to being named secretary last year. At his confirmation hearings, Peake said he would recuse himself from any
matters involving QTC.
Much of the inspector general’s report focused on a discrepancy between the reimbursement rate for certain
services called for in the contract and what QTC actually received.
The audit said that contract specifically set the reimbursement at the same rates for those services set by the
Medicare program in 1998.
“QTC incorrectly updated the Medicare rates to the (program’s) current rates each year rather than bill at the 1998
rates as stipulated in the contract,” the audit said. “The contract is not ambiguous.”
By not sticking to the 1998 rates, QTC was able to bill the VA an extra $2.6 million, according to the audit.
The auditors, by reviewing records dating back to when the contract was awarded, concluded that QTC officials were
fully aware that the payment rates for certain services were supposed to be frozen at 1998 figures.
“Nonetheless, QTC never complied with the terms of the contract,” the report said.
Under a prior contract, QTC had been allowed to raise rates annually.
Although QTC officials contended that the VA knew about the higher billing rate and effectively approved it, the
auditors said they did not find that contention credible.
“The reasons QTC offered for continuing to use current Medicare rates are not accurate,” the report concluded.
The audit noted that VA officials disagreed with some of the report’s conclusions. Department officials also cited a
ruling by its general counsel in early 2007 supporting the higher payments to QTC.
A department spokesman nonetheless issued a written statement saying that the agency agreed with the
audit findings.
walter.roche@latimes.com
Related Articles
z San Francisco Opera musicians OK new contract May 24, 2006
z Chrysler workers approve union deal Oct 28, 2007
z Supreme Court to hear case from energy crisis Sep 26, 2007
z Amtrak puts brakes on strike with accord favoring unions Jan 19, 2008
z Justices examine energy crunch Feb 20, 2008
More articles by Walter F. Roche Jr.

More articles from the National section
California and the world. Get the Times from $1.35 a week
Copyright 2008 Los Angeles Times
EXHIBIT 9
Access World News - Document Display https://vpn.lib.ucdavis.edu/iw-search/we/,DanaInfo=infoweb.newsbank...
English Other NewsBank Products
Access World News

Search History Saved Articles
Search Results for principi in All Text

Greater Los Angeles
Edit Search | New Search Did you mean: principia
Show Help
Back To Results Previous Article 9 of 9 Next Save this Article

0 Saved Articles
Former VA Chief Has Interest in Contract Company this article
Los Angeles Times (LATWP News Service) (CA) - April 22, 2006
Email
Author: Walter F. Roche Jr. ;
Print
WASHINGTON - A Diamond Bar, Calif., company headed by former Veterans
Affairs Secretary Anthony J. Principi could get fees exceeding $1 billion from the
Bibliography (export)
Veterans Administration, much of it on contracts approved and amended while he
ran the government agency, records show.
Quick Links
Principi was president of the medical services company, QTC Management Inc., Find articles by Walter F.
before joining the Bush Cabinet in 2001. He ran the VA for four years, then returned Roche Jr. ;
to the company as chairman of the board. Find more from section
"Washington"
During his tenure as VA secretary, Principi 's past and future corporate home in Find all articles from April 22,
2006
Diamond Bar collected about $246 million in fees, according to VA records. And
Congressional Budget Office projections show the VA contracts could be worth as
much as $1.2 billion to QTC if fully funded by Congress through 2008.
Principi said he had no role in awarding, amending or administering VA contracts

with QTC.
"While at the VA, I had no contact with QTC on any business matter and recused
myself entirely from any issues or business that QTC might have had with the VA,"
Principi said in e-mail responses to written questions. He said he fully complied
with federal ethics statutes barring contact with the VA following his departure from
the agency.
Citing the recent combat service of his two sons, Principi also said, "Caring for
these young men and women we send to war is the only thing that motivates me
whether I'm in public service or in any aspect of business, where their interests are
at stake."
Whether or to what extent Principi stands to benefit financially from QTC's success
could not be determined. The former VA secretary said he holds nonvested stock
options in the company, but he did not specify the numbers of shares.
As a VA contractor, Principi 's company administers medical exams to veterans

applying for disability assistance. It also examines soldiers before their discharge
from military service. The results of the QTC exams play a substantial role in
subsequent disability benefit determination decisions by the VA.
While the VA is QTC's biggest customer, the company also does similar exams for
other government agencies and private insurers.
According to its Web site, QTC owns and operates 31 medical evaluation facilities
around the country and has produced "more than 2.5 million" medical exams and
reports.
1 of 4 10/2/2008 10:17 AM
Principi , who was deputy VA Secretary and acting secretary under former
President Bush, also served as Republican chief counsel and staff director of the
Senate Armed Services Committee a decade ago.
Principi , graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis, Md., and is a
veteran of the Vietnam War. He was a partner in the San Diego law firm of Luce,
Forward, Hamilton and Scripps, according to his White House biography.
In 1996 he was named chairman of a congressional task force to investigate

veterans' problems. His panel produced recommendations that included a
standardized, comprehensive physical exam for outgoing military personnel.
That recommendation by Principi 's task force eventually would lead to exams
conducted outside the VA by private contractor QTC.
The Southern California company began its relationship with the VA in 1998,
conducting disability medical exams under a congressionally authorized pilot
program. Principi joined the company in 1999.
QTC's initial performance drew some criticism. As mandated by Congress, QTC's

work was reviewed by a private consulting company retained by the government. In
a report, the consultants said QTC costs were much higher than expected.
A QTC hearing exam, for instance, averaged $495.55 compared to $89.80 for an
in-house exam. Even with an adjustment for possible hidden VA costs, the
difference exceeded 400 percent. For a general medical exam, QTC's average cost
was $393.52 compared to a VA average of $225.58, the consultants found.
They recommended further cost comparison studies, but such follow-up analysis
was not completed.
VA officials, in a written response to questions by the Los Angeles Times, said the
recommended follow-up study was never conducted "because the (QTC) fee
schedule was studied carefully by the technical evaluation teams and found to be
reasonable and fair for the services provided."
The pilot program was in its third year when Principi was nominated VA secretary.
He told the Senate panel considering his confirmation that he had "terminated all
relationships with QTC and waived any and all future rights or benefits that could
flow from my relationship with that organization."
Nonetheless, Principi 's 2001 financial disclosure listed a $250,000 bonus he said
he received from QTC before his confirmation on Jan. 23.
The following year he also was photographed with officials of his former company at
a business forum in Orange County, Calif. Principi was the featured speaker.
QTC's founder and then-principal owner, Steeve Kay, was a financial sponsor of the
forum.
Immediately after his appointment to head the VA, Principi appointed a task force
to study the large backlog of veterans' claims. The panel, as part of its report to
Principi , lauded the performance of QTC and recommended the VA continue or
expand the medical exam program.
Principi said he had nothing to do with that favorable review or the

recommendation. The chair of that panel later was appointed a top deputy to
Principi .
The favorable Principi task force report was cited as justification for language
inserted in the 2003 Veterans Affairs' budget authorizing continuation and
expansion of the pilot program. That extension and expansion had been requested
by Principi 's agency.
2 of 4 10/2/2008 10:17 AM
While the task force urged that the expansion and continuation be done on a
competitive basis, the VA subsequently awarded a new contract to QTC after giving
rival contractors 30 days to submit proposals. No other bids were submitted. Some
competitors said they learned of the new contract only after it was awarded.
SahniahLambert, a physician with MSLA, a competing enterprise based in

Pasadena, Calif., said she had contacted the VA to express interest in bidding on
what she called the lucrative contract, but no one ever returned her calls.
During Principi 's leadership of the VA, his agency also awarded QTC bonus
payments for performance.
And the company emerged in 2003 as the sole private contractor selected to
perform the comprehensive joint discharge physical exams as recommended by the
Principi task force.
Since then, the VA has made multiple amendments to two successive QTC
contracts, increasing the numbers of approved sites where the company conducts
the examination and thereby adding to the contract's value.
As the sites doubled and quadrupled, so did QTC's revenues. While it collected $8
million in fees in 1998, it collected $69.1 million in 2005.
Principi , in his written response to questions, said that he had nothing to do with
the expansion of sites during his tenure as secretary.
Veteran groups and radio talk shows recently have seized on Principi 's ties to
QTC and accused him of conflicts of interest.
John Hennon, who broadcasts a veterans' show in Illinois, said he is convinced that
QTC "was contracted to deny as many claims as it could." He blamed Principi . He
said "It's not a surprise (to find out the former secretary has an interest in the
company)."
And Skip Dreps, head of government relations for the Northwest chapter of the
Paralyzed Veterans of America said: "I'm disappointed in the secretary."
He said he regretted "even the appearance of a conflict of interest."
QTC has additional critics.
North Carolina attorney Hugh Cox, who frequently represents veterans, accuses the
company of working with the VA to deny costly disability claims.
"Significant numbers of QTC medical examiners issue addendums to previous

medical reports creating an appearance that VA officials communicate
off-the-record with the QTC examiners to alter the veteran's chance of receiving
benefits," Cox said in an e-mail response to questions.
Cox said Principi 's involvement with the company before and after his tenure as
Veterans Secretary is "of special concern" while taxpayers continue to pay
"increasing and unchecked amounts to QTC."
One of his clients, a Vietnam veteran awarded two Purple Hearts, was told to
appear for a physical exam scheduled two days before he received the notice.
"They put me down as a no-show," said the veteran, Jimmy S. Pollock.
According to data supplied by the VA, QTC has been paid $6.2 million since May of
2003 for no-show exams. VA officials say the no-show rate experienced by QTC is
10.86 percent, "which is considered excellent."
3 of 4 10/2/2008 10:17 AM
Seattle psychiatrist Philip B. Plattner, who has worked at veterans health facilities
for 23 years, was one of the first to question QTC's expanded role. He launched a
letter-writing campaign warning that veterans could be the victims of inadequate
evaluations.
In one letter addressed to several members of Congress, Plattner said the switch to
QTC exams had the appearances of a "good old boys plan to privatize VA services,
which will cost our country and our veterans dearly."
Plattner said the cash-strapped VA is paying double what it should. He cited data
from a May 2005 VA Inspector General's report that showed the average cost of a
QTC exam was $590.
Principi , in a written response to questions, defended the company's performance,

noting that the company in its 25 years failed only once in getting its contract
renewed.
"If mistakes are made," Principi said, "QTC employees strive hard to correct them."
The value of QTC's federal contracts became apparent late last year when the
company was sold to Spectrum, a Massachusetts-based venture capital enterprise,
for a reported premium price of $270 million.
A partner who spearheaded the Spectrum purchase was Steven Price a colleague
of Principi 's in the Bush administration. Price was named to the QTC board
immediately following the purchase, but he has since stepped down.
Principi acknowledged discussing with Price his return to QTC in advance of the
sale.
Times researcher Janet Lundblad in Los Angeles also contributed to this report.
Section: Washington
Record Number: 1112DB2B327BD018
Copyright 2006, Los Angeles Times. Reproduced with the permission of Los
Angeles Times - Washington Post News Service by NewsBank, inc.
To bookmark this article, right-click on the link below, and copy the link location:
Former VA Chief Has Interest in Contract Company
Back To Results Previous Article 9 of 9 Next
4 of 4 10/2/2008 10:17 AM
EXHIBIT 10
EXHIBIT 11
Clerk of the House of Representatives Secretary of the Senate
Legislative Resource Center Office of Public Records
B-106 Cannon Building 232 Hart Building
http://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov http://www.senate.gov/lobby
LOBBYING REPORT
1. Registrant Name ✔ Organization/Lobbying Firm Self Employed Individual

2. Address Check if different than previously reported
Address1
Address2
City
State Zip Code - Country
4a. Contact Name b. Telephone Number c. E-mail 5. Senate ID#

International Number

7. Client Name Self Check if client is a state or local government or instrumentality 6. House ID#

TYPE OF REPORT 8. Year Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) ✔
Q3 (7/1-9/30) Q4 (10/1 - 12/31)
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
10. Check if this is a Termination Report Termination Date 11. No Lobbying Issue Activity
INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13

INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period
was: were:
Less than $5,000 ✔ Less than $5,000
$5,000 or more $ $5,000 or more $

of all lobbying related income from the client (including all accounting method. See instructions for description of options.
payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying
Method A. Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the
Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal
Revenue Code
Signature

Date

v6.0.1f 1
Page ______ 2
of ______
Registrant

Client Name

(one per page)




v6.0.1f 2
Page ______ 2
of ______
EXHIBIT 12
Anthony J. Principi Elected to Mutual of Omaha Board of Directors Page 1 of 1
Anthony J. Principi Elected to Mutual of Omaha

Board of Directors
OMAHA, Neb. - (May 23, 2005) Anthony J. Principi, who served as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs from 2001 to
2005, has been elected to the Mutual of Omaha Board of Directors, Chairman and CEO Dan Neary announced.
As Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Principi directed the federal government's second largest department, responsible for a nationwide
system of health care services, benefits programs and national cemeteries for America's 25 million living veterans and dependents. With
an annual budget in excess of $71 billion, Principi led an organization of 230,000 employees in hundreds of VA medical centers, clinics,
benefits offices and national cemeteries throughout the country.
Principi was recently appointed by President George W. Bush to chair the 2005 military Base Realignment and Closure Commission.
"Anthony Principi brings a wealth of experience and expertise in managing large, complex organizations as well as a strong background
in government affairs that will add a valuable dimension to the Mutual of Omaha Board of Directors. We will rely on his perspective, as
well as that of our other distinguished board members, as we work to achieve our strategic vision in an increasingly competitive and
highly regulated environment," Neary said.
A native of New York, Principi is a 1967 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy. He saw active duty aboard the destroyer USS Joseph P.
Kennedy and commanded a River Patrol Unit in Vietnam, earning the Bronze Star with combat "V" for valor.
Upon returning from Vietnam, Principi earned his law degree from Seton Hall University in 1975 and was assigned to the Navy's Judge
Advocate General Corps in San Diego. In 1980 he was transferred to Washington as legislative counsel for the Department of the Navy.
After leaving the Navy, Principi served as counsel to the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and as Republican chief
counsel and staff director of the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Principi served as Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the VA's second highest executive position, from 1989 to 1992, when he was
named Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs by President George H.W. Bush, a position he held until January 1993.
Prior to his 2000 appointment as Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Principi served as Republican chief counsel and staff director of the
Senate Committee on Armed Services; chairman of the Commission on Servicemembers and Veterans Transition Assistance; president
of QTC Medical Services, Inc.; senior vice president at Lockheed Martin IMS; and a partner in the San Diego law firm of Luce, Forward,
Hamilton & Scripps.
Mutual of Omaha is a full-service, multi-line organization providing insurance and financial products for individuals, businesses and
groups throughout the United States.
© 2008 Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company. All rights reserved.
http://www.mutualofomaha.com/about/press/management/20050523.html 6/10/2008
EXHIBIT 13
Page 1
1 of 13 DOCUMENTS
The Associated Press
February 26, 2008 Tuesday 12:26 AM GMT
Mutual of Omaha spent nearly $1.2 million to lobby government on

insurance, Medicare issues
SECTION: BUSINESS NEWS
LENGTH: 124 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
Insurance company Mutual of Omaha spent nearly $1.2 million in 2007 to lobby the federal government.
Privately held Mutual of Omaha, which has been expanding into the banking industry, spent $683,000 in the
second half of 2007 to lobby Congress on taxes, patent legislation, consumer privacy, Medicare benefits and long-term
health insurance, according to a disclosure form posted online Feb. 13 by the Senate's public records office. The
company spent $496,000 in the first six months of 2007 to lobby on issues including terrorism insurance, mental health
insurance and small business taxes.
Lobbyists are required to disclose activities that could influence members of the executive and legislative branches,
under a federal law enacted in 1995.
LOAD-DATE: February 26, 2008
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newswire
Copyright 2008 Associated Press

