Corporations are never going to save us. They’re never even going to meet the low bar they set for their own PR purposes, as the aftermath of the attack on the U.S. Capitol reminds us.
Following the violent insurrection by Trump supporters trying to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election, dozens of major companies swore they would not contribute to the campaigns of the 147 Republican lawmakers who followed the attack by voting against certifying the results. Tuesday marked six months since January 6, and many of those companies had long since broken their own promises.
In some cases, like Intel, AT&T, and Cigna, it took less than two months.
The common excuse these corporations use is that they aren’t giving directly to the Republicans who tried to prevent the peaceful transition of power. They’re just giving to PACs that support those Republicans. AT&T told the Associated Press that when it gave $5,000 to the House Conservatives Fund, it extracted the promise that its money wouldn’t go to support any of the House members who tried to overturn the election results. Here’s the thing: The House Conservatives Fund is run by Rep. Mike Johnson, who himself voted against certifying President Biden’s win.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee, likewise, is run by Sen. Rick Scott, who came back after the bloody attack on the Capitol and voted to block the will of the people. Walmart, General Electric, and Pfizer have all gone from claiming they wouldn’t contribute to any of the 147 anti-democracy Republicans to giving money to the NRSC. Walmart and GE also gave to the National Republican Congressional Committee, though two-thirds of House Republicans tried to stop the peaceful transition of power.
A Pfizer spokeswoman told the AP that giving to an individual politician’s campaign and a committee or PAC that supports that politician’s campaign are two tooootally different things. “We just don’t think it is an accurate connection,” she said. And no, Pfizer didn’t get the NRSC to promise that its money wouldn’t go to the eight senators who wanted to overturn the election. Of course, it wouldn’t have mattered much if it had. Even if the NRSC didn’t technically send Pfizer’s money to support Sen. John Kennedy, the one senator who voted against certification and is up for reelection in 2022, it would have $20,000 more than it had prior to Pfizer’s donation, which could go to everyone but Kennedy, freeing up money that theoretically came from other sources to go to Kennedy. Money is money. If the NRSC has extra money, Kennedy benefits. And if the NRCC has extra money, the 139 Republican House members who undermined U.S. democracy damn sure benefit.
These companies said the thing that would make them look good back in January. Then, it seemed important to appear to defend democracy. But it didn’t take them long to quietly go back on that or decide that their initial commitments had a loophole you could drive a truck (full of cash) through. Because corporations are not in the business of protecting democracy. They’re in the business of profit, and if giving money to the people trying to overturn elections looks like the path to profit, that’s the path they’re taking.
Following the violent insurrection by Trump supporters trying to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election, dozens of major companies swore they would not contribute to the campaigns of the 147 Republican lawmakers who followed the attack by voting against certifying the results. Tuesday marked six months since January 6, and many of those companies had long since broken their own promises.
In some cases, like Intel, AT&T, and Cigna, it took less than two months.
The common excuse these corporations use is that they aren’t giving directly to the Republicans who tried to prevent the peaceful transition of power. They’re just giving to PACs that support those Republicans. AT&T told the Associated Press that when it gave $5,000 to the House Conservatives Fund, it extracted the promise that its money wouldn’t go to support any of the House members who tried to overturn the election results. Here’s the thing: The House Conservatives Fund is run by Rep. Mike Johnson, who himself voted against certifying President Biden’s win.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee, likewise, is run by Sen. Rick Scott, who came back after the bloody attack on the Capitol and voted to block the will of the people. Walmart, General Electric, and Pfizer have all gone from claiming they wouldn’t contribute to any of the 147 anti-democracy Republicans to giving money to the NRSC. Walmart and GE also gave to the National Republican Congressional Committee, though two-thirds of House Republicans tried to stop the peaceful transition of power.
A Pfizer spokeswoman told the AP that giving to an individual politician’s campaign and a committee or PAC that supports that politician’s campaign are two tooootally different things. “We just don’t think it is an accurate connection,” she said. And no, Pfizer didn’t get the NRSC to promise that its money wouldn’t go to the eight senators who wanted to overturn the election. Of course, it wouldn’t have mattered much if it had. Even if the NRSC didn’t technically send Pfizer’s money to support Sen. John Kennedy, the one senator who voted against certification and is up for reelection in 2022, it would have $20,000 more than it had prior to Pfizer’s donation, which could go to everyone but Kennedy, freeing up money that theoretically came from other sources to go to Kennedy. Money is money. If the NRSC has extra money, Kennedy benefits. And if the NRCC has extra money, the 139 Republican House members who undermined U.S. democracy damn sure benefit.
These companies said the thing that would make them look good back in January. Then, it seemed important to appear to defend democracy. But it didn’t take them long to quietly go back on that or decide that their initial commitments had a loophole you could drive a truck (full of cash) through. Because corporations are not in the business of protecting democracy. They’re in the business of profit, and if giving money to the people trying to overturn elections looks like the path to profit, that’s the path they’re taking.