Corporations United

Ten years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its infamous ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC). The decision, authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy and backed by the court’s conservative majority, overturned a century of law to allow unlimited corporate spending in federal elections.

So how much money have for-profit corporations spent to influence elections since Jan. 21, 2010?

Because of rise of “dark money” groups that spend millions to influence elections but under current law are not required to disclose their donors, it’s impossible to say for sure.

But an analysis of FEC data obtained from the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org) and other sources provides the following insights.

Key Findings

• Over 2,200 corporations have reported a total of $313 million in donations to over 500 super PACs for the purpose of influencing elections.
• Additionally, 30 corporate trade groups, which do not disclose their donors, have spent $226 million for the purpose of influencing elections.
• This means there has been at least $539 million in corporate political spending to influence elections that we know of – and that this is almost certainly an undercount.

Additional Findings

• The top 20 corporate donors account for $118 million – more than a third – of corporate donations reported to the FEC, and the entities donated exclusively to super PACs that back Republicans.
• Only four of these top corporations are publicly traded. Three are energy corporations – Chevron, NextEra Energy and Pinnacle West Capital – and the fourth is a subsidiary of British American Tobacco.
• All 20 of the reported corporate donors have executives, chairpersons, or other top figures who also have donated generously to political campaigns – collectively, more than $127 million, mostly to support Republicans.
• At least half of the 16 private corporations among these top donors are run by billionaires.
• The surge in corporate spending primarily benefited a handful of super PACs dedicated to electing Republican candidates. The top 20 recipients received $230 million, or 74% of the total disclosed corporate donations.
• The 18 top super PACs that exclusively or almost exclusively supported Republican candidates account for 93% of the top spenders and 69% of all disclosed corporate election spending.
• Among the nondisclosing corporate trade groups, the US Chamber of Commerce alone accounts for $143 million – 64% of the total.

Section 1: Disclosed Money

Thanks to Citizens United, corporations can now channel as much money as they want into dark money groups that influence elections – over $1 billion and counting – so it’s not possible to know exactly how much corporate election spending is occurring.

Nevertheless, FEC data from the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org) reveals that over 2,200 corporations have reported a total of $310 million in donations to over 500 political entities for the purpose of influencing elections.

The top 20 corporate donors account for $118 million – more than a third – of the corporate donations reported to the FEC. For the purposes of analyzing these 20 corporate donors, where multiple corporations are subsidiaries of a parent corporation, or when multiple corporations are controlled by the same individuals, they are treated as a single entity.

Out of the top 20 reporting corporate donors, only four are publicly traded, of which three are energy corporations – Chevron, NextEra Energy and Pinnacle West Capital – and the fourth is RAI Services Co., a part of tobacco company Reynolds American Inc (which is itself a subsidiary of the multinational British American Tobacco). Fossil fuel corporations make up the greatest proportion of the top donors, representing seven of the total, followed by financial and real estate corporations, of which there are six. Five of the corporations are based in Texas and four are based in Florida (see Table 1).

Table 1: Top 20 Corporate political spenders disclosed to FEC, 2010-2020

Source: Public Citizen analysis of OpenSecrets.org and FEC data.

These top corporate donors gave exclusively to super PACs that back Republicans. (See Table 2.)

Table 2: Republican beneficiaries of donations from the top 20 corporate political spenders disclosed to FEC, 2010-2020

Source: Public Citizen analysis of OpenSecrets.org and FEC data.

All 20 of the top corporations spending to influence elections have executives, chairpersons, or other top figures who have who have donated generously to political campaigns – collectively, more than $127 million. At least half of the 16 private corporations of these corporations are run by a billionaire or billionaire family (see Table 3).

In every instance, the corporations’ political spending mirrored the political spending of the individual executives, board chairs, owners and/or funders that control them. One difference between the corporate donations and the individuals’ donations is that a few of the executives have occasionally supported Democratic candidates. Another is the scale of the donations – in 75% of the top 20, the corporate spending was significantly larger than the spending by the corporations’ top executives or owner. The top executives or owner whose historic spending surpasses that of the corporations they control are Mountaire Corp.’s Ronald Cameron (over $25 million), TRT Holdings’ Robert Rowling ($9.5 million), Koch Industries’ Charles and David Koch ($20 million combined), Stephens Inc.’s Warren Stephens ($26 million) and Crow Holdings’ Harlan Crow ($6.8 million).

Charles Koch and his late brother David may be the most politically ambitious and notorious of the billionaire executives that spent millions to influence elections while overseeing a corporation that also spends millions to influence elections. The Kochs, however, are not alone.

Table 3: Political spending by corporate executives from the top 20 corporate political spenders disclosed to FEC, 2010-2020

Source: Public Citizen analysis of OpenSecrets.org and FEC data.

The surge in corporate spending primarily benefited a handful of super PACs that were dedicated to electing Republicans during the Obama administration and/or supporting candidates in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries.  The top 20 recipients received $230 million, or 74% of the total disclosed corporate donations (see Table 4). The 18 top super PACs that exclusively or almost exclusively supported Republican candidates account for 93% of the top spenders and 69% of all disclosed corporate election spending.

Table 4: Top 20 Recipients of Corporate Donations for Electoral Purposes, 2010-2020

Source: Public Citizen analysis of OpenSecrets.org and FEC data.

