Why San Jose should limit corporate spending in elections
As election season kicks into high gear, with major races in San Jose for mayor and City Council, voters can expect to see their mailboxes filled with flashy campaign mailers, thanks in large part to lavish spending of a small number of corporations aiming to protect their pocketbooks and influence our local government.
Independent expenditure committees allow corporations to spend unlimited amounts of cash on campaign ads. It is important to examine spending from foreign-influenced corporations or statewide PACs that bundle donations from such businesses. For instance, contributions to the California Apartment Association include millions in donations from foreign-influenced real estate giants such as Equity Residential and Essex Property Trust. Between two San Jose City Council races in 2020, the California Apartment Association spent $84,000.
Billion-dollar companies such as Chevron and Lyft have also used their money to influence elections. Lyft spent $40,000 in 2020 pushing its favored San Jose City Council candidates. Chevron gave money to the Silicon Valley Organization PAC, which collected more than $150,000 from foreign-influenced entities and spent $588,000 in two council races. During that election, SVO PAC made headlines for airing inflammatory, racist campaign ads.
Voting is a fundamental human right, the great equalizer to money and power, giving citizens both a voice and a seat at the table. Our votes determine the future of our community's housing, education, infrastructure and more. Yet this fundamental right is imperiled today, whether by blatant voter suppression in Georgia and Texas or by elected officials in San Jose who uphold this “pay-toplay” system for special interests to exert their power over our local governments thanks to outdated campaign finance laws.
It's been 12 years since the the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United reversed decades-old laws and opened up the floodgates for foreign-influenced corporations' campaign spending. Under the guise of freedom of speech, Citizens United created a massive loophole that has allowed billiondollar corporations with significant foreign ownership to pour money into our elections through PACs and independent expenditures. Even though foreign investors are banned from participating in our elections directly, they are allowed to do so by using corporations as an intermediary. The result? Communities shaped by special interests, and a growing distrust for our democratic institutions.
Why are big-money outsiders having a say in our future? Should the voices of overseas investors outweigh San Jose residents? Democracy should represent the public interest, not the highest bidder. We need to prohibit foreign-influenced corporations' election spending to protect our local democracy.
Now more than ever, it is critical that San Jose adopt an ordinance to ban foreign-influenced corporations from spending on local elections. In order to rebuild faith in our democracy, we need communities, not corporations, to determine our destiny.
An excellent model of this initiative exists in Seattle. In 2020, the Clean Campaigns Act was signed into law to curb corruption in election contributions. The Seattle ordinance builds on SEC policies and the wisdom of corporate governance and campaign finance experts such as former FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub to define a foreign-influenced corporation as having a single foreign owner holding 1% or more of shares or multiple foreign owners holding a cumulative 5% or more. Even these modest percentages of ownership are enough to influence corporate decision-making.
Stopping foreign-influenced corporations from spending money to sway our local elections is an issue of accountability that should transcend political parties. In a true democracy, elections would prioritize ordinary voters, not foreign investors.
It's time we root out the threat of corruption in San Jose and put power back into the hands of the people.