All Rights Reserved
EXHIBIT 14
Clerk of the House of Representatives Secretary of the Senate I
Legislative Resource Center

B-I06 Cannon Building
Offi" ofPubl;, R,oonI,
232 Hart Building
LOBBYING REP ORT

1. Registrant Name III Organization o Individual
MUTUAL OF OMAHA
2. Address o Cheek if different than previously reported
Address I 1455 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE Address2 SUITE 400
City WASHINGTON State DC Zip Code 20004 - Co untry USA
r-
4a. Contact Name b. Telephone Number c. E-mail 5. Se nate ID#
o International Number
Ms. MELISSA S. REWINKEL (202) 652-2286 26:1 84-12
r-=
7. Client Name III Self 6. Heouse ID#
MUTUAL OF OMAHA 319 910000
TYPE OF REPORT 8. Year 2007 Midyear (Januaryl-June30) III Year End (July 1-01 cember 31) 0
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report 0
10. Check if this is a Termination Report 0 Termination Date II. No Lobbying Ac tivity D
INCOME OR EXPENSES - Complete Either Line 12 OR Line 13
INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for thi s reporting period
was: were:
Less than $10,000 0 Less than $10,000 0
$10 000 or more 0 $ $10 000 or more III $ 496,000.00
of all lobbying related income from the client (including all accounting method. See instructions for descript ion of options.
payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying
o Method A. Reporting amounts using LDA definil ions only
o Metbod B. Reporting amounts under section 603 3(b)(8) oftbe

III Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162 (e) of the Internal
Revenue Code
~I Date 08/11/2007
Signature
us, DST ACES Bu.ine•• Repre.entative, MUTUAL OF OMAHA, Meli..a S Rewinkel
I

Printed Name and Title Melissa Rewinkel, Vice President of Federal Government Affairs
vS,O.Oj Page 1 of 10
~trant MUTUAL 0 F OMAHA Client Name MUTUAL OF OMAIIA
I LOBBYING ACTIVI TY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant
engaged in lobbying 0 1 behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide
information as requested. Attach additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code CSP II Consumer Issues/Safety/Products I (one per page)
IS.ll 78-lndentity Theft Prevention Act; S.1260-Data Security Act of2007; H.R. 1525-Intemet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of
2007; H.R. 948-Socia Security Number Protection Act of 2007
IRR. 493/8.358 Genet c Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2007
1------
17. House(s) ofCongr,~ess and Federal agencies 0 Check if None [l] House [l] Senate
---- J
0 Other
~---
18. Name of each indiv idual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area

First Last SuffIX
Melissa I Rewinkel 0
I l i 0
I
l D
I D
D
II 0
I
c_ II II IlL- D
19. Interest of each fo>reign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above ~ Check if None
Printed Name and T itle Melissa Rewinkel, Vice President of Federal Government Affairs
vs.O.Oj Page 2 of 10
------
,..
Registrant MUTUAL OF OMAHA C"~<N••, MO'"," DC OMAHA ~ l
15. General issue area code [AGR ]I Agri culture I (one per page)
H.R. 2419 Farm, Nutrition, BioEnergy
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies o Check if None ~ House ~ Senate o Other
L__ 18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
_-__ I

First Last Suffix
Melissa. I Rewinkel 0
Ii 0
0
I I 0
0
I
0
0
I I 0
I ~C II II I 0
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above ~ Check if None
Printed N arne and Title Melissa Rewinkel, Vice President of Federal Government Affairs
vS.O.Oj Page 3 of 10
L--------------_
Registrant MUTUAL OF OMAHA Client Name MUTUAL OF OMAHA
15. General issue area code HCR JIHealth Issues J (one per page)
H.R. 493/S.358 Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of2007

5.558 Mont'l H"lthPMity Act of2007
lI
.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies o Check if None o House III Senate o Other
_I
First Last Suffix
Melissa Rewinkel o
o
o
II ----l II I
o
I
r III
[
o
o
I I
I
! o
I !
~
C II ~I IIC o
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above [{] Check if None
___ i
v5.0.0j Page 4 of 10
L- -J
Registrant MUTUAL OF OMAHA Client :>lame MUTUAL OF OMAHA
15. General issue area code o

INS [Insurance

H.R. 2761-Terrorism Risk Insurance Revision and Extension Act of 2007
H.R.1810,S.1366
H.R.I081,S.6IS-lnsurance Industry Competition Act of 2007
SAOO- Michelle's Law
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies o Check if None [{] House [{] Senate o Other

First Last Sutlix
,---
Melissa Rewinkel 0
I
I 0
!
I 0
r I I 0
,
I 0
0
I
0
0
I II II II ~ 0
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above [{] Check if None
L _
ADDENDUM for General Lobbying Issue Area: II INS - Insurance_ ]
H.R.46 Small Business Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2007
H.R.2582 Qualified Long Term Care Fairness Act of2007
SAO National Insurance Act of 2007
S.558 Mental Health Parity Act of 2007
S.10101/H.R.2205 Retirement Security for Life Act of2007
Printed Narne and Title Melissa Rewinkel, Vice President of Federal Government Affairs
information as requested. Attach additional pagers) as needed.
15. General issue area code /MM~lMedicare/Medicaid ~ (one per page)
_~~I
H.R.2582 Qualified Long Term Care Fairness Act of2007
L~~~~~~~~__
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies o Check if None o House ~ Senate o Other
l _

First Last Suffix
Melissa Rewinkel 0
I 0
0
I 0
0
0
I 0
0
~
~
L IL II IL ~
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above o Check if None
____ J
Printed N arne and Title Melissa Rewinkel, Vice President of Federal Government Affairs _ I
vS.o.Oj Pal!e 7 of ~
15. General issue area code RET ] [Retirement J (one per page)
IH.R. 46 Small Business Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2007 I

S.1010/H.R.2205 Retirement Security for Life Act of 2007
J
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies o Check if None o House "?J Senate o Other

First Last Suffix
Melissa Rewinkel o
~ II
I
o
~ o
II
o
I o
I! I o
LJ
JL ][ lie o
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above [l] Check if None
vs.O.Oj Page 8 of]O
15. General issue area code TAX ~ (one per page)

I IITaxationJlnternal Revenue Code
~'R'181O'S'618'In,u"n"Indu>try Comp,tition Act of 2007
Senate and House Budget Resolutions(S.J.Res.1,H.J.Res.1,7,10,21,45)
H.R. 46 Small Business Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2007

I
H.R.2582 Qualified Long Term Care Fairness Act of 2007
-------------- I
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies 0 Check if None 0 House 0 Senate 0 Other
I~
I
I
J

First Last Suffix
-~--- -~
Melissa Rewinkel ~ C
I
I [J
0
I I 0
I ~ I
I D
I I D
I ,-----
I 0
I II 0
IL - - ~L JL~ L I 0
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above 0 Check if None
I
I
l
I
1_
vs.o.Oj Page 9 of]O
ADDENDUM for General Lobbying Issue Area: IT AX - Taxation/Internal Revenue Code
~
S.1010/H.R.220S Retirement Security for Life Act of2007
Printed Name and Title Melissa Rewinkel, Vice President of Federa! Government Affairs
Page 1
2 of 3 DOCUMENTS
States News Service
September 26, 2007 Wednesday
SENATE PASSES DOMENICI-COSPONSORED AMENDMENT TO

IMPROVE MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR TROOPS
BYLINE: States News Service
LENGTH: 555 words
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
The following information was released by New Mexico Senator Pete V. Domenici:
To begin improving mental health services for military personnel and their families, the Senate has approved
legislation cosponsored by U.S. Senator Pete Domenici to increase mental health reimbursement rates as a means of
ensuring greater access to mental health care.
Domenici is among the bipartisan sponsors of an amendment added to the FY2008 Defense Authorization Bill,
which is being debated by the Senate. The amendment was offered in response to reimbursement rate cuts for mental
health professionals who treat military personnel. It gives the Secretary of Defense the flexibility to increase mental
health reimbursement rates for TRICARE, the health care program for members of military and their families.
We increasingly understand that mental health issues are growing in frequency and severity, particularly with so
many serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The problem is that access to mental health services for our military personnel
and their families is inadequate. Cutting reimbursement rates has only compounded the problem. This amendment takes
an essential step to begin removing barriers to mental health care and treatment, Domenici said.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) earlier this year reduced its reimbursement rate for
psychologists and social workers by 9 percent. Because the Defense Department bases its reimbursement rates for
TRICARE providers on the rates designated by CMS, this rate reduction led to an equivalent decrease of 9 percent in
rates for mental health providers who treat military personnel and their families.
Since psychologists and social workers provide almost all of the TRICARE psychotherapy and testing services, this
cut in reimbursement rates has had the detrimental effect of limiting access to mental health care for soldiers and their
families. Many psychologists and social workers have indicated they may have to reduce their caseloads or leave the
TRICARE program altogether.
These reimbursement rates are critical, especially in large rural states like New Mexico where it is often more
difficult for people to access mental health professionals, said Domenici, a long-time mental health advocate who serves
on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.
The amendment, authored by Senator Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), was also cosponsored by Senators Blanche
Lincoln (D-Ark.), Kit Bond (R-Mo.) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). The Senate is attempting complete work on the
FY2008 Defense Authorization Bill this week.
Page 2
SENATE PASSES DOMENICI-COSPONSORED AMENDMENT TO IMPROVE MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR
TROOPS States News Service September 26, 2007 Wednesday
Last week, Domenici and Senator Ted Kennedy gained unanimous Senate approval of their Mental Health Parity
Act of 2007 (S.558), which would require health insurance plans that offer mental health coverage to provide that
coverage on par with financial and treatment coverage offered for other physical illnesses. It would improve coverage
for about 113 million Americans, including an estimated 478,000 New Mexicans.
In May, Domenici and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) introduced the Veterans Mental Health Access and Delivery
Act (S.38) to authorize the Veterans Affairs Secretary to develop and implement a comprehensive national program to
increase the availability of mental health support so that veterans affected by combat-related mental health problems get
care.
LOAD-DATE: October 11, 2007
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
PUBLICATION-TYPE: Newswire
Copyright 2007 States News Service

EXHIBIT 15
Query the Lobbying Disclosure Act Database http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=submitSearchRequest
Query the Lobbying Disclosure Act Database
Your Search Results
To view the filing details, please click on a row in the search results. The filing details will open in a new browser window.
You may also refine your search or perform a new search. For a description of the search results grid functionality, click here.
You searched for:

Client Name: Mutual of Omaha Government Entity Contacted: Veterans Affairs, Dept of (VA)
Disclosure Home
1 of 1 1/9/2009 10:31 AM
EXHIBIT 16
16MAR200606092872
PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION

2300 W. Plano Parkway
Plano, Texas 75075
Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders

Wednesday, May 10, 2006
3:00 p.m.—Central Daylight Time
Perot Systems Corporation

Plano Campus Cafeteria, West Lobby
2300 West Plano Parkway
Plano, Texas 75075
March 29, 2006
To Our Stockholders
On behalf of the Board of Directors, you are cordially invited to attend the 2006 Perot Systems
Corporation Annual Meeting of Stockholders. At the Annual Meeting, our stockholders will be voting on:
• the election of our directors;
• the adoption of the 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan and approval of the
reservation of shares under the plan;
• the ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm for 2006;
and
• any other business properly brought before the meeting.
Voting is limited to stockholders of record at the close of business on March 13, 2006.
If you plan to attend the meeting in person, please bring to the Annual Meeting one of the admission
tickets provided with these proxy materials.
Sincerely yours,
1MAR200610024426
Ross Perot, Jr.
Chairman
16MAR200606092872
PROXY STATEMENT
FOR
ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
Perot Systems Corporation is furnishing you this Proxy Statement on behalf of its Board of Directors
to solicit proxies for its Annual Meeting of Stockholders and any adjournments or postponements of the
Annual Meeting. We will hold the Annual Meeting at our Plano Campus Cafeteria, 2300 West Plano
Parkway, Plano, Texas on Wednesday, May 10, 2006, at 3:00 p.m. Central Daylight Time. We first mailed
these proxy materials to our stockholders on or about March 29, 2006.
PURPOSE OF MEETING
We are holding the Annual Meeting for the stockholders to elect our directors, adopt the 2006
Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan and approve the reservation of shares under the plan,
ratify the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm for 2006 and conduct any
other business that properly comes before the Annual Meeting.
VOTING AND SOLICITATION

Right to Vote and Record Date
Our Class A Common Stock, par value $.01 per share, is the only type of security entitled to vote at
the Annual Meeting. Each share of Class A Common Stock that you owned as of the close of business on
March 13, 2006, entitles you to one vote for each of the 11 nominees for director and one vote on each
other proposal properly brought before the Annual Meeting. On March 13, 2006, there were 118,219,239
shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding.
Quorum; Adjournment
The holders of at least a majority of the voting power of our issued and outstanding shares of Class A
Common Stock must be present, in person or by proxy, to constitute a quorum for the transaction of
business at the Annual Meeting. We count abstentions to determine whether a quorum exists for the
transaction of business. We also count broker non-votes, which we describe in more detail below, as shares
present or represented at the Annual Meeting for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists.
Voting at the Annual Meeting

If your shares of Class A Common Stock are registered directly with Mellon Investor Services, you are
a ‘‘record holder’’ and may vote in person at the Annual Meeting. If you hold your shares through a
broker, bank or other nominee, your shares are held in ‘‘street name’’ and you are the ‘‘beneficial holder.’’
If you hold your shares in street name, in order to vote in person at the Annual Meeting, you must obtain a
proxy from your broker, bank or other nominee.
1
Voting by Proxy
Whether or not you are able to attend the Annual Meeting, we urge you to vote by proxy.
Shares Held of Record

If you are a record holder, you can vote your shares using one of the following methods:
• via the Internet website shown on the proxy card,
• by telephone using the toll-free number shown on the proxy card, or
• by a completed and returned written proxy card.
We must receive votes submitted through the Internet or by telephone by 11:59 p.m., Eastern Daylight
Time, on May 9, 2006. Internet and telephone voting are available 24 hours a day, and if you use one of
those methods, you do not need to return a proxy card. Submitting your voting instructions by any of the
methods mentioned above will not affect your right to attend the Annual Meeting and vote in person.
If you vote by phone or via the Internet, please have your social security number and proxy or voting
instruction card available. The sequence of numbers appearing on your proxy card and your social security
number are necessary to verify your vote.
Shares Held in Street Name

If you hold your shares in street name, you should follow the directions provided by your broker or
bank regarding how to instruct your broker to vote your shares. Without instructions from you, your broker
or bank has discretion to vote your shares on ‘‘routine matters,’’ such as the election of directors and
ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting firm.
How the Proxy Holders Will Vote Your Proxy

