A number of large companies pledged, citing their commitments to democracy, to not donate money to the 147 lawmakers that opposed the certification of Joe Biden’s victory on false grounds of voting fraud.
Although it was an impressive gesture from some of the most well-known names in business, it turned out to be largely empty.
Six months later, many of these companies have resumed funding political action committees with cash that benefits the election efforts of legislators regardless of whether they object to the election certification. It is business as usual when it comes to gaining political influence through corporate gifting.
Pfizer (Walmart), Intel, General Electric, and AT&T were among the companies that pledged support for democracy after Trump supporters stormed Capitol in a violent attempt to stop the transfer of power.
According to the companies, donating to a candidate directly is not the same thing as giving to a PAC supporting them. This distinction is important because of America’s opaque campaign finance laws.
Arguments by companies also ignore the fact that they gave their money through PACs prior to their pledge. In many cases, nothing has changed.
“Pledging to not give to one person doesn’t mean much when there are so numerous other ways corporate money reaches elected officials,” Daniel Weiner, former senior counsel at Federal Election Commission, said. He now works at Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. These pledges are largely symbolic.”
Walmart’s three-month-long moral stand was not a temporary one. The retail giant announced in January that it would stop all donations to the 147 legislators who opposed the election results. However, in April, the company donated $30,000 to National Republican Congressional Committee (the party that supports House Republicans in election campaigns).
Two-thirds of these House members voted against Biden’s win.
Walmart donated $30,000 more to the House’s counterpart for Senate Republicans: the National Republican Senatorial Committee. This group is headed by Sen. Rick Scott, a Florida senator who objected to the election’s certificate. He, along with seven other GOP senators, stands to benefit from this contribution. The Associated Press did not return messages left at both committees.
General Electric stated in January that it would stop donating to legislators who voted against certification because it believed it was important to “ensure that our future contributions continue reflecting our values and commitments to democracy.” But that wasn’t what actually happened.
General Electric donated $15,000 to each of the House and Senate GOP election teams in April.
Pfizer also pledged to stop contributing to Republican objectors for six more months. After three months, Pfizer gave $20,000 to the GOP Senate group. Sharon Castillo, a spokeswoman for Pfizer, told the AP that the company made a distinction between funding individual legislators and supporting groups designed to aid those same legislators. She said, “We don’t believe it is an accurate connection.”
She said that Pfizer did not make any commitment to the Senate election committee that Pfizer’s donation would be used for senators who voted against the certification.
AT&T also promised not to give money lawmakers who objected to its services, but in February the company donated $5,000 to the House Conservatives Fund. Margaret Boles, a company spokeswoman, stated that AT&T was given assurances that the money would not be paid to legislators who object to the election results. However, the PAC is headed by a lawmaker who made the same claim.
Campaign finance experts claim that it is impossible to predict whether money given to Republican political PACs will be used to fund incumbents who opposed the election results. These Republican committees are similar to the ones for Democrats and can help incumbents in many ways. They may make direct contributions, or provide technical and professional assistance with voter data, advertising, and get-out–the-vote.
Corporate donations to party committees don’t include dark money contributions that have been made to groups not required to make public details. Corporate giving is encouraged by dark money.
Ciara Torres–Spelliscy is a Stetson University Law Professor who studies corporate campaign finance.
Many of those who opposed the certification had previously relied heavily on the GOP House or Senate election committees and are likely to seek substantial assistance from them again.
The NRCC distributed contributions for the 2020 election to 39 Republican legislators who objected to it, compared to 11 who didn’t. The sum total of the five-fold increase in money received by Jan. 6’s objectors last year was five times greater than the amount received by those who later voted for certifying the electoral results.
Pfizer and GE, Walmart, and other companies contacted the AP stated that their criticism of lawmakers who objected the election results is valid.
Other companies may not be so shrewd as to make the pledges, but they could just be trying to appear good in front of the public. The pledges were not made by many companies, as they tended to avoid giving large donations to legislators.
Weiner stated that companies would support efforts to defeat Republican measures making it more difficult to vote in many states if they were serious about supporting democracy.
Weiner stated that he doesn’t believe these companies give money to insurgent groups. They give money, and they are pressured to do so for many reasons that all have to do with their bottom line.
Some companies actually fulfilled their pledges. Hallmark, for example, stated it would not donate money to objectors. The record shows that Hallmark made no PAC donations this year and no direct giving to the 147 objectionors.
Hallmark also asked two Republican senators to object. Roger Marshall of Kansas and Josh Hawley from Missouri asked Hallmark to return any direct contributions it made before the insurrection. Campaign finance records don’t yet reflect these refunds. Two senators did not respond to messages seeking their opinion.
Others announced that they would suspend campaign contributions after Jan. 6, to allow them to reassess and reevaluate their campaign finance strategy. This list includes Charles Schwab and Kraft Heinz, Archer Daniels Midland, Citigroup, Archer Daniels Midland, and Citigroup.
The amount of money that companies give to Republican groups is insignificant compared to the vast amounts of cash donated overall. Walmart’s $60,000 donation to the GOP Senate or House committees is only a fraction the company’s total political spending, which was over $5 million last year.
As they seek to build good relationships with the party in power, companies often give money to both Democrats and Republicans. These pledges are not uncommon.
Jan. 6 appeared to shake up this calibration. Jan. 6 was a shakeup in that calibration. The Capitol attack on American democracy was so shocking and the falsehoods behind it so outrageous, some loyal Republicans deserted their president and decried the objectors within their ranks.
If the opposition won, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky stated that “our democracy would enter into a death spiral”.
All but the 147 appeared to be on the side for the angels. Corporations rushed to join the pro-democracy movement. The devil was in all the details.