Over the past decade, disclosed corporate political spending has been particularly active during presidential elections. In 2012, this spending was primarily focused on defeating President Barack Obama or electing his Republican opponent, then-Gov. (now Sen.) Mitt Romney. In 2016, the spending was primarily focused on the Republican primaries.

Several of the corporate political spenders that have been active over the past decade have already started spending in the 2020 election, with the most notable recipients of corporate donations being the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity Action, Engage Texas (which is devoted to registering new Republican voters), and the Congressional Leadership Fund and Senate Leadership Fund. Among the top 10 corporate donors, the only notable Democratic donor is Waterfront Strategies, a consulting group and advertising vendor that works for Democratic campaigns.

Table 5: Top 10 corporate donors so far in 2020 election cycle

Source: Public Citizen analysis of OpenSecrets.org and FEC data.

Section 2: Dark Money

Supreme Court Anthony Justice Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion in the Citizens United ruling that the “advent of the Internet” meant shareholders and citizens would have ample means to know how much corporations are spending to influence elections and how they’re spending it.

But, contrary to Justice Kennedy’s assumption, corporations that want to keep their political activities secret can quietly influence elections by contributing funds to “dark money” groups – that is, groups that engage in election spending but are exempt from disclosure requirements. These nondisclosing groups are primarily organized under section 501(c)(6) of the tax code as trade or business associations and 501(c)(4) social welfare nonprofit groups. Lawmakers have repeatedly introduced legislation to introduce new disclosure requirements that expose the sources of dark money, but Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has consistently led his caucus to block these pro-transparency efforts. Advocates have also pushed for reforms that push the Securities and Exchange Commission to require publicly traded corporations to disclose the political contributions to shareholders, but neither Obama’s nor Trump’s SEC chairs have supported these reforms. Conservatives in Congress have even gone so far as to bury language in the federal budget bill that stops the SEC from finalizing this kind of transparency rule.

Since January 2010, these dark money groups have spent more than $1 billion to influence elections, and because of their secretive nature, it’s impossible to know how much of that $1 billion comes from corporations.

However, nearly a quarter of those funds – $226 million – can be traced to 501(c)(6) trade groups that accept contributions from corporate members. For the purposes of this analysis, we count this election spending as corporate money.

This inference comes with a few caveats. For example, while some corporations disclose their contributions to 501(c)(6) trade groups, it is not possible to determine that those specific funds were used for electioneering purposes and not earmarked for other purposes. Additionally, some trade groups have raised at least some money, presumably for election purposes, from individuals. Citizens United did nothing to alter billionaires’ ability to donate to these organizations.

Nevertheless, because 501(c)(6) trade groups collect large sums from corporate members to advance corporate interests and because of the fungibility of the money the groups use to pursue their various interests, it’s reasonable to count the $226 million they spent to influence elections as “corporate money” for analytical purposes.

A single corporate trade group, the US Chamber of Commerce, is responsible for the vast majority of this spending: $143 million, or 64% of the total since 2010 (see Table 6). The US Chamber’s election spending has overwhelmingly supported Republicans, while other trade associations, such as the National Association of Realtors and the Credit Union National Association, have supported a mix of Republicans and Democrats.

Table 6: The 30 corporate 501(c)(6) trade groups collectively spending $226 million spending to influence elections, 2010-2020.

Source: Public Citizen analysis of OpenSecrets.org and FEC data.

The groundbreaking 2018 Issue One report Dark Money Illuminated revealed more than $85 million in contributions to the US Chamber of Commerce, including $68 million in contributions from corporations and $9.8 million in contributions from other 501(c)(6) groups. Top corporate contributors to the US Chamber include Dow Chemical, Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, and Aetna (see Table 7).

Again, because the lack of disclosure makes tracing the purpose of the funds impossible, we can’t know with certainty whether and how much of these funds paid for its $143 million in election expenditures or whether, for example, any or all of these funds went toward the $956 million the US Chamber has spent on lobbying since 2010.

To err on the side of undercounting corporate contributions, contributions to the Chamber from 501(c)(4) groups – even those that are known to receive corporate funding – are not cannot be counted as “corporate.” For example, Crossroads Grassroots Political Strategies, a 501(c)(4) associated with Karl Rove’s American Crossroads super PAC gave the Chamber more than $5 million. The report reveals some of Crossroads’ donors – but these revealed donors primarily are still more dark money 501(c)(6) and 501(c)(4) groups that do not reveal their donors. The dark money shell game makes confidently attributing the true sources of these funds impossible. In the absence of legal disclosure requirements, the corporate revelations come from voluntary disclosures from corporations whose shareholders and other stakeholders have convinced them total secrecy is untenable (for details about corporations’ voluntary political spending disclosures, see the Center for Political Accountability’s annual CPA-Zicklin Index).

Table 7: Top 10 corporate and 501(c)(6) trade group donors to the US Chamber.

Source: Public Citizen analysis of Issue One data.

Including the contributions to the US Chamber of Commerce, the Dark Money Illuminated report finds $762 million in contributions to dark money groups, including $123 million in contributions to 501(c)(6) groups besides the Chamber.

Other kinds of groups, primarily 501(c)(4) nonprofits, account for $745 million in dark money spending since 2010, a significant majority. Issue One’s report identifies $246 million in contributions to 501(c)(4)s, much of it like the American Crossroads funding – impossible to trace because it largely comes from other dark money groups. The Issue One database identifies $22 million in contributions from corporations to groups besides the Chamber. No doubt a meaningful proportion of the rest also comes from corporate sources. But, for now, voters are in the dark.