The proxy holders will vote as you direct if you properly complete your proxy. If you submit a proxy
but do not provide directions on how to vote, your proxy will be voted as follows:
• FOR the nominees of the Board of Directors,
• FOR approval of the 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan and the reservation
of shares under the plan,
• FOR ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent
registered public accounting firm, and
• In the discretion of the proxy holders, with respect to any other matters that may properly come
before the Annual Meeting.
Changing Your Vote

You may revoke or change your proxy at any time before the Annual Meeting. The procedures for
changing your vote differ depending on how you own your shares. If you are a record holder of your Perot
Systems shares, you may change your vote by:
• submitting another proxy with a later date before the beginning of the Annual Meeting,
• sending a written notice of revocation to the Secretary of Perot Systems at 2300 West Plano
Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075 that is received before the beginning of the Annual Meeting, or
• attending the Annual Meeting and voting in person.
If you are a beneficial holder of your Perot Systems shares, you may change your vote by submitting
new voting instructions to your broker, bank or nominee.
2
Vote Required
Board of Directors
The 11 nominees receiving the highest number of affirmative votes will be elected directors of Perot
Systems and will serve until the next Annual Meeting or until their successors have been elected and
qualified or until their earlier resignation or removal. We do not have cumulative voting for the election of
directors.
Adoption of the 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan and Reservation of Shares
Under the Plan
Adoption of the 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan and reservation of shares
under the plan requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present or represented by proxy and
entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting.
Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Ratification of our independent registered public accounting firm requires the affirmative vote of a
majority of the shares present or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting.
Other Matters
Approval of other matters considered at the Annual Meeting generally require the affirmative vote of
a majority of the shares present or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. Our
Certificate of Incorporation requires a vote of 662⁄3% of the outstanding Class A Common Stock for
certain matters. As of the date of this proxy statement, no other matter for consideration at the Annual
Meeting has been submitted to Perot Systems.
Broker Non-Votes and Abstentions

A broker non-vote occurs when a broker holds shares in street name for a customer and the customer
does not direct the broker’s vote with respect to the approval of non-routine matters. With respect to the
election of directors and ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting
firm, a broker will have discretionary authority to vote the shares if the beneficial owner has not given
instructions. Without your instructions, a broker may not vote on the adoption of the 2006 Non-Employee
Director Equity Compensation Plan and reservation of shares under such plan.
Abstentions are counted as votes AGAINST for purposes of determining the approval of any matter
submitted to the stockholders for a vote.
Solicitation of Proxies
Perot Systems will pay all costs of the solicitation. We will furnish copies of solicitation material to
fiduciaries and custodians holding shares in street name that others beneficially own. We will conduct the
original solicitation by mail or, in cases where the stockholder has previously consented to electronic
delivery, by electronic means. We may supplement the original solicitation with a solicitation by telephone,
telegram, or other means by our directors, officers, or employees. We will not pay additional compensation
to these individuals for their services. We do not plan to solicit proxies by means other than those we have
described above.
3
PROPOSAL NO. 1
ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
General
Our bylaws provide that the number of our directors will not be less than one, with the exact number
to be fixed by the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors has fixed the number of directors at 11. We
are proposing the election of all 11 of our current directors to hold office for a term of one year, expiring at
the close of the 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders or when their successors are elected and qualified or
until their earlier resignation or removal. We have listed the nominees and their positions and offices with
Perot Systems below. The proxy holders will vote all duly executed proxies received for the nominees listed
below unless you instruct them otherwise. If any nominee is unable or declines to serve as a director at the
time of the Annual Meeting, the proxy holders will vote the proxies for any nominee designated by the
current Board to fill the vacancy, unless the Board reduces the number of directors to be elected at the
Annual Meeting. The Board is not aware of any nominee who is unable or who will decline to serve as a
director.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT THE STOCKHOLDERS VOTE ‘‘FOR’’ THE ELECTION OF EACH
OF THE DIRECTOR NOMINEES LISTED BELOW.
Directors and Their Business Experience

Ross Perot is Chairman Emeritus of the Board and has served as a director of Perot Systems since
November 1997. Mr. Perot served as Chairman of the Board from February 1998 until September 2004.
Mr. Perot is a founder of Perot Systems, served as Perot Systems’ President and Chief Executive Officer
from November 1997 through August 2000 and served as a director from April 1988 until August 1994.
Mr. Perot is currently a private investor. Mr. Perot is the father of Ross Perot, Jr. Age 75.
Ross Perot, Jr. has served as Chairman of the Board of Perot Systems since September 2004 and as a
director since June 1988. Mr. Perot served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Perot Systems from
September 2000 until September 2004. Mr. Perot is founder of Hillwood Development Company LLC.
Mr. Perot is the son of Ross Perot. Age 47.
Peter A. Altabef has served as President and Chief Executive Officer and as a director of Perot Systems
since September 2004. Mr. Altabef served as Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel of Perot
Systems from March 1996 until September 2004. Mr. Altabef became General Counsel in 1994 and a Vice
President in 1995. Age 46.
Steven Blasnik has served as a director of Perot Systems since September 1994. Mr. Blasnik has been
employed by Perot Investments, Inc., a private investment firm affiliated with our Chairman Emeritus,
Ross Perot, for more than five years. Mr. Blasnik also serves as President of Parkcentral Capital
Management LP, an investment firm controlled by the Perot Family Trust, and Hill Air Company, LLC,
which is wholly-owned by Ross Perot. Age 48.
John S.T. Gallagher has served as a director of Perot Systems since May 2001. Since November 2005,
Mr. Gallagher has served as director and Chief Executive of Stony Brook University Hospital.
Mr. Gallagher also serves as a director and member of the audit and compensation committees of
Netsmart Technologies, Inc. and as a director and audit committee member of American Medical Alert
Corp. Mr. Gallagher served as President and Chief Executive Officer of North Shore-Long Island Jewish
Health System from October 1997 through December 2001 and continues to serve on its Board of Trustees.
From January 2002 to November 2005, Mr. Gallagher served as Deputy County Executive of Health and
Human Services for Nassau County, New York. Age 74.
Carl Hahn has served as a director of Perot Systems since April 1993. Since June 1996, Mr. Hahn has
been a private investor. Mr. Hahn previously served as Chairman of Saurer Ltd., a manufacturer of textile
4
machines, and Chairman of the Board of Management of Volkswagen AG. Mr. Hahn also serves as a
director and member of the compensation committee of Hawesko AG and Indesit Company (formerly
known as Merloni Elettrodomestici Group). Mr. Hahn is also a professor of Industrial Strategies at the
University of Zwickau, Germany. Age 79.
DeSoto Jordan has served as a director of Perot Systems since February 2004. Since September 1999,
Mr. Jordan has been a private investor and Chairman of Afton Holdings, LLC. From 1988 to 1999,
Mr. Jordan served as Vice President of Perot Systems. Mr. Jordan also serves as a director and member of
the audit committee of Argan, Inc. Age 61.
Thomas Meurer has served as a director of Perot Systems since May 2001. Mr. Meurer is Senior Vice
President of Hunt Consolidated, Inc., director and President of Hunt Equities, Inc., and director and
Senior Vice President of Hunt Oil Company and has served as an officer and director of one or more of
the Hunt affiliated entities for over five years. Age 64.
Cecil H. (C. H.) Moore, Jr. has served as a director of Perot Systems since October 2003. Mr. Moore is
a private investor and has served on several public boards since his retirement from KPMG LLP in
June 2000. Mr. Moore is also a partner in Moore Holdings, Ltd., a family owned partnership. From
January 1990 until August 1999, he served as managing partner of the Dallas Business Unit and as an
International Liaison Partner of KPMG LLP. Mr. Moore is also a director and member of the audit
committee of NL Industries, Inc. and a director and chairman of the audit committee of Kronos
Worldwide, Inc. Age 66.
Anthony J. Principi has served as a director of Perot Systems since December 2005. Mr. Principi has
served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of QTC Management, Inc. since November 2005.
Mr. Principi is also a director and member of the audit committee of Mutual of Omaha Insurance
Company. Since March 2005, Mr. Principi has served as Chairman of the Defense Base Closure and
Realignment Commission. From January 2001 until January 2005, Mr. Principi was Secretary of the United
States Department of Veterans Affairs. From March 2005 until May 2005, Mr. Principi was Vice President
of Pfizer, Inc. Age 61.
Anuroop (Tony) Singh has served as a director of Perot Systems since March 2005. Mr. Singh has
served as Vice Chairman of Max New York Life Insurance Company Limited, a partnership between New
York Life International LLC and Max India Limited, since January 2005. Mr. Singh was CEO and
managing director of Max New York Life from October 2000 through December 2004. Mr. Singh also
served as a director of Max India Limited from October 2000 until September 2005. Age 52.
Board and Committee Meetings

The Board met six times in 2005. During 2005, each incumbent director, except for Ross Perot,
attended at least 75% of the Board meetings and meetings of all of the committees of which he was a
member. Mr. Perot attended four of six of the Board of Directors’ meetings held during 2005. Directors
are encouraged to attend the annual meetings of Perot Systems’ stockholders. Six members of the Board
attended the Company’s annual stockholders’ meeting in May 2005.
The Board has established the Audit Committee, Human Resources and Compensation Committee,
and Nominating and Governance Committee to assist in the discharge of the Board’s responsibilities.
Members of the committees serve until their successors are appointed or their earlier resignation or
removal.
The charters of the Audit, Human Resources and Compensation, and Nominating and Governance
Committees are publicly available at the Corporate Responsibility section of Perot Systems’ Web site
(www.perotsystems.com/responsibility). Perot Systems intends to disclose all substantive amendments to
these charters on this Web site. Stockholders may request a printed copy of any of these charters from
5
Perot Systems Corporation, Attn: Investor Relations, 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075,
telephone 1-877-737-6973.
Presiding Director for Executive Sessions of Non-Management Directors

The Board holds meetings of its non-management directors quarterly. The presiding director for these
meetings rotates January 1 of each year according to the alphabetical order of each non-management
director’s last name. Mr. Gallagher served in this position during fiscal 2005. Mr. Hahn is the presiding
director for 2006. Stockholders and other interested parties may express any concerns regarding Perot
Systems’ business practices to the presiding director or to the non-management directors as a group by
sending a written communication to Perot Systems Corporation, Attn: Non-Management Directors/
Corporate Secretary, 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075 or by calling our Confidential Hotline
(1-800-753-9173) and requesting that the information be provided to the non-management directors.
Audit Committee
The Audit Committee consists of C. H. Moore, Jr., Carl Hahn, and John S.T. Gallagher. Mr. Moore,
the Chairman of the Audit Committee, was appointed to the Audit Committee in December 2003.
Messrs. Hahn and Gallagher were appointed in December 1994 and May 2001, respectively. The Audit
Committee met eight times in 2005. All members of the Audit Committee satisfy the requirements of
independence as set forth in the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and Perot Systems’
Director Independence Standard, and are independent within the meaning of the applicable regulations of
the Securities and Exchange Commission. C. H. Moore, Jr. is qualified as an audit committee financial
expert within the meaning of the Securities and Exchange Commission regulations, and the Board has
determined that he has accounting and related financial management expertise within the meaning of the
listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange.
The Audit Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its responsibility for oversight of the quality and
integrity of the accounting, auditing, and financial reporting practices of Perot Systems. The Audit
Committee does not prepare financial statements or perform audits, and its members are not auditors or
certifiers of Perot Systems’ financial statements. A charter, that the Board reassesses annually, governs the
Audit Committee’s activities.
The Audit Committee’s primary responsibilities and duties are to review and discuss with our outside
independent registered public accounting firm our financial statements and the professional services they
provide, including the scope of their audit coverage, the independent registered public accounting firm’s
reports to management and management’s responses to such reports, and the independence of the
accounting firm from our management. In addition, the Audit Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its
oversight responsibilities with respect to legal and regulatory compliance matters. The Audit Committee
also reviews and discusses with management the scope of our internal audits, summaries of the internal
auditors’ reports and activities, the effectiveness of our internal audit staff, certain possible violations of
our Standards and Ethical Principles, and such other matters with respect to our accounting, auditing, and
financial reporting practices and procedures as it may find appropriate or as have been brought to its
attention. In addition, the Board has delegated to the Audit Committee the authority to select Perot
Systems’ independent registered public accounting firm for each fiscal year.
Human Resources and Compensation Committee

The Human Resources and Compensation Committee consists of Carl Hahn, DeSoto Jordan, Thomas
Meurer and Anuroop (Tony) Singh. Mr. Hahn, the Chairman of the Human Resources and Compensation
Committee, was appointed to the committee in March 2002. Messrs. Meurer, Jordan and Singh were
appointed in March 2002, February 2004, and June 2005, respectively. The Human Resources and
Compensation Committee met five times in 2005.
6
All members of the committee satisfy the requirements of independence as set forth in the listing
standards of the New York Stock Exchange and Perot Systems’ Director Independence Standard. The
primary responsibilities of the committee are to assist the Board of Directors in discharging its
responsibilities relating to the compensation of our associates, to review and make final determinations
with respect to the compensation of the Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer, and to review and
make recommendations to the Board of Directors on the compensation of other executive officers and
outside directors, bonus and retirement plans, the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the 2001
Long-Term Incentive Plan. In discharging these responsibilities, the committee was advised by our Human
Resources organization. In addition, the committee has engaged an independent compensation consultant
as its advisor.
Nominating and Governance Committee

The Nominating and Governance Committee consists of Thomas Meurer, John S.T. Gallagher, and
DeSoto Jordan. Mr. Meurer, the Chairman of the Nominating and Governance Committee, was appointed
to the committee in June 2003. Messrs. Gallagher and Jordan were appointed to the Nominating and
Governance Committee in June 2003 and February 2004, respectively. The committee met four times in
2005.
The Board of Directors established the Nominating and Governance Committee to assist the Board in
shaping the corporate governance of Perot Systems, including the composition of the Board and its
committees. The Nominating and Governance Committee identifies and recommends to the full Board all
candidates for election as a director. The committee also recommends corporate governance principles for
Perot Systems.
Each member of the Nominating and Governance Committee satisfies the requirements of
independence set forth in the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange and Perot Systems’
Director Independence Standard. The Director Independence Standard is publicly available at the
Corporate Responsibility section of Perot Systems’ Web site (www.perotsystems.com/responsibility).
Director Independence
Pursuant to the Director Independence Standard, the Board reviewed each director’s independence in
February 2006. As a result of this review, the Board affirmatively determined that each director standing
for election at the Annual Meeting, except Ross Perot, Ross Perot, Jr., Peter Altabef and Steven Blasnik,
has no material relationship with Perot Systems (either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an
organization that has a relationship with Perot Systems) and is independent of Perot Systems and its
management under the Director Independence Standard, the listing standards of the New York Stock
Exchange currently in effect and, with respect to members of the Audit Committee, applicable regulations
of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
In connection with Mr. Meurer’s independence determination, the Board examined the personal
relationships between Mr. Meurer and the Perot family. These relationships include Mr. Meurer’s service
as an unpaid trustee or co-trustee for 13 trusts that benefit members of Ross Perot’s family, including Ross
Perot, Jr. One of these trusts is a limited partner, which owns approximately 56.4% of the economic
interest in HWGA, Ltd., a limited partnership having Ross Perot and Ross Perot, Jr. as its sole general
partners. HWGA owns 31,705,000 shares of the Company’s Class A Common Stock. However, as a limited
partner, the trust does not possess, either directly or indirectly, (i) the power to direct or cause the
direction of management and policies of HWGA or (ii) voting or dispositive power over the Class A
Common Stock owned by HWGA. Five of the remaining trusts, one of which has Ross Perot, Jr. as its
principal beneficiary, own an aggregate of 136,800 shares (27,360 shares each) of the Company’s Class A
Common Stock. After considering all relevant facts and circumstances, the Board determined
Mr. Meurer’s relationships were not material and do not impair the independence of Mr. Meurer.
7
In connection with Mr. Gallagher’s independence determination, the Board examined Mr. Gallagher’s
service as a Life Trustee on the 130-member board of trustees for North Shore—Long Island Jewish
Health System, a former client of Perot Systems, and his former service as its Chief Executive Officer.
After considering all relevant facts and circumstances, the Board determined that Mr. Gallagher’s
relationships were not material and do not impair the independence of Mr. Gallagher.
In connection with Mr. Jordan’s independence determination, the Board examined Mr. Jordan’s role
as a founder of the Company and his employment by the Company until his retirement in 1999. The Board
also considered a personal loan made by Ross Perot to Mr. Jordan, which was repaid in 1999. After
considering all relevant facts and circumstances, the Board determined that Mr. Jordan’s relationships
were not material and do not impair the independence of Mr. Jordan.
Stockholder Nominations and Nominee Review Process

The Nominating and Governance Committee will consider director candidates recommended by
Perot Systems’ stockholders. Perot Systems’ Director Qualification Guidelines are publicly available at the
Corporate Responsibility section of Perot Systems’ Web site (www.perotsystems.com/responsibility). Perot
Systems stockholders who wish to recommend a director candidate should mail the candidate’s resume,
together with a letter from the candidate confirming his or her interest in serving as a director of Perot
Systems, to Perot Systems Corporation, Attn: Nominating and Governance Committee/Corporate
Secretary, 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075.
Once the Nominating and Governance Committee has identified a prospective candidate, the
committee makes an initial determination as to whether to conduct a full evaluation of the candidate. This
initial determination is based on the candidate’s resume, as well as the Nominating and Governance
Committee’s own knowledge of the prospective candidate, which may be supplemented by inquiries to the
person making the recommendation or others. The initial determination is also based on the likelihood
that the prospective candidate meets the standards and qualifications set forth in the Perot Systems’
Director Qualification Guidelines, which include:
• the ability of the prospective candidate to represent the interests of the stockholders of Perot
Systems;
• the highest personal and professional ethics, integrity and values;
• broad-based skills and experience at an executive, policy-making level in business, government or
technology areas relevant to Perot Systems’ activities;
• a global business perspective;
• a willingness to devote sufficient time to become knowledgeable about Perot Systems’ business and
to carry out his or her duties and responsibilities effectively;
• a commitment to serve on the Board for five years or more at the time of his or her initial election;
and
• the extent to which the prospective candidate contributes to the expertise of the Board.
The Nominating and Governance Committee also considers such other relevant factors as it deems
appropriate, including the composition of the Board, the balance of management and independent
directors, and financial or industry expertise. If the Nominating and Governance Committee determines
that the candidate is qualified and interested, the committee coordinates a series of interviews between the
candidate and appropriate directors, officers and other senior managers of Perot Systems. After
conducting their evaluation, the Nominating and Governance Committee makes a recommendation to the
full Board as to the persons who should be nominated by the Board, and the Board determines the
nominees after considering the recommendation and report of the committee.
8
Directors (other than executive officers) standing for election by our security holders for the first time
and the source of recommendations for such directors are as follows:
Director Nominee Recommended By
Anthony J. Principi . . . . . . . . . . . Security holder and non-management director
Communications with Directors

Stockholders and other interested parties may send communications to the Board of Directors, the
Audit Committee, and the Nominating and Governance Committee at the addresses set forth in the table
below. Perot Systems’ Secretary is responsible for forwarding to appropriate directors all written
communications addressed to the Board or its committees. In addition, transcripts of calls to Perot
Systems’ Confidential Hotline relating to accounting and financial matters are forwarded to the members
of the Audit Committee.
Directors Address
Board of Directors . . . . . . . . . . . By mail: Perot Systems Corporation

Attn: Board of Directors/Corporate Secretary
Plano, TX 75075
Audit Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . By mail: Perot Systems Corporation
Attn: Audit Committee/Corporate Secretary
Plano, TX 75075
By e-mail: PSC-AuditCommittee@ps.net
Telephone: +1 (800) 753-9173 (Confidential Hotline)
Nominating and Governance
Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . By mail: Perot Systems Corporation
Attn: Nominating and Governance Committee/Corporate
Secretary
Plano, TX 75075
Individual Directors . . . . . . . . . . By mail: Perot Systems Corporation
Attn: Name of Director/Corporate Secretary
Plano, TX 75075
Director Compensation
Each of the non-employee directors (other than Ross Perot) receives a $45,000 annual retainer
payable in quarterly installments. These non-employee directors have the option to receive all or part of
the retainer in the Company’s Class A Common Stock, which is valued at the closing price of our Class A
Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the last trading day of the fiscal quarter preceding the
quarter with respect to which payment is due. Prior to January 1, 2006, any annual retainer paid in the
Company’s Class A Common Stock, was valued at the closing price of our Class A Common Stock on the
New York Stock Exchange on the last trading day of the quarter with respect to which payment was due. In
2005, additional retainers for the Chairman of the Audit Committee and the Human Resources and
Compensation Committee were $5,000 and $3,000, respectively. Beginning in 2006, the additional retainers
for the Chairman of the Audit Committee and the Human Resources and Compensation Committee were
9
increased to $12,000 and $5,000, respectively, and a retainer for the Chairman of the Nominating and
Governance Committee was established at $5,000. During 2005, Perot Systems also compensated each of
its non-employee directors (other than Ross Perot) $2,000 for each meeting of the Board and committee of
the Board attended in person or by telephone. In the event that a director attended multiple meetings of
the Board and its committees on the same or consecutive days, each of the non-employee directors were
compensated a total of $2,000 for all such meetings. As of January 1, 2006, each non-employee director
(other than Ross Perot) will be compensated $2,000 for each meeting of the Board of Directors attended in
person or by telephone and $1,000 for each committee meeting attended in person or by telephone
(including meetings held in conjunction with Board meetings). We reimburse our directors for their
reasonable travel-related and other out-of-pocket expenses associated with attending Board and
committee meetings. Ross Perot receives no compensation for his services.
Perot Systems’ 1996 Non-Employee Director Plan provides for the issuance of nonqualified stock
options or restricted stock to our non-employee directors (other than Ross Perot). The Board administers
the Non-Employee Director Plan and has the authority to interpret it. Directors who are not employees of
Perot Systems are eligible to receive awards under the Non-Employee Director Plan. The Non-Employee
Director Plan currently provides for a grant to each eligible director of (i) an option to purchase 8,000
shares of Class A Common Stock vesting one year after the date of grant or (ii) the right to purchase 8,000
restricted shares of Class A Common Stock vesting one year after the date of grant. The exercise price of
options or the purchase price of restricted shares of Class A Common Stock must be at least equal to 100%
of the fair market value of the Class A Common Stock on the date of the award. Perot Systems makes
grants to new directors upon their initial election to the Board and to existing directors at completion of
the original vesting schedule for any existing options or restricted shares granted to such director under the
Non-Employee Director Plan. If the 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan is approved
at the 2006 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, the 1996 Non-Employee Director Plan will automatically
terminate, except with respect to outstanding awards.
During 2005, our non-employee directors earned the following compensation (in addition to grants of
options under the Non-Employee Director Plan):
Steven Blasnik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,012 and 3,218 shares of Class A Common Stock

John S. T. Gallagher . . . . . . . . . . $61,000
Carl Hahn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $23,012 and 3,218 shares of Class A Common Stock
DeSoto Jordan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $59,000
Thomas Meurer . . . . . . . . . . . . . $14,012 and 3,218 shares of Class A Common Stock
C. H. Moore, Jr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $68,000
Anthony J. Principi(1) . . . . . . . . . $2,096
Anuroop (Tony) Singh(2) . . . . . . $10,021 and 2,628 shares of Class A Common Stock
(1) Mr. Principi was appointed as a director on December 14, 2005.

(2) Mr. Singh was appointed as a director on March 3, 2005.
10
Corporate Governance Principles
Code of Conduct
Perot Systems has adopted Standards & Ethical Principles to assist its directors, executive officers and
other employees to recognize and deal with ethical issues in business situations, to provide mechanisms to
report unethical conduct, and to promote a culture of honesty and accountability.
The Standards & Ethical Principles are publicly available at the Corporate Responsibility section of
Perot Systems’ Web site (www.perotsystems.com/responsibility). Stockholders may request a printed copy of
these guidelines, without charge, from Perot Systems Corporation, Attn: Investor Relations, 2300 West
Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075, telephone 1-877-737-6973.
Perot Systems intends to disclose all substantive amendments to the Standards & Ethical Principles on
its Web site. In addition, Perot Systems intends to disclose waivers, if any, granted to any of its directors or
to its Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Controller and any other executive officer on its
Web site.
Governance Guidelines
Perot Systems has corporate governance guidelines. These guidelines are publicly available at the
Corporate Responsibility section of Perot Systems’ Web site (www.perotsystems.com/responsibility). Perot
Systems intends to disclose all substantive amendments to these guidelines on this Web site. Stockholders
may request a printed copy of these guidelines, without charge, from Perot Systems Corporation, Attn:
Investor Relations, 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075, telephone 1-877-737-6973.
PROPOSAL NO. 2
APPROVAL OF THE 2006 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN
On December 14, 2005, the Board adopted the 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation
Plan (the ‘‘Plan’’), subject to stockholder approval.
The Plan
Non-employee directors (other than Ross Perot) are the only persons who would be eligible to
participate in the Plan. The class of persons eligible to participate currently consists of eight directors. Up
to 500,000 shares of the Company’s Class A Common Stock may be issued pursuant to the Plan, subject to
adjustment for stock splits, dividends, recapitalizations, share combinations, and other changes affecting
the outstanding Class A Common Stock. The Plan would expire no later than May 31, 2016.
The Plan provides for a grant to each eligible non-employee director of 5,000 shares of Class A
Common Stock on each June 1 that the director is serving as a member of the Board of Directors,
beginning June 1, 2006. Non-employee directors first elected to the Board of Directors following the
approval of the Plan by the stockholders will receive an initial grant that is a prorated portion of the 5,000
share annual grant. The shares would be immediately vested. Directors would have the option to
irrevocably defer the receipt of shares received under the Plan to the date that the director’s service
terminates.
The Plan is attached as Annex 1 to this Proxy Statement.
11
The annual benefits that the non-employee directors as a group are eligible to receive are as follows:
New Plan Benefits

2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan
Position Dollar Value ($) Number of Units
Non-Executive Director Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $611,600(1) 40,000 shares(2)
(1) Based on the closing price of $15.29 per share of the Company’s Class A Common Stock on the New
York Stock Exchange on March 1, 2006.
(2) Shares of Class A Common Stock.
Upon receiving stockholder approval of the Plan, Perot Systems will terminate its 1996 Non-Employee
Director Stock Option/Restricted Stock Plan, except with respect to outstanding awards. Perot Systems has
not granted any awards under the Plan.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT THE STOCKHOLDERS VOTE ‘‘FOR’’ THE APPROVAL OF THE
2006 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN AND THE RESERVATION OF
SHARES TO BE ISSUED UNDER THE PLAN.
PROPOSAL NO. 3
RATIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Audit Committee has selected PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the independent registered public
accounting firm to perform the audit of our financial statements for 2006. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
was our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ended December 31, 2005.
We are asking our stockholders to ratify the selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers as our independent
registered public accounting firm. Although ratification is not required, the Board is submitting the
selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers to our stockholders for ratification as a matter of good corporate
practice. Even if the selection is ratified, the Audit Committee in its discretion may select a different
independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if it determines that such a
change would be in the best interests of Perot Systems and our stockholders.
PricewaterhouseCoopers’ representatives are expected to attend the 2006 Annual Meeting. They will
have an opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so and will be available to respond to
appropriate stockholder questions.
Fees Paid to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

The following table shows the aggregate fees PricewaterhouseCoopers has billed or is expected to bill
to Perot Systems for services rendered in 2005 and 2004.
Audit Audit Related All Other

Year Fees(1) Fees(2) Tax Fees(3) Fees(4) Total
2005(5) $2,536,629 $143,585 $267,968 $1,599 $2,949,781

2004 $2,931,110 $ 42,986 $415,143 $1,624 $3,390,863
(1) Fees for our annual audit and review of interim financial statements, various statutory audits, and
consultations on accounting for existing transactions.
(2) Fees for services including audits of an employee benefit plan, audits in connection with acquisitions,
and consultations on the accounting for prospective transactions.
12
(3) Fees for compliance and tax advisory services.
(4) Subscription fee to an online accounting research tool.
(5) Amounts include estimates that have not been billed.
In 2005, all audit related services, tax services and other services were pre-approved by the Audit
Committee or its Chairman. The Audit Committee concluded that the provision of such services by
PricewaterhouseCoopers was compatible with the maintenance of that firm’s independence in the conduct
of its auditing functions. See ‘‘Report of Audit Committee.’’ Our policy restricting the engagement of our
independent registered public accounting firm requires that all audit, review and attestation services must
be approved by the Audit Committee prior to Perot Systems engaging the audit firm.
In addition, our policy regarding the engagement of our independent registered public accounting
firm provides that the Audit Committee or its Chairman may pre-approve engagement of the accounting
firm for services in designated areas for fees that do not exceed the pre-approved limit. For 2006, the Audit
Committee has approved the following types of services:
• Audit Related Services—pension and benefit plan audits, separate audit reports on subsidiaries,
other statutory reports not included in audit services, and advice on generally accepted accounting
principles applicable to prospective transactions and business combinations.
• Tax Services—tax accounting advice on international, federal, and state tax matters, assistance with
tax examinations, tax advice on prospective transactions and business combinations and compliance
reviews.
• Other Services—annual subscription fee for accounting research tool.
Our policy requires quarterly reports to the Audit Committee on billings for pre-approved services.
All amounts in excess of pre-approved amounts for these services must be specifically approved by the
Chairman of the Audit Committee and reported to the full Audit Committee no later than its next regular
meeting.
The Audit Committee or its Chairman may also approve specific engagements for non-audit services.
Following such approval, Perot Systems may engage the auditor to perform those services. Any approval by
the Chairman must be reported to the full Audit Committee no later than its next regular meeting.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT THE STOCKHOLDERS VOTE ‘‘FOR’’ THE RATIFICATION OF
THE APPOINTMENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP.
13
STOCK OWNERSHIP OF PRINCIPAL STOCKHOLDERS
AND MANAGEMENT
The following table shows the number of shares of Common Stock beneficially owned as of March 13,
2006 by:
• each person who we know beneficially owns more than 5% of our common stock;
• each director;
• the Chief Executive Officer and the other executive officers required to be named in the Summary
Compensation Table; and
• all executive officers and directors as a group.
Class A Common Stock

Number of Shares Percent
Beneficially of
Owned(1) Ownership(1)
Executive Officers and Directors

