Regulation creates uncertainty for managers – which they don’t like. John Gress/Getty ImagesĪt the core, firms spend when they are dependent on states, meaning that they have vested interests and operations in a state that are subject to regulation. We also interviewed industry insiders, political affairs consultants and lobbyists to complement our empirical findings.ĮxxonMobil is one of many companies that will likely spend a lot of money on upcoming elections. Specifically, the companies in these industries have industrial manufacturing processes that create toxic releases. The companies we studied (e.g., ExxonMobil and 3M) all operate in environmentally intensive industries – oil and gas, chemical, energy and manufacturing industries. We examined political contributions by publicly traded firms in elections for governor and the legislature across the 50 U.S. External forces spark donationsĪ new study we conducted with colleagues Trey Sutton and Bruce Lamont provides insight into the details of when and why corporations contribute to state gubernatorial and legislative candidates. ![]() Corporations can affect the air that you breathe, the water that you drink and the taxes that you pay. Companies’ attempts to manage state regulations have important effects on their operations directly as well as on state revenues and on the lives of state residents. That’s an over five-fold increase.Īs the next election approaches, corporate involvement in state politics is vital to understand. This is compared with the 2007-2008 election cycle prior to the Citizens United ruling, in which independent spending in these states amounted to $106 million. An examination of 16 states that provided pre-Citizens United data revealed that the 2018 election cycle saw over $540 million in independent spending across their state elections. ![]() Supreme Court decision that freed corporations (as well as nonprofits, unions and other associations) to spend unlimited amounts in elections, political spending skyrocketed. From Alaska to Alabama, firms spend huge sums of money to influence policymaking because they depend on their local business environments, resources and regulations.įor example, after Citizens United, a landmark 2010 U.S. This kind of political spending is also common across state governments. ![]() Facebook spent over $2 million in contributions and $24 million in lobbying during the same period. The operations of Facebook, for example, could be heavily affected by government legislation, whether from laws concerning net neutrality, data privacy, censorship or the company’s classification as a platform or publisher. As shown by campaign finance monitor the Center for Responsive Politics, those firms most affected by government regulation spend more.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |