consultant) for ICG, a firm that assists businesses in obtaining and defending performance under government contracts. At the time of her hire, Congressman Davis was her mentor and campaign manager. ICG Founder and President Don Upson is a longtime friend of Davis. After Devolites was hired by ICG, Davis, then divorced, married Devolites. The financial benefits between Rep. Davis and his wife, from the ICG job as well as other campaign donations to Mrs. Davis, were highlighted in a June 2007 ethics report "Family Affair" by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. The report identified ethical questions on financial ties that benefit family members of 64 of the 435 voting members of Congress. As of December 24, 2008, Davis continues to work for ICG. She reported to The Washington Post that she was paid $78,000 in 2005 for working "10 to 20 hours a week," primarily at home on her cellphone, she said. She made $18,000 a year as a Virginia legislator. Her ICG bio, which continues to describe her as a "Current Virginia State Senator for largest IT district", bio, also is the only one on the ICG website to name a spouse. Disclosures During the week of October 22, 2007, the Davis campaign sent out 60,000 campaign flyers accusing Petersen of not disclosing that his former law firm was working on issues that Petersen voted on while in the House of Delegates. The flyer did not mention that Petersen had not been involved in the legal issues for the client. The flyer included a copy of a section of Petersen's Statement of Economic Interest, which he filed while serving in the House. It includes Petersen's home address, telephone number, and the names of his wife and four children. This information was not redacted by the Davis campaign. Petersen held a press conference on October 26 in front of Davis' headquarters in Fairfax. He said that "words cannot describe the anger I feel" about the flyer, and called it "shocking" that Davis would use his personal information in such a manner. Petersen said that advertising his personal information was not in and of itself a problem, but using his personal phone number and children's identification was not appropriate or safe in an attack ad. Such tactics, Petersen said, endangered his family. Mrs. Petersen complained of receiving two telephone calls related to the attack ad, and police presence