Peter Altabef(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 291,919 *
James Champy(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 1,021,286 *
Russell Freeman(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 273,473 *
Charles A. Lyles(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 129,961 *
David Sanders(6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 9,000 *
Steven Blasnik(7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 99,065 *
John S.T. Gallagher(8) . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 32,000 *
Carl Hahn(9) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 118,065 *
DeSoto Jordan(10) . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 216,000 *
Thomas Meurer(11) . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 181,865 *
C. H. Moore, Jr.(12) . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 16,000 *
Ross Perot(13) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 31,763,100 26.9%
Ross Perot, Jr.(14) . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 32,880,000 27.5%
Anthony J. Principi . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . — —
Anuroop (Tony) Singh(15) . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . . . . 11,423 *
All Executive Officers and Directors as a Group
(21 Persons)(16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ........... 35,560,443 29.5%
Additional 5% Beneficial Owners
Royce & Associates, LLC(17) . . . . . .................. 11,153,300 9.6%
Wachovia Corporation(18) . . . . . . . . .................. 6,240,094 5.4%
* Less than 1%
(1) Percentages are based on the total number of shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding at
March 13, 2006, plus the total number of outstanding options and warrants held by each person that
are exercisable within 60 days of such date. We do not consider shares of Class A Common Stock
issuable upon exercise of outstanding options and warrants to be outstanding for purposes of
computing the percentage ownership of any other person. Except as indicated in the footnotes to this
table, other than shared property rights created under joint tenancy or marital property laws between
our directors and executive officers and their respective spouses, each stockholder named in the table
has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares of Class A Common Stock set forth
opposite such stockholder’s name. The shares of Class A Common Stock listed include shares held by
our Retirement Savings Plan and Trust for the benefit of the named individuals. Participants in the
plan have investment and voting power over shares held for their benefit.
14
(2) Includes 152,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Altabef has the right to acquire upon the
exercise of vested options.
(3) Includes 200,000 shares of Class A Common Stock the Champy Family Irrevocable Trust, of which
Mr. Champy is a trustee, holds. As trustee, Mr. Champy shares voting and investment power with
respect to the shares of Class A Common Stock the Champy Trust holds and, therefore, the table
shows him as the beneficial owner of such shares of Class A Common Stock. Includes 46,000 shares of
Class A Common Stock that Mr. Champy has the right to acquire upon the exercise of vested options.
(4) Includes 245,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Freeman has the right to acquire upon the
(5) Includes 122,100 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Lyles has the right to acquire upon the
(6) Includes 6,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Sanders has the right to acquire upon the
(7) Includes 84,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Blasnik has the right to acquire upon the
exercise of vested options and 6,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Blasnik’s spouse holds.
Mr. Blasnik disclaims beneficial ownership of the shares that his spouse holds.
(8) Includes 32,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Gallagher has the right to acquire upon the
(9) Includes 24,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Hahn has the right to acquire upon the
(10) Includes 16,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Jordan has the right to acquire upon the
(11) Includes 136,800 shares owned by Perot Investment Trusts I—V of which Mr. Meurer is trustee. As
trustee, Mr. Meurer has voting and investment power with respect to the shares of Class A Common
Stock held by the Trusts and, therefore, the table shows him as the beneficial owner of such shares of
Class A Common Stock. Also includes 32,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Meurer has
the right to acquire upon the exercise of vested options.
(12) Includes 16,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Moore has the right to acquire upon the
(13) Includes 31,705,000 shares owned by HWGA, Ltd.; 10,000 shares owned by The Perot Foundation;
4,000 shares owned by Petrus Financial Services Limited, a Texas limited partnership; and 100 shares
owned by Ross Perot’s spouse with respect to which Mr. Perot disclaims beneficial ownership. Ross
Perot, our Chairman Emeritus, is the managing general partner of HWGA. Ross Perot has voting and
investment power over shares owned by HWGA. Ross Perot, Jr., Chairman of Perot Systems, is a
general partner of HWGA and has authority to manage HWGA if Ross Perot ceases to be managing
general partner of HWGA. Accordingly, the table also shows Ross Perot, Jr. beneficially owning the
shares that HWGA owns. Mr. Perot is a director and officer of The Perot Foundation. Petrus
Financial Services Limited is an affiliate of Ross Perot. The address for Ross Perot, HWGA, The
Perot Foundation and Petrus Financial Services Limited is P.O. Box 269014, Plano, Texas 75026-9014.
(14) Includes 31,705,000 shares of Class A Common Stock owned by HWGA, Ltd.; 10,000 shares owned by
The Perot Foundation; 5,000 shares owned by Ross Perot, Jr.’s spouse; and 1,160,000 shares that Ross
Perot, Jr. has the right to acquire upon the exercise of vested options. Mr. Perot disclaims beneficial
ownership of the shares his spouse holds. Ross Perot, Jr. is a general partner of HWGA. Ross Perot,
our Chairman Emeritus, is the managing general partner of HWGA. If Ross Perot ceases to be
managing general partner, Ross Perot, Jr. will have authority to manage HWGA. Accordingly, the
15
table also shows Ross Perot beneficially owning the shares that HWGA owns. Ross Perot, Jr. is a
director of The Perot Foundation. The address for Ross Perot, Jr. is 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano,
Texas 75075, and the address of HWGA and The Perot Foundation is P.O. Box 269014, Plano, Texas
75026-9014.
(15) Includes 8,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that Mr. Singh has the right to acquire upon the
(16) In addition to the 15 listed executive officers and directors, Darcy Anderson, James C. Ballard, John
King, Padma Ravichander, Jeff Renzi and Thomas D. Williams are executive officers and are
therefore included in the group of 21 persons. Includes 2,159,800 shares of Class A Common Stock
that the Executive Officers and Directors have the right to acquire upon the exercise of vested
options.
(17) This data is based on information contained in Amendment No. 3 to Schedule 13G filed by Royce &
Associates, LLC with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 31, 2006. The address for
Royce & Associates, LLC is 1414 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10019.
(18) This data is based on information contained in Amendment No. 2 to Schedule 13G filed by Wachovia
Corporation with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 10, 2006. The address for
Wachovia Corporation is One Wachovia Center, Charlotte, North Carolina 28288-0137.
16
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Summary of Cash and Certain Other Compensation
The Summary Compensation Table below shows compensation for the years 2005, 2004, and 2003 for
the Chief Executive Officer and the four other most highly compensated executive officers who were
serving as executive officers at the end of 2005 (the ‘‘named executive officers’’).
Summary Compensation Table
Long Term Compensation Awards

Annual Compensation Restricted Securities LTIP All Other
Salary Bonus Other Stock Awards Underlying Payouts Compensation
Name and Principal Position Year ($) ($)(1) ($)(2) ($)(3) Options ($) ($)(4)
Peter Altabef . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2005 533,335 550,000 — 681,500 100,000 — 8,400
President and Chief Executive 2004 389,504 661,000 — 1,593,000 100,000 — 8,200
Officer(5) 2003 341,744 210,000 — 263,000 40,000 — 8,000
James Champy . . . . . . . . . . . . 2005 566,453 270,000 9,974 136,300 20,000 — 25,400
Vice President 2004 557,238 492,000 10,022 238,950 30,000 — 21,200
2003 546,312 130,000 10,022 263,000 40,000 — 25,000
Russell Freeman . . . . . . . . . . . 2005 380,169 340,000 — 306,675 45,000 — 8,400
Vice President and Chief 2004 357,000 548,000 — 358,425 45,000 — 8,200
Financial Officer 2003 350,000 210,000 — 263,000 40,000 — 8,000
Charles A. Lyles . . . . . . . . . . . 2005 373,334 330,000 — 204,450 30,000 — 8,400
Vice President 2004 319,791 420,000 — 258,863 32,500 — 8,200
2003 241,901 100,000 — 82,188 12,500 — 61,000
David Sanders . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2005 383,335 235,000 — 204,450 30,000 — 8,400
Vice President(6) 2004 47,501 50,000 — — 30,000 — —
2003 — — — — — — —
(1) Bonus amounts shown for 2005 include bonuses earned in 2005 and paid in 2006. Mr. Sanders’ bonus for 2005
includes $75,000 paid as a signing bonus. Bonus amounts shown for 2004 include bonuses earned in 2004 and paid
in 2005. Mr. Altabef’s bonus for 2004 comprises $374,000 paid with respect to service as our General Counsel and
$287,000 paid with respect to service as our President and Chief Executive Officer. The bonus paid to Mr. Sanders
in 2004 was a signing bonus. Bonus amounts shown for 2003 include bonuses earned in 2003 and paid in 2004.
Bonuses for 2003 include $70,000 outside of the annual bonus plan for each of Messrs. Altabef and Freeman
related to performance with respect to special projects.
(2) Represents the payment of taxes related to the life insurance premiums referenced in Note 4 to this table.
(3) Represents restricted stock unit awards in the designated year. These restricted stock unit awards vest in five
equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the grant. Vesting is contingent upon satisfaction of
individual performance requirements. At December 31, 2005, the aggregate number and value of all unvested
restricted stock units owned by the named executive officers were as follows: Mr. Altabef owned 142,000 units
representing the right to receive Class A Common Stock with a value of $2,007,880; Mr. Champy owned 34,000
units representing the right to receive Class A Common Stock with a value of $480,760; Mr. Freeman owned
52,500 units representing the right to receive Class A Common Stock with a value of $742,350; Mr. Lyles owned
31,750 units representing the right to receive Class A Common Stock with a value of $448,945; and Mr. Sanders
owned 27,000 units representing the right to receive Class A Common Stock with a value of $381,780. In addition,
at December 31, 2005, Mr. Champy owned 100,000 restricted shares of Class A Common Stock with a value (less
the amount paid therefor) of $1,289,000 that were issued under our 1988 Restricted Stock Plan. These restricted
shares represent the final installment in an award that vests in equal installments over 10 years with vesting
beginning in 1997. Holders of restricted stock and restricted stock units are entitled to a pro rata distribution of
any dividends paid by Perot Systems on the Class A Common Stock.
17
(4) In 2005, represents (i) $17,000 in life insurance premiums paid for the benefit of Mr. Champy, and (ii) $8,400 in
contributions to our 401(k) plan for the benefit of each of the named executive officers. In 2004, represents
(i) $13,000 in life insurance premiums paid for the benefit of Mr. Champy, and (ii) $8,200 in contributions to our
401(k) plan for the benefit of each named executive officer except Mr. Sanders. In 2003, represents (i) $17,000 in
life insurance premiums paid for the benefit of Mr. Champy, (ii) $53,000 in commissions paid to Mr. Lyles, and
(iii) $8,000 in contributions to our 401(k) plan for the benefit of each named executive officer except Mr. Sanders.
(5) Mr. Altabef served as Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary until his appointment as President and
Chief Executive Officer on September 22, 2004.
(6) Mr. Sanders joined Perot Systems in November 2004.
Stock Option Grants

The following table provides information relating to option grants in 2005 to the named executive
officers. All options are exercisable for Class A Common Stock pursuant to the Company’s existing stock
option plans and are non-qualified stock options.
Option Grants in Last Fiscal Year

Individual Grants Potential Realized
Value at Assumed
Number of Percent of Annual Rates of Stock
Securities Total Options Price Appreciation
Underlying Granted to Exercise for Option Term(1)
Options Employees in Price Expiration
Name Granted Fiscal Year ($/Sh) Date 5% ($) 10% ($)
Peter Altabef(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000 2.66% $13.63 10/13/12 $554,878 $1,293,101

James Champy(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000 0.53% $13.63 10/13/12 $110,976 $ 258,620
Russell Freeman(2) . . . . . . . . . . . 45,000 1.20% $13.63 10/13/12 $249,695 $ 581,896
Charles A. Lyles(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,000 0.80% $13.63 10/13/12 $166,463 $ 387,930
David Sanders(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,000 0.80% $13.63 10/13/12 $166,463 $ 387,930
(1) These amounts represent assumed rates of appreciation in value from the date of grant until the end
of the option term, at the rates set by the Securities and Exchange Commission and, therefore, are not
intended to forecast possible future appreciation, if any, in the shares of Class A Common Stock.
(2) Grant vests in five equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the grant.
Option Exercises and Holdings

The following table provides information regarding exercises of stock options by named executive
officers during 2005.
Aggregated Option Exercises in Last Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year-End Option Values
Number of Securities Value of Unexercised

Class A Underlying Unexercised in-the-Money Options at
Shares Options at Fiscal Year-End Fiscal Year-End
Acquired on Value
Name Exercise(#) Realized($) Exercisable(#) Unexercisable(#) Exercisable($) Unexercisable($)
Peter Altabef . . . . . . . . . . — — 152,000 297,000 134,400 480,660

