Walmart’s $10K gift to Abbott a sign money talks
Testifying at the Legislature? Writing a letter to an elected official? Those won’t get a company looking to change public policy anywhere.
To get a politician’s attention, executives write checks. And sometimes, executives have to look the other way when an incumbent does something unsavory.
A Walmart spokesperson said as much when CNBC News’s Brian Schwartz noticed the company’s “PAC for sustainable government” had donated $10,000 to Gov. Greg Abbott’s campaign on Sept. 29. The governor had just signed some of the nation’s most restrictive abortion and voting laws and was doing his best to hobble efforts to slow the COVID-19 pandemic.
“As a company that operates in all 50 states, it is necessary for us to engage political leaders from both parties across a broad spectrum of policy matters. Our company and PAC engage in a bipartisan manner based on a range of issues that impact our associates, customers and shareholders,” CNBC quoted an unnamed Walmart representative as saying.
Polls show most Americans and Texans consider the abortion and voting measures outrageous, but Abbott is more worried about right-wing challenger Don Huffines than moderates. And Walmart is more worried about losing influence than defending human rights.
“We have not been and will never be a single-issue contributor, and we recognize that at times elected officials will back legislation we don’t support or condone,” a representative told CNBC News. “However, it’s important that we continue to engage in the political process and make our views known to policymakers and other stakeholders.”
In other words, businesses must keep writing checks to get what they want.
Most people will consider Walmart’s gift a tacit endorsement of Abbott’s increasingly extremist policies, even if the company insists it’s not. The PAC also gave $5,000 to Abbott’s erstwhile rival for the right-wing crown, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.
Walmart’s statement is kind of sweet in an old-timey way, suggesting that voters should not expect corporations to care about social issues. Aw, shucks, Walmart says, we’re just buying influence for issues like taxes, leave us out of the culture war.
Meanwhile, activists from both parties are downloading campaign finance reports to see who is collecting corporate money. They then weaponize the data to let voters know who is enabling the politicians they’ve come to despise.
Both Democratic and Republican activists have gone after AT&T for donating $132,000 not only to Abbott but to other Texas politicians who made it more difficult to vote. Corporate PACs should expect more scrutiny as politicians fundraise for next year’s election.
Some elected officials rely on corporate money more than others. U.S. Rep. Michael Burgess, who represents the DallasFort Worth area, gets 52 percent of his money from business
PACs, according to a recent analysis. Sen. Ted Cruz relies on them for less than 2 percent.
Politicians often claim campaign donations do not influence them, but Walmart’s statement suggests otherwise. Why else give money to every incumbent regardless of party? The money is clearly not about backing a specific ideology, so what’s the point if you’re not buying influence from someone with power?
The way American politicians raise money would be considered bald-faced corruption in other nations. Nonstop, yearround fundraising is illegal in many places. Other systems cap how much a politician can raise and spend. What’s shocking about Texas is the absence of effective conflict-of-interest laws.
Commission Shift, a nonprofit campaign seeking an overhaul ethics at the Texas Railroad Commission, recently studied who finances the reelection campaigns of the three people who regulate the oil and gas industry.
No big surprise that 67 percent of donations come from people or organizations connected to the oil and gas industry. Most of the money comes from pipeline and wastewater disposal companies, the sectors where commissioners have the most power to resolve disputes and issue permits.
A comparison of the agency’s docket with campaign finance records reveals activity that would be felonious elsewhere.
“The commissioners take campaign funds from parties with active cases pending before their agency,” the nonprofit’s analysis found. “Too often, the commission has focused on accelerated oil and gas development at the expense of safety, economic vitality and stewardship of natural resources and the environment.”
None of this is new, and no statewide elected official will whisper a word about campaign finance reform. (For the record, they are all Republicans.) No bill to tighten conflict of interest laws has emerged from a legislative committee in years. (Democrats chair some committees in Austin.)
The private sector exerts enormous effort to ensure the interests of the company and its leaders are aligned. Too bad we don’t do the same in politics.