James Champy . . . . . . . . — — 46,000 84,000 124,080 106,120
Russell Freeman . . . . . . . — — 273,000 237,000 715,890 585,130
Charles A. Lyles . . . . . . . 2,000 $10,790 143,700 112,100 161,984 109,273
David Sanders . . . . . . . . . — — 6,000 54,000 — 15,3000
18
Employment Contracts and Change in Control Agreements
Change-in-Control and Severance Agreements
We have entered into change-in-control and severance agreements with each of the named executive
officers. The agreements continue through December 31, 2007, and provide that they are to be
automatically extended in one-year increments unless we give prior notice of termination.
These agreements are intended to provide for continuity of management in the event of a change in
control. The agreements provide that the covered executive officers could be entitled to certain severance
benefits following a change in control (as described below) of Perot Systems. If, during a specified period
following such a change in control, the executive officer is terminated for any reason, other than for cause
(as defined in the agreements), or if such executive officer terminates his or her employment for a
specified reason (as defined in the agreements), then the executive officer would be entitled to:
• cash severance payments equivalent to two times the sum of the executive officer’s base salary in
effect at the time of termination;
• cash severance payments equivalent to two times a prescribed incentive payment allowance (based
on a fixed percentage—ranging from 50% to 100%—of the executive officer’s base salary) for the
year in which termination occurs, which payments are expected to vary from actual target bonuses
and historical bonus payments;
• cash payment of a prorated bonus for the year in which termination occurs; and
• continued health care coverage (including for the executive’s spouse and eligible dependents) for up
to six months after the involuntary termination.
In addition, upon an involuntary termination following a change in control, all restrictions on
restricted stock awarded to such executive officer would lapse and all unvested options, stock appreciation
rights and other awards granted to such executive officer under our 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan and
other stock incentive plans would automatically vest and become exercisable for the remainder of the term
of the option.
In the event that any payments made in connection with a change in control would be subjected to the
excise tax imposed by Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code, we will ‘‘gross up’’, on an after-tax basis,
the executive officer’s compensation for all federal, state and excise taxes and any penalties and interest.
Under the change-in-control and severance agreements, a ‘‘change in control’’ would include any of
the following events:
• any ‘‘person,’’ as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, acquires 30 percent
or more of our voting securities, unless the person acquires such securities from us;
• a majority of our directors are replaced and are not nominated by the incumbent members (as
defined in the agreements) of our board of directors;
• the consummation of a merger, reorganization, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our
assets, unless (i) the holders of our voting securities would retain more than 60 percent of the voting
securities of the entity resulting from such transaction, (ii) no ‘‘person’’ beneficially would own
more than 30 percent of the voting securities of the entity resulting from such transaction, and
(iii) we would retain at least a majority of the directors of the entity resulting from such transaction;
or
• our shareholders approve the liquidation or dissolution of Perot Systems.
19
Employment Agreement with James Champy
In addition to the benefits provided under his change in control severance agreement, James
Champy’s associate agreement provides for a base salary of $500,000 per year, which is to be reviewed at
least annually, and provides for additional benefits, including:
• a bonus to be determined in accordance with the current bonus plan for the most senior officers of
Perot Systems,
• payment of life insurance premiums, and
• some travel benefits.
Mr. Champy’s associate agreement also provides that if we terminate him other than for cause or
substantial misconduct or Mr. Champy is deemed to have been constructively terminated, Mr. Champy will
receive a severance payment equal to six months of his current base salary. We may terminate
Mr. Champy’s associate agreement upon 30 days’ notice and payment of severance equal to six months’
base pay plus benefits.
The 1,000,000 restricted shares of Class A Common Stock Mr. Champy acquired pursuant to his
restricted stock agreement vest in equal annual installments beginning in 1997 and ending in 2006. Vesting
is contingent on continued employment, but Mr. Champy’s restricted shares of Class A Common Stock will
continue to vest for two years following the termination of his employment if he is terminated by Perot
Systems other than for cause or substantial misconduct or is deemed to have been constructively
terminated. If either party terminates Mr. Champy’s employment for any reason, he has the right to
require Perot Systems to purchase his shares for their original cost plus simple interest at the rate of 8%
per annum.
20
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
The following is a description of our executive officers who are not on the Board of Directors. Our
executive officers serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.
Joined
Executive Officer Business Experience Perot Systems
Darcy Anderson . . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in December 2000.
Age 49. 2000
James C. Ballard . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in January 2006.
Mr. Ballard has served as President and Chief Executive Officer
of Perot Systems Government Services, Inc. since January 2006,
and served as its Chief Operating Officer from July 2002 until
December 2005. Mr. Ballard served as Chief Operating Officer of
ADI Technology, Inc. from August 1998 until its purchase by
Perot Systems in July 2002. Age 54. 2002
James Champy . . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in September 1996.
Mr. Champy also served as a director of Perot Systems from
September 1996 until February 2004. Mr. Champy is also a
director and serves as a member of the compensation committee
of Analog Devices, Inc. Age 63. 1996
Russell Freeman . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Perot
Systems in August 2000. Age 42. 1989
John King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One of our founders, Mr. King was elected as Vice President of
Perot Systems in April 1989, and currently serves as General
Manager of Strategic Partnerships. Age 59. 1988
Charles A. Lyles . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in September 2001.
Mr. Lyles leads the Healthcare Group. From June 1997 until
September 2001, Mr. Lyles served as chief operating officer of
Perot Systems’ Healthcare Group. Age 43. 1989
Padma Ravichander . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in September 2005.
Ms. Ravichander has served as Managing Director of Perot
Systems’ Applications Solutions since March 2005.
Ms. Ravichander was Vice President of North American
Operations for Oracle Corporation India from January 2004 to
December 2004. From March 1995 to December 2003,
Ms. Ravichander was Managing Director—ISO for Hewlett-
Packard. Age 46. 2005
Jeff Renzi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in April 2003. Mr. Renzi
was employed by Electronic Data Systems from 1989 to 2003.
While at Electronic Data Systems, Mr. Renzi served in a number
of positions, including Vice President of Sales. Age 45. 2003
David Sanders . . . . . . . . . . . Elected Vice President of Perot Systems in December 2004.
Mr. Sanders has led the Commercial Solutions Group of Perot
Systems since November 2004. Mr. Sanders was senior vice
president of BearingPoint, Inc. from August 1995 until
September 2004. Age 55. 2004
Thomas D. Williams . . . . . . . Elected Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel of Perot
Systems in September 2004. Mr. Williams was a partner in the law
firm of Luce & Williams from February 1997 until
September 2004. Age 45. 2004
21
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Licenses for Use of Name
We license the right to use the names ‘‘Perot’’ and ‘‘Perot Systems’’ in our current and future
businesses, products, or services from the Perot Systems Family Corporation and our Chairman Emeritus,
Ross Perot. The license is a non-exclusive, royalty-free, non-transferable license without geographic
restriction. We may also sublicense our rights to these names to certain of our affiliates. Under the license
agreement either party may, in their sole discretion, terminate the license at any time, with or without
cause and without penalty, by giving the other party written notice of such termination. Upon termination
by either party, we must discontinue all use of the names ‘‘Perot’’ and ‘‘Perot Systems’’ within one year
following notice of termination.
Outsourcing Agreement with Hillwood Enterprises L.P.

We are currently providing information technology and energy management services for Hillwood
Enterprises L.P., which is controlled and partially owned by Ross Perot, Jr. This contract has been extended
and will expire on January 31, 2007. This contract includes provisions under which we may be penalized if
our actual performance does not meet the levels of service specified in the contract, and such provisions
are consistent with those included in other customer contracts. For the year ended December 31, 2005, we
recorded revenue of $1,623,573 and direct cost of services of $1,229,394. Our Audit Committee has
reviewed and approved this contract.
Sublease with Perot Services Company, LLC

During 2002, we entered into a sublease agreement with Perot Services Company, LLC, which is
controlled and owned by Ross Perot, for approximately 23,000 square feet of office space at our Plano,
Texas facility. The lease term is 31.5 months with one optional 24-month renewal period, which has been
exercised by Perot Services. Under the terms of the sublease, we paid a $100,000 allowance for
modifications to the leased space. Perot Services Company, LLC has paid all modification costs in excess of
the allowance. The total amount paid to Perot Systems in 2005 under this sublease agreement was
$348,471. Our Audit Committee has reviewed and approved this contract.
Affiliate Use of AAirPass Program

Perot Systems has a corporate AAirPass program with American Airlines under which it prepays for
mileage that Perot Systems associates use for business travel. Historically, the use of prepaid miles has
resulted in lower travel costs than refundable tickets for most travel itineraries. Employees of Hillwood
Development Company LLC, The Perot Group, and their affiliated corporations, as well as members of
the Perot family, also use the Perot Systems AAirPass program. These parties reimburse Perot Systems for
the prepaid miles that they use. During 2005, these parties used approximately $454,000 in prepaid miles
under the Perot Systems AAirPass program, of which approximately $426,000 has been reimbursed, with
the remaining amount to be reimbursed upon final reconciliation and invoicing. We benefit from this
arrangement because we have a commitment to American Airlines to purchase a minimum number of
miles under the AAirPass program, and the miles used by these related parties are counted toward
fulfilling that commitment. Our Audit Committee has reviewed and approved this arrangement.
Employment of Law Firm

During 2005, we paid Carrington Coleman Sloman & Blumenthal LLP $213,686 for legal services. A
partner in that firm is the spouse of Peter Altabef, President and Chief Executive Officer of Perot Systems.
Our Audit Committee has reviewed and approved the use of Carrington Coleman Sloman & Blumenthal
LLP to provide legal services to the Company.
22
REPORT OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES AND COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
March 1, 2006
Introduction
The Human Resources and Compensation Committee of the Board is providing this report to assist
our stockholders in understanding Perot Systems’ objectives and procedures in the establishment and
operation of the compensation policy for our executive officers.
Human Resources and Compensation Committee

In March 2002, the Board of Directors established the Compensation Committee, which was renamed
the Human Resources and Compensation Committee in 2004. The primary responsibilities of the
committee, which is composed entirely of independent directors within the meanings of the listing
standards of the New York Stock Exchange and Perot Systems’ Director Independence Standard, are to
assist the Board of Directors in discharging its responsibilities relating to the compensation of our
associates, review and make final determinations with respect to the compensation of the Chairman and
the Chief Executive Officer, and to review and make recommendations to the Board of Directors on the
compensation of other executive officers and outside directors, bonus and retirement plans, the 1999
Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan. In addition, the committee’s
responsibilities include reviewing Perot Systems’ succession planning and talent development processes,
and reviewing Perot Systems’ progress in promoting diversity. In discharging these responsibilities, the
committee is advised by our Human Resources organization. In addition, the committee has engaged an
independent compensation consultant as its advisor.
Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

Perot Systems has a core compensation philosophy that underpins our approach to compensating our
associates, including our executive officers. Our policy is to develop an executive compensation program
that is competitive with comparable information technology companies with whom we compete for
executive talent, but with appropriate variations based on individual and corporate performance. We
believe that the compensation of our executive officers should:
• Have stock as a key component;
• Be cost effective and deemphasize base salaries and other forms of fixed compensation, while
maximizing variable pay that tracks to business results and individual performance;
• Be comparable with our industry peers to ensure market competitiveness;
• Attract, retain and motivate high-caliber executives on a long-term basis; and
• Align with the business strategy of our Company.
Perot Systems has historically avoided most of the perquisites typically provided to corporate
managers, especially members of top management. Perot Systems’ senior managers have no company cars
or airplanes, executive dining rooms, paid country club memberships, matching charitable or educational
contributions, paid financial counseling, or tax planning or return preparation assistance (except in certain
non-U.S. based locations where certain of these practices are deemed customary).
2005 Executive Compensation Program—Overview

As in prior years, our 2005 executive compensation program comprised three key components: base
salary, a short-term incentive program, and long-term incentive programs. Perot Systems’ philosophy is to
23
position the aggregate of these elements at a level that is competitive with peer information technology
services companies. The committee reviews the reasonableness of total compensation levels and practices
using public information from the proxy statements of peer information technology services companies and
published information from various nationally recognized compensation surveys. Our peer group includes
all of the U.S.-based companies in the Hemscott Group Information Technology Services Index, which was
used in the preparation of our Performance Graph, except those that are substantially smaller than Perot
Systems. In addition, Perot Systems included in its peer set other comparably sized companies with which
Perot Systems competes.
Base Salary
Base salary is a core component of our compensation program. Base salary rewards associates for
effective performance in their current role and is adjusted over time as a consequence of that performance
and also changes in responsibility. We set and adjust base salary based on the following principles:
• The base salaries of all associates, including executive officers, reflect market levels in order to
ensure competitiveness and consistency.
• Specific salary levels vary by individual, according to experience, responsibility level, and individual
performance towards the attainment of corporate goals and objectives.
Excluding the CEO, executive officers received salary increases in 2005 averaging 5% of salary.
Executive officer salary adjustments included annual merit increases and where appropriate competitive
market pay adjustments to align pay with competitive benchmarks. The CEO base salary adjustment was
10% and included a competitive market adjustment to better align CEO pay with competitive benchmarks.
Short-Term Incentive Program

Perot Systems’ short-term incentive program is an annual bonus plan. Perot Systems and the
committee review the design of the annual bonus plan annually, but always link the plan to principles of
corporate and individual performance.
• Perot Systems and the committee set corporate financial and strategic goals during the first quarter
of each plan year as well as the overall framework of the plan. We then use these goals to determine
the basic payments after the end of the plan year. We also consider factors such as the financial
targets and corporate contribution of business units, which may be recognized in our plan design.
• Perot Systems and the committee also consider individual performance as the other key criterion in
determining payments under the plan. Perot Systems and the committee consider the contribution
of individual associates and their attainment of designated goals as the means by which Perot
Systems meets its corporate objectives. Associates are attributed individual goals and annual
performance ratings and any payments reflect such goals and ratings.
As in prior years, the annual bonus plan for 2005 reflects corporate, business unit, and individual
performance. Perot Systems and the committee established specific financial goals for 2005 bonus purposes
with earnings per share as the primary performance metric. Additional goals were established in regard to
revenue, free cash flow, and the value of new contract signings. Performance against these secondary areas
of financial focus would serve to increase or decrease the size of bonuses associated with earnings per
share results. Perot Systems also established target bonus awards for executive officers, with potential
awards ranging from 0% to 200% of target levels. The committee has the discretion to adjust the amounts
payable under the plan to take into account circumstances arising during the year. Individual payments
were assessed against these design criteria. With respect to bonuses related to 2005 performance, our
executive officers will receive payments recognizing achievement of the primary performance metric and
partial achievement of the remaining financial goals outlined above.
24
Long-Term Incentive Programs
Perot Systems regards the holding of stock as a key consideration for executive officers. We believe
that stock ownership helps fundamentally to align executive behaviors and the achievement of corporate
objectives with our stockholders. Stock rewards long-term commitment to the successful performance of an
organization. It is, therefore, a major component of our executive compensation program.
We use stock-based awards under an annual grant program. We consider executive officers, like all
other associates, for awards on the basis of their contribution and responsibility level and reference to the
external market. In 2005, Perot Systems awarded restricted shares in addition to stock options to reflect
market trends and external developments. The restricted shares vest annually over five years subject to
achievement of individual performance goals. Perot Systems has also established share ownership
requirements for executive officers that are based on these restricted stock awards to support our core
philosophy of stock ownership.
The short-term and long-term incentive programs are both operated at the discretion of Perot
Systems.
Compensation of the Chief Executive Officer

Compensation for Peter Altabef, President and Chief Executive Officer, has been determined
consistent with the principles and philosophy explained above. For 2005, Mr. Altabef’s salary was increased
from $500,000 to $550,000. Mr. Altabef’s target bonus award was increased for 2005, thereby more heavily
weighting incentive compensation tied to performance than typical market practice. Based on Perot
Systems’ results against the financial criteria established for 2005 bonus purposes as mentioned above, and
in light of the committee’s evaluation of Mr. Altabef’s individual performance, the committee approved an
annual bonus of $550,000 for Mr. Altabef. He received 100,000 stock options and 50,000 restricted stock
units in 2005, subject to the same terms and conditions as awards received by other executive officers. The
committee approved these awards in light of the evaluation of Mr. Altabef’s performance as Chief
Executive Officer and market levels of long-term incentive compensation.
Deductibility of Compensation
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits deductibility of compensation in excess of
$1 million paid to Perot Systems’ Chief Executive Officer and to each of the other four highest-paid
executive officers unless this compensation qualifies as ‘‘performance-based. ’’ The committee will
continue to review the potential deductibility of compensation but retains the discretion to award
compensation that may not be deductible if it believes such action is in the best interest of Perot Systems
and its stockholders.
Conclusion
Our compensation policy and resultant payments directly reflect the performance of Perot Systems
and its individual executive officers. It is our belief that our compensation policy serves the best interests of
our stockholders and Perot Systems.
HUMAN RESOURCES AND

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE:
Carl Hahn (Chair)
DeSoto Jordan
Thomas Meurer
Anuroop (Tony) Singh
25
SECTION 16(a) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING REQUIREMENT
Our directors, executive officers, and holders of more than 10% of our Class A Common Stock must
file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission indicating the number of shares of Perot
Systems’ Class A Common Stock they beneficially own and any changes in their beneficial ownership. They
must provide copies of these reports to us. Based on our review of these reports and written
representations from the persons required to file them, we believe that all Section 16(a) Securities and
Exchange Commission filing requirements applicable to our directors and executive officers for fiscal 2005
were timely met except that each of Messrs. Altabef, Freeman, and King reported two Section 16
transactions late due to administrative errors on the part of the Company. Messrs. Williams and Robert J.
Kelly, Controller of the Company, reported one Section 16 transaction late due to administrative errors on
the part of the Company.
26
PERFORMANCE GRAPH
The graph below compares the performance of our Class A Common Stock since December 31, 2000.
250
225
200
175
DOLLARS
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
PEROT SYSTEMS CORP. HEMSCOTT GROUP INDEX

NYSE MARKET INDEX
16MAR200606522347
ASSUMES $100 INVESTED ON DEC. 31, 2000

ASSUMES DIVIDEND REINVESTED
FISCAL YEAR ENDING DEC. 31, 2005
(1) The Hemscott (formerly known as Coredata and Media General) Group Information Technology
Services Index.
27
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table gives information about our Class A Common Stock that we may issue under our
equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2005.
Number of Securities
Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future
to be Issued Upon Weighted-Average Issuance Under Equity
Exercise of Exercise Price of Compensation Plans
Outstanding Options, Outstanding Options, (Excluding Securities Reflected
Plan Category Warrants, and Rights Warrants, and Rights in Column (a))
(a) (b) (c)
Equity Compensation Plans
approved by Security Holders . . 11,772,340(1) $15.69 44,208,533(2)
Equity Compensation Plans not
Approved by Security Holders . 13,570,115 $14.04 742,393(3)
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,342,455 $14.81 44,950,926
(1) Excludes 786,045 restricted stock units that have been granted under the 2001 Long-Term Incentive
Plan.
(2) Includes 27,764,736 shares available to be issued under the 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan and
16,443,797 shares available to be issued under the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.
(3) Includes 432,000 shares available to be issued under the 1996 Non-Employee Director Stock Option/
Restricted Stock Plan, 52,757 shares available to be issued to directors who elect to receive stock in
lieu of their cash retainer, and 257,636 shares available to be issued under other plans.
We have four equity plans or arrangements that have not been approved by our stockholders. Under
one arrangement, our non-employee directors (other than Ross Perot) may elect to have all or a portion of
their director retainers paid in our Class A Common Stock, valued at such stock’s closing market price on
the last trading day of the fiscal quarter preceding the quarter with respect to which the retainer
installment relates.
Our 1996 Non-Employee Director Plan, which was adopted prior to our initial public offering in 1999
and remains active, provides for issuance of up to 800,000 restricted shares or options to purchase our
Class A Common Stock to our non-employee directors (other than Ross Perot). Under the plan, each
eligible director currently receives an option to purchase 8,000 shares of our Class A Common Stock upon
election, and subsequent awards are made upon the completion of vesting of the director’s prior awards.
Awards have an exercise price equal to the fair market value on the date of the award and vest one year
following the award. In lieu of receiving an option, each director has the option to purchase 8,000 shares of
restricted stock which vest in one year, at a purchase price equal to the fair market on the date of the
award. Payment is due at the time of the award. No director has elected to purchase restricted shares since
1998. Awards under the 1996 Non-Employee Director Plan prior to June 2003 were for 40,000 options or
restricted shares, which vest over five years.
The remaining plans were also adopted prior to Perot Systems’ initial public offering in 1999 and were
terminated in 2001, except to the extent that they govern options or restricted shares that were outstanding
at the time of the termination of such plans. Our 1991 Stock Option Plan provided for the issuance of
options to eligible employees and were generally issued at not less than the fair market value on the date of
grant. Our Restricted Stock Plan, which was adopted in 1988, provided eligible employees with the
opportunity to purchase our stock at its fair market value (determined pursuant to a third-party appraisal).
Unvested restricted shares are generally subject to repurchase at cost plus eight percent upon termination
of employment. These grants or awards had vesting periods of from three to 10 years.
28
REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
February 24, 2006
The Audit Committee of our Board of Directors (‘‘Board’’) is composed of three directors and
operates under a written charter adopted by our Board. All members of the Audit Committee meet the
independence standards established by our Board, the New York Stock Exchange and the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. The Audit Committee’s charter is available at the Corporate Responsibility section on Perot
Systems’ Web site at www.perotsystems.com/responsibility.
Perot Systems’ management is responsible for, among other things, preparing its consolidated
financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America (‘‘GAAP’’), establishing and maintaining internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f)), and evaluating the effectiveness of such internal control over financial
reporting. Perot Systems’ independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for auditing the
consolidated financial statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States) and for expressing an opinion on the conformity of the financial
statements with GAAP. The independent registered public accounting firm is also responsible for auditing
Perot Systems’ internal control over financial reporting in accordance with such standards and for
expressing an opinion on (i) management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over
financial reporting and (ii) the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting. The Audit
Committee assists the Board of Directors in fulfilling its responsibility to oversee management’s
implementation of Perot Systems’ financial reporting process. In its oversight role, the Audit Committee
reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements with management and with
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (‘‘PwC’’), Perot Systems’ independent registered public accounting firm for
2005. The Audit Committee also reviewed and discussed Perot Systems’ internal control over financial
reporting with management and with PwC.
The Audit Committee has met privately with PwC and discussed any issues deemed significant by the
independent registered public accounting firm, including the required matters to be discussed by
Statement of Auditing Standards No. 61, Communication With Audit Committees, as amended. PwC has
provided to the Audit Committee written disclosures and the letter required by Independence Standards
Board Standard No. 1, Independence Discussions with Audit Committees, and the Audit Committee
discussed with PwC that firm’s independence. The Audit Committee also concluded that PwC’s provision
of non-audit services to Perot Systems and its affiliates is compatible with PwC’s independence.
Based upon the foregoing considerations, the Audit Committee recommended to our Board that the
audited financial statements be included in Perot Systems’ Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2005 for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission and appointed PwC the
independent registered public accounting firm for the Company for 2006.
The foregoing report is respectfully submitted by members of the Audit Committee of our Board:
AUDIT COMMITTEE
C. H. Moore, Jr. (Chair)

John S.T. Gallagher
Carl Hahn
29
STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS FOR THE 2006 ANNUAL MEETING
AND FOR THE 2007 ANNUAL MEETING
Under Article II, Section 4 of our current bylaws, proposals by stockholders intended to be presented
at the Annual Meeting must be received by Perot Systems’ Secretary at our executive offices no later than
the close of business on April 12, 2006.
If you would like to include a stockholder proposal in the proxy statement for the 2007 annual
meeting, it must be delivered to Perot Systems’ Secretary at our executive offices no later than
November 29, 2006.
OTHER MATTERS
Other Business
At the date of mailing of this Proxy Statement, we are not aware of any business to be presented at the
Annual Meeting other than the proposals discussed above. If other proposals are properly brought before
the Annual Meeting, any proxies returned to us will be voted as the proxy holders see fit.
New York Stock Exchange Disclosure Requirements

Perot Systems submitted to the New York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’) during 2005 a certification of its
Chief Executive Officer regarding compliance with the NYSE’s corporate governance listing standards.
Perot Systems also included as exhibits to its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2005, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the certifications of its Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer required under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Householding of Proxy Materials

In a further effort to reduce printing costs and postage fees, we have adopted a practice approved by
the Securities and Exchange Commission called ‘‘householding.’’ Under this practice, stockholders who
have the same address and last name will receive only one copy of our proxy materials, unless one or more
of these stockholders notifies us that he or she wishes to continue receiving individual copies. Stockholders
who participate in householding will continue to receive separate proxy cards.
If you share an address with another stockholder and received only one set of proxy materials and
would like to request a separate copy of our proxy materials, please: (1) mail your request to Perot Systems
Investor Relations, 2300 West Plano Parkway, Plano, Texas 75075; or (2) contact our Investor Relations
Department at 1-877-737-6973. Similarly, you may also contact us if you received multiple copies of the
proxy materials and would prefer to receive a single copy in the future.
30
FOR MORE INFORMATION
We file reports, proxy statements, and other information with the SEC. You can read and copy these
reports, proxy statements, and other information concerning Perot Systems at the SEC’s public reference
room at 100 F Street N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 (or
1-800-732-0330) for further information on the public reference room. The SEC maintains an Internet site
at http://www.sec.gov/ that contains reports, proxy, and information statements and other information
regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including Perot Systems. Our Class A Common
Stock is listed on the NYSE. These reports, proxy statement, and other information are also available for
inspection at the offices of the NYSE, 20 Broad Street, New York, New York 10005.
In addition, our annual report on Form 10-K (without exhibits) is available via the Internet at our Web
site (www.perotsystems.com). If you would like to request documents from us, please contact our Investor
Relations Department at 1-877-737-6973 by April 14, 2006 to receive them before the Annual Meeting.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
1MAR200610025365
Thomas D. Williams
Secretary
31
ANNEX 1

2006 NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN
ARTICLE ONE
GENERAL PROVISIONS
I. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

This Plan is intended to promote the interests of Perot Systems Corporation, a Delaware corporation,
by creating an equity incentive arrangement to attract and retain the services of highly qualified
non-employee Board members.
Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the
attached Appendix.
II. ADMINISTRATION OF THE PLAN
Administration of the Plan shall be self-executing in accordance with its terms and no plan
administrator shall exercise any discretionary functions with respect to any stock issuance made under the
Plan except as provided in IV(B) below.
III. ELIGIBILITY
Eligible Directors shall be limited to non-employee Board members (other than Ross Perot).
IV. STOCK SUBJECT TO THE PLAN
A. The stock issuable under the Plan shall be shares of authorized but unissued or reacquired
Common Stock, including shares repurchased by the Corporation on the open market. Subject to any
additional shares authorized by the vote of the Board and approved by the shareholders, the number of
shares of Common Stock reserved for issuance over the term of the Plan shall not exceed 500,000 shares.
B. If any change is made to the Common Stock by reason of any stock split, stock dividend,
recapitalization, combination of shares, exchange of shares or other change affecting the outstanding
Common Stock as a class without the Corporation’s receipt of consideration, appropriate adjustments shall
be made by the Plan Administrator to the maximum number and/or class of securities issuable under the
Plan. Such adjustments are to be effected in a manner that shall preclude the enlargement or dilution of
rights and benefits hereunder. The adjustments determined by the Plan Administrator shall be final,
binding and conclusive.
ARTICLE TWO
DIRECTOR AUTOMATIC GRANTS
I. TERMS
A. Grant Dates. Grants under this Article Two shall be made on the dates specified below:
1. Each individual who is first elected or appointed as a non-employee Board member at any
time on or after May 31, 2006 shall automatically be granted, on the date of such initial election or
appointment, a number of shares equal to the product of (a) the number of months (including full and
partial months) remaining until the next June 1 divided by 12 and (b) 5,000, provided that individual
A-1
has not previously been in the employ of the Corporation or any Parent or Subsidiary within the three
year period ending on the date of such initial election or appointment.
2. On June 1 of each year, beginning with 2006, each individual who is to continue to serve as
an Eligible Director, whether or not that individual is standing for re-election to the Board at that
particular annual meeting of shareholders, shall automatically be granted an additional 5,000
unrestricted shares of Common Stock. There shall be no limit on the number of such stock awards any
one Eligible Director may receive over his or her period of Board service, and non-employee Board
members who have previously been in the employ of the Corporation (or any Parent or Subsidiary)
shall be eligible to receive one or more such annual stock awards over their period of continued Board
service.
B. Issuance of Shares. Each stock award for 5,000 shares shall be immediately vested and shall be
issued to the applicable Eligible Director as soon as administratively practicable after such Eligible
Director becomes entitled to the award.
C. Deferral Election. Each Eligible Director may elect to defer receipt of a future year’s stock award
to the date his or her Service terminates, in accordance with the rules of this Section. An election to defer
must apply to the entire stock award for the year in question and must be made prior to the date such
award is granted. A deferral election once made shall continue in effect for each subsequent year’s award
unless revoked at least 30 days before the grant date of such future year’s award. All deferral elections
shall be irrevocable as of the date of the award to which the election relates.
ARTICLE THREE
MISCELLANEOUS
I. TAX WITHHOLDING
The Corporation’s obligation to deliver shares of Common Stock shall be subject to the satisfaction of
all applicable federal, state and local income and employment tax withholding requirements.
II. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM OF THE PLAN
A. The Plan became effective immediately on the Plan Effective Date. Awards may be granted
under the Plan at any time on or after the Plan Effective Date.
B. The Plan shall terminate upon the earliest to occur of (i) May 31, 2016 or (ii) the date on
which all shares available for issuance under the Plan shall have been issued as fully-vested shares.
III. AMENDMENT OF THE PLAN
The Board shall have complete and exclusive power and authority to amend or modify the Plan in any
or all respects. In addition, shareholder approval will be required for any amendment to the Plan that
(i) materially increases the number of shares of Common Stock available for issuance under the Plan,
(ii) materially expands the class of individuals eligible to receive awards under the Plan, (iii) materially
increases the benefits accruing to the Participants under the Plan (iv) materially extends the term of the
Plan, (v) expands the types of awards available for issuance under the Plan, or (vi) is otherwise required by
applicable laws, rules or regulations, including but not limited to any rules of any stock exchange or market
system on which the Common Stock is then listed for trading.
IV. REGULATORY APPROVALS
A. The implementation of the Plan, the issuance of any shares of Common Stock pursuant to
any award under the Plan shall be subject to the Corporation’s procurement of all approvals and
permits required by regulatory authorities having jurisdiction over the Plan, the stock granted under it
and the shares of Common Stock issued pursuant to it.
A-2
B. No shares of Common Stock or other assets shall be issued or delivered under the Plan
unless and until there shall have been compliance with all applicable requirements of Federal and
state securities laws, including the filing and effectiveness of the Form S-8 registration statement for
the shares of Common Stock issuable under the Plan, and all applicable listing requirements of any
stock exchange or market system on which Common Stock is then listed for trading.
V. NO EMPLOYMENT/SERVICE RIGHTS
Nothing in the Plan shall confer upon the Participant any right to continue in Service for any period of
specific duration or interfere with or otherwise restrict in any way the rights of the Corporation (or any
Parent or Subsidiary employing or retaining such person) or of the Participant, which rights are hereby
expressly reserved by each, to terminate such person’s Service at any time for any reason, with or without
cause.
VI. COMPLIANCE WITH 409A
The Plan and all awards granted hereunder are intended to comply with the requirements of Code
Section 409A and shall be administered accordingly, including, without limitation, the delay in payment of
all deferred awards for six months after the Participant’s termination of service for any Participant who is a
‘‘specified employee’’ within the meaning of Code Section 409A.
A-3
APPENDIX
The following definitions shall be in effect under the Plan:
A. Board shall mean the Corporation’s Board of Directors.
B. Code shall mean the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
C. Common Stock shall mean the Corporation’s Class A Common Stock.
D. Corporation shall mean Perot Systems Corporation, a Delaware corporation, and any
corporate successor to all or substantially all of the assets or voting stock of Perot Systems
Corporation, which shall by appropriate action adopt the Plan.
E. Eligible Director shall mean a non-employee Board member eligible to participate in this Plan
in accordance with the eligibility provisions of Articles One and Three.
F. Parent shall mean any corporation (other than the Corporation) in an unbroken chain of
corporations ending with the Corporation, provided each corporation in the unbroken chain (other
than the Corporation) owns, at the time of the determination, stock possessing 50% or more of the
total combined voting power of all classes of stock in one of the other corporations in such chain.
G. Participant shall mean any person who is issued shares of Common Stock under the Plan.
H. Plan shall mean the Corporation’s 2006 Non-Employee Director Equity Compensation Plan,
as set forth in this document.
I. Plan Administrator shall mean the Corporation.
J. Plan Effective Date shall mean May 31, 2006.
K. Service shall mean the performance of services for the Corporation (or any Parent or
Subsidiary) by a person in the capacity of an employee, a non-employee member of the board of
directors or a consultant or independent advisor, except to the extent otherwise specifically provided
in the documents evidencing the stock award thereunder. For purposes of the Plan, a Participant shall
be deemed to cease Service immediately upon the date on which the Participant no longer performs
services in any of the foregoing capacities for the Corporation or any Parent or Subsidiary.
L. Subsidiary shall mean any corporation (other than the Corporation) in an unbroken chain of
corporations beginning with the Corporation, provided each corporation (other than the last
corporation) in the unbroken chain owns, at the time of the determination, stock possessing 50% or
more of the total combined voting power of all classes of stock in one of the other corporations in
such chain.
A-4
Directions to Perot Systems’ Plano Campus
From DFW International Airport:

Take International Parkway (the one main road running north-south through DFW Airport) North to
I-635 East.
Continue East on I-635.
Take Exit #27B to I-35E North.
Take Exit #443 to President George Bush Turnpike (TX 190) heading East.
Drive East on President George Bush Turnpike (TX 190) to Plano.
Exit at Custer Parkway.
Turn Left on Custer Parkway to go North.
At Plano Parkway turn Left.
As you head West on Plano Parkway, Perot Systems’ Campus is on your left.
Use the first left turn lane entering the Campus parking lot. Once entering the parking lot, proceed to
the west end of the parking lot and enter the Campus through the West Lobby.
From Downtown Dallas:

Proceed North on North Central Expressway (IH-75).
Take exit #28B to President George Bush Turnpike going West.
Take the first exit—Custer Parkway. Proceed West on the service road to the light at Custer Parkway.
Turn Right on Custer Parkway.
Turn Left at the first light (Plano Parkway).
As you head West on Plano Parkway, Perot Systems’ Campus is on your left.
Use the first left turn lane entering the Campus parking lot. Once entering the parking lot, proceed to
the west end of the parking lot and enter the Campus through the West Lobby.
EXHIBIT 17
Perot Systems - About Us Page 1 of 1
About Perot Systems

Whether you’re retooling one aspect of your business or transforming an entire operation from the ground up, we can provide the
insight and know-how to help you succeed.
For 20 years, Perot Systems has been providing technology-based business solutions that build trust by enabling our clients
to cultivate growth, streamline operations and achieve objectives. We tailor our flexible and collaborative solutions to meet the
specific needs of our clients in healthcare, government, manufacturing, banking, insurance and other industries. Drawing on deep
industry expertise and a portfolio of interrelated consulting, business process, applications and infrastructure services, we blend
strategic design, proven technology and timely delivery to create effective solutions that maximize your returns on IT investment.
Our Company Our People Leadership
Our History Our Values. Our Guiding Corporate Leadership

Awards and Recognition Principles. Operations and Support
Our Culture Our Commitment Leadership
Board of Directors
http://www.perotsystems.com/About/default 6/10/2008
EXHIBIT 18
Perot Systems - US Federal Government
Our country sites:
Search
Home Industries Services Investor Relations Media Room Careers About Us
HomeIndustriesFederal Government Email this page
Industries
Banking
Engineering and Construction
Consumer Packaging
Federal Government
Markets
Services
Contract Vehicles
Small Business Programs
Locations and Driving Directions Trusted Partner of the Federal Government

Executive Spotlight with Lee
Your mission is clear - to provide technologies that enable colleagues to serve our leaders, our fellow citizens, and our country. The challenges of a year-
Carrick
to-year budget environment while maintaining a pace of innovation commensurate with the mission requires nimble, best of breed solutions for your IT
Solutions for the Federal
Government and personnel environment.
Healthcare At Perot Systems, we provide IT solutions and outsourcing as well as consulting and professional services to the civilian, defense, homeland security,
Insurance and intelligence communities. We are dedicated to delivering what we promise. Let us apply our experience to support your mission. We know what is
at stake.
Manufacturing
Telecommunications
Federal Government Markets We Serve
Transportation and Logistics At Perot Systems, we currently serve as the prime contractor for more than 80% of our federal business. By working
collaboratively with our clients and focusing on sustainable, long-term solutions we enable our clients to achieve measurable
results.
More >
http://www.perotsystems.com/Industries/Federal_Government/default (1 of 2) [10/27/2008 3:01:11 PM]

EXHIBIT 19
Federal Contracts to Contactor(s) matching "perot", FY 2006, list of contractors
About this Site | About the Data | Site Map | Contact Us
PRINTER-FRIENDLY
Contracts to Contractor(s) "perot" Search Criteria Used (More)
BY CONTRACTOR (FY 2006)
Federal Fiscal Year 2006 GO
Search by name: Level of Detail

List of Contractor Parent Companies for FY Low (list of contractors) GO
2006 Output HTML GO
Top 100 Contractors (2008)
Awards by contractor state You can click on the column headers below to re-sort the search.
Awards by cong. district of contractor

Parent Company Name Contractor Name(s) Total Amount (for this search) DUNS Number
Advanced search for contractors GLOBAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC GLOBAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC $10,029,927 618513428
PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION $304,032,771 191692813
BY PLACE OF PERFORMANCE
PEROT SYSTEMS GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS, INC PEROT SYSTEMS GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS, INC $317,916 610719200
Overview of congressional districts SOZA & COMPANY, LTD. SOZA & COMPANY, LTD. $46,191,011 044673937
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING & MGT CORP TECHNOLOGY PLANNING & MGT CORP $5,965,468 603661307
State: Alabama
Total parent companies for fiscal year 2006: 5
Advanced search by place of perform.
Total funding (within this search) for the year: $366,537,093
BY CONTRACTING AGENCY
Overview by major agency Competition summary for entire search for fiscal year 2006:
Advanced search by agency
OTHER
By competition type
By product or service provided
Competition and service, 2008

Available for everyone for competition $83,066,520
Everyone could compete, but only one bid or offer was recieved $25,348,606
Competition within a limited pool $202,624,663
Actions necessary to continue existing competitive contracts for continuity (until the next one could be competed) $998,216
Available only for groups such as disabled persons, prisoners, and regulated utilities $-1,051,191
Not competed for an allowable reason $7,154,963
Not identified, soon to be addressed $48,395,315
file:////Crewserver05/data/Research%20&%20Investigations/Bush%20Cabinet%...ipi,%20Anthony/Documentation/Fed%20Contract%20to%20Perot%20FY%202006.htm (1 of 2) [10/27/2008 3:37:38 PM]
Perot Systems - US Federal Government
Services Tailored to the Unique Missions of the Federal Government

We offer a variety of technology-based solutions tailored to meet the changing needs of the federal government. Our innovative
delivery model and client-focused approach helps federal executives successfully manage complex information technology
challenges and critical missions to ensure greater efficiencies and significant cost savings.
More >
Executive Spotlight with Lee Carrick, President of Perot Systems Government Services
Lee Carrick sits down exclusively with ExecutiveBiz to share his vision for continuing the momentum there as well as the delicate
balance to be struck between growth strategies and the resources dedicated to execution.
More >
US Federal Government Services and Solutions

Homeland Security Intelligence Communities Department of Defense Civilian Agencies Contract Vehicles Small Business Programs Driving Directions
Contract Vehicles
Army ITES-2S DHS EAGLE GSA Millennia Lite GSA Schedules IRS TIPSS-3 NAVSEA SeaPort HQ NAVSEA SeaPort-e Navy MARMC OPM TMA
Contact UsCorporate ResponsibilityPrivacy PolicyTerms of Use Email this page
Online Resource LibraryEventsSpeakers Bureau
© 1996-2008 Perot Systems All Rights Reserved
http://www.perotsystems.com/Industries/Federal_Government/default (2 of 2) [10/27/2008 3:01:11 PM]

USASpending.gov Last Updated

August 25, 2008
Search Criteria Used
*END OF REPORT*
Contracts data was updated for all 24 CFO Act
agencies at this time. Federal Fiscal Year 2006 GO
This search was done on October 1, 2008. Parent or Contractor
Assistance data was updated for 15 of 24 CFO act perot
Name
agencies. Updates are currently pending for the
The contracts database is compiled from the FPDS-NG system. For Sort By Parent Name
following agencies: DOD, DOT, DHS, GSA, HHS, NRC,
OPM, SBA and TREAS. timeliness details, please see the Data Quality tab. Number of records Only the first 500 for each year
For more details, please click here Note: The numbers in this table can change after each data load. Level of Detail Low (list of contractors) GO
Transactions included in a data load can impact numbers for the
current and previous fiscal years. Output HTML GO
The data housed on USASpending.gov is provided by Federal agencies. Please refer to the Data Quality site for information
about the current status of data quality. USASpending.gov is continuously developing ways to measure and improve the quality
of the data on the site.

PRINTER-FRIENDLY
Contracts to Contractor(s) "perot" Search Criteria Used (More)
BY CONTRACTOR (FY 2007)
Search by name: Level of Detail

List of Contractor Parent Companies for FY Low (list of contractors) GO
2007 Output HTML GO
Top 100 Contractors (2008)
Awards by cong. district of contractor

Parent Company Name Contractor Name(s) Total Amount (for this search) DUNS Number
PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION $296,428,038 191692813
BY PLACE OF PERFORMANCE
Overview of congressional districts SOZA & COMPANY, LTD. SOZA & COMPANY, LTD. $85,058,582 044673937
State: Alabama Total parent companies for fiscal year 2007: 4
Advanced search by place of perform. Total funding (within this search) for the year: $386,076,414
BY CONTRACTING AGENCY
Competition summary for entire search for fiscal year 2007:
Overview by major agency
OTHER
By competition type
Competition and service, 2008 Available for everyone for competition $122,719,994
Everyone could compete, but only one bid or offer was recieved $25,570,916
Actions necessary to continue existing competitive contracts for continuity (until the next one could be competed) $7,657,280
Available only for groups such as disabled persons, prisoners, and regulated utilities $-14,883


August 25, 2008 *END OF REPORT*
This search was done on October 1, 2008. Parent or Contractor
agencies at this time. perot
Name
Assistance data was updated for 15 of 24 CFO act The contracts database is compiled from the FPDS-NG system. For Sort By Parent Name
agencies. Updates are currently pending for the timeliness details, please see the Data Quality tab.
following agencies: DOD, DOT, DHS, GSA, HHS, NRC, Number of records Only the first 500 for each year
OPM, SBA and TREAS. Note: The numbers in this table can change after each data load. Level of Detail Low (list of contractors) GO
For more details, please click here Transactions included in a data load can impact numbers for the
current and previous fiscal years. Output HTML GO
The data housed on USASpending.gov is provided by Federal agencies. Please refer to the Data Quality site for information
about the current status of data quality. USASpending.gov is continuously developing ways to measure and improve the quality
of the data on the site.

Federal Contracts to Contactor(s) matching "perot systems", FY 2008, lis... http://www.usaspending.gov/fpds/fpds.php?company_name=perot+syst...
PRINTER-FRIENDLY
BY CONTRACTOR
Search Criteria Used (More)
Contracts to Contractor(s) "perot systems"
Search by name: Federal Fiscal Year 2008 GO
(FY 2008)
Level of Detail Low (list of contractors) GO
Top 100 Contractors (2008) List of Contractor Parent Companies for FY 2008 3Q *
Output HTML GO
Awards by cong. district of contractor Total Amount (for this DUNS
Parent Company Name Contractor Name(s)
search) Number
BY PLACE OF PERFORMANCE PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION PEROT SYSTEMS CORPORATION $194,316,999 191692813
PEROT SYSTEMS GOVERNMENT SERVICES PEROT SYSTEMS GOVERNMENT SERVICES
Overview of congressional districts $-31,369 ** RP70032
(miscellaneous foreign contractor) (miscellaneous foreign contractor)
State: Alabama
SOZA & COMPANY, LTD. SOZA & COMPANY, LTD. $14,774,718 044673937
Advanced search by place of perform.
BY CONTRACTING AGENCY *Note: FY 2008 only includes data up to second and part of third quarter.
Overview by major agency ** Note: negative numbers represent deallocations.
Total parent companies for fiscal year 2008: 5

OTHER Total funding (within this search) for the year: $211,612,886
By competition type
Competition summary for entire search for fiscal year 2008:
Competition and service, 2008

August 25, 2008

agencies at this time.
Assistance data was updated for 15 of 24 CFO

act agencies. Updates are currently pending for Available for everyone for competition $103,451,579
the following agencies: DOD, DOT, DHS, GSA, Everyone could compete, but only one bid or offer was recieved $489,446
HHS, NRC, OPM, SBA and TREAS.
For more details, please click here Actions necessary to continue existing competitive contracts for continuity (until the next one could be competed) $3,533,501
Available only for groups such as disabled persons, prisoners, and regulated utilities $0

*END OF REPORT*
This search was done on October 1, 2008.
Parent or Contractor Name perot systems
The contracts database is compiled from the FPDS-NG system. For Sort By Parent Name
timeliness details, please see the Data Quality tab.
Number of records Only the first 500 for each year
Note: The numbers in this table can change after each data load. Level of Detail Low (list of contractors) GO
Transactions included in a data load can impact numbers for the Output HTML GO
current and previous fiscal years.
The data housed on USASpending.gov is provided by Federal agencies. Please refer to the Data Quality site for information about the
current status of data quality. USASpending.gov is continuously developing ways to measure and improve the quality of the data on the
site.
1 of 1 10/1/2008 11:12 AM
EXHIBIT 20

Exhibits - Anthony Principi, Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Exhibits - Anthony Principi, Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

EXHIBIT 1

Anthony Principi, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 2001-2005 Page 1 of 1

Home > Government

Anthony J. Principi was nominated to be Secretary of Veterans Affairs by President George W.

UREPORT On FOX News CHANNEL:

MOST READ • TOP EMAILED • TOP VIDEOS •

RELATED Principi, a decorated Vietnam War veteran, once

LINKS Leaving Congress: The Changing

Newt Gingrich Newsletter

Artery Clearing Secret

Newt Gingrich Newsletter

Artery Clearing Secret

Treat Spinal Stenosis

"Teeth Whiteners Exposed"

Buy a link here

See Next Story in Politics

U.S. • WORLD • POLITICS • HEALTH • SCITECH • ENTERTAINMENT • AP WIRES

$30K home equity loan 7.62% 1 yr CD 3.67%

Artery Clearing Secret

Distributed by Knight/Ridder Tribune News Service

March 25, 2006 Saturday

Principi returns to Pfizer

SECTION: BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL NEWS

LENGTH: 377 words

LOAD-DATE: March 25, 2006

Copyright 2006 The Day

4a. Contact Name b. Telephone Number c. E-mail 5. Senate ID#

9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report

INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13

$5,000 or more $ $5,000 or more ✔

Printed Name and Title 

15. General issue area code   

16. Specific lobbying issues

Printed Name and Title 

Printed Name and Title 

15. General issue area code  

16. Specific lobbying issues

Printed Name and Title 

Printed Name and Title 

ADDENDUM for General Lobbying Issue HCR - HEALTH ISSUES

Name Covered Official Position (if applicable) New

First Last Suffix

Printed Name and Title Anthony J. Principi

15. General issue area code  

16. Specific lobbying issues

17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None

Printed Name and Title 

15. General issue area code  

16. Specific lobbying issues

17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None

Printed Name and Title 

Printed Name and Title 

15. General issue area code  

16. Specific lobbying issues

17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None

Printed Name and Title 

Printed Name and Title 

15. General issue area code  

16. Specific lobbying issues

Printed Name and Title 

Printed Name and Title 

15. General issue area code 

16. Specific lobbying issues

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

&'(!

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title

15. General issue area code

Printed Name and Title

Printed Name and Title