NBC News reports, More than 150 companies back update to Voting Rights Act:
More than 150 companies, including PepsiCo, Amazon and Target, threw their support behind updating the Voting Rights Act in a letter released Wednesday.
The signatories, all U.S. employers, urged Congress to enact the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation that would restore a key provision of the 1965 law that was stripped out by the Supreme Court in 2013. The bill would again require jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to get permission from the Department of Justice to make changes to their elections, using an updated formula to determine those jurisdictions.
The letter made no mention of Republican efforts to tighten voting rules across the country after former President Donald Trump’s election loss, focusing instead on “deep inequities” exposed by the 2020 contest in “how our elections are run.”
“Despite decades of progress, impediments to exercising the right to vote persist in many states, especially for communities of color. We need federal protections to safeguard this fundamental right for all Americans,” the letter, obtained by NBC News, said.
[S]everal signatories, including PepsiCo, Macy’s, Ikea, and Nestlé USA, appear to be taking a stand on voting access and federal voting legislation for the first time, while other signatories, such as Amazon, Patagonia, Cisco and Target, have spoken out against voting restrictions.
This spring, hundreds of corporations and business leaders voiced support for voting rights and opposed Republican-led restrictions being considered or enacted in states like Georgia and Texas.
Last month, more than 70 companies said they supported passage of the For the People Act, Democrats’ priority piece of voting legislation. It was filibustered by Senate Republicans the very next day.
How many of these same companies have renewed giving money to Republican candidates and Republican affiliated PACs after halting donations in response to the MAGA/QAnon insurrection on January 6? They can’t have it both ways: “Oh look how wonderful we are for supporting voting rights legislation,” while at the same time funding an anti-democratic, anti-majoritarian authoritarian white nationalist party enacting Jim Crow 2.0 voter suppression laws and “voter nullification” laws (a GQP legislature can set aside the results of an election and decide the winner).
Austin Sarat, the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College, and Dennis Aftergut, a former federal prosecutor, write Corporations are funding Trump-supporting, anti-democratic Republican lawmakers again:
“Don’t watch what they say; watch where they spend.” That variation on a popular adage — “I no longer listen to what they say; I watch what they do” — applies aptly to big corporate PACs that have shamefully resumed their political spending habits after the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection.
That’s according to a new report by the Washington-based ethics watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. According to the study, in the few months since the Capitol riot, 170 business PACs have contributed more than $2.6 million to campaigns and PACs associated with the 147 senators and Congress members who objected to certifying the election.
Citizens can and should hold those companies to account, particularly those that publicly committed to pause or stop contributing to lawmakers whose actions supported “the Big Lie.”
[S]ince most corporate donations come in the form of PACs, companies may claim their money has strings attached. But under current disclosure requirements, we really can’t tell exactly how those PACs, with their vast pools of funds, are ultimately doling out cash.
We may like to think of the 19th century’s so-called Gilded Age of railroad tycoons and Standard Oil as ancient history. The era was one where “wealth influenced and co-opted the government at all levels, through unregulated campaign contributions, vote buying, and similar machinations,” according to The Atlantic. But continuing corporate funding of the “sedition caucus” reminds us of novelist William Faulkner’s insight: “The past is never dead. It’s not even past.”
This is why it is essential for those who want to see American democracy endure to support the House-passed For the People Act, now pending in the Senate. The act provides a way to help end the corrupting influence of wealth in American politics. It uplifts the power of small political donors by providing a federal match for all contributions up to $200. The act also compels more dark money disclosure by requiring, with limited exceptions, any corporation, union, nonprofit or similar organization that spends more than $10,000 in an election cycle to disclose all donors who give at least that amount.
But transparency is only the first step. Pro-democracy groups must also put bad corporate citizens on a “democracy watchlist.” That could encourage consumers to spend only with companies that keep their word not to reward politicians and public officials who threaten democracy.
CREW reported that “228 companies have, so far, held to their promises to stop giving either to all members of Congress or the 147 who voted not to certify the election results.” Dell Technologies, for example, told CNBC in early spring that it had “no plans to revisit the decision to suspend contributions to members of Congress whose statements and activities during the post-election period weren’t in line with Dell Technologies’ principles.”
Such companies deserve praise and patronage.
We’ve learned with a vengeance how fragile democracy is and how it depends on ordinary citizens to keep it.
Good on these companies for publicly supporting the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, but actions speak louder than words. If these companies are still funding the anti-democratic, anti-majoritarian authoritarian white nationalist GQP, they are hypocritical subversives.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Huffington Post reports, “Unions Gave Money To GOP Lawmakers Who Voted To Overturn The Election”, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/union-money-gop-overturn-election_n_60ef168ee4b022142cf4432b
[L]abor unions are also a significant source of political contributions, and while they tend to steer far more money to Democrats, some spread their contributions around to both political parties ― including to members of Congress who didn’t want to certify Joe Biden’s victory in the Electoral College.
Through May, the political action committees of at least six major unions contributed to the campaigns of 13 of the 139 House Republicans who wanted to throw out the election results of either Arizona or Pennsylvania. None of the money HuffPost identified went directly to the campaigns of the eight GOP senators who objected, though some went to a party committee that would work to support those lawmakers.
All these contributions were made after Jan. 6, the day Trump supporters stormed the Capitol, leading to five deaths.
The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) contributed to the reelection efforts of eight objectors: Rep. Lloyd Smucker (Pa.), $2,000; Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (Pa.), $2,000; Rep. Barry Loudermilk (Ga.), $2,000; Rep. Adrian Smith (Neb.), $1,000; Rep. Ron Estes (Kans.), $1,000; Rep. Richard Hudson (N.C.), $1,000; Rep. Kevin Hern (Okla.), $1,000; and Rep. Greg Steube (Fla.), $1,000.
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) contributed $5,000 to the campaign of Rep. Jeff Van Drew, the former New Jersey Democrat who opposed the impeachment of Trump, defected to the GOP in 2019 and vowed “undying support” for the former president.
The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), arguably Biden’s closest ally in the labor movement, gave money to the reelection efforts of two members who did not want to certify Biden’s victory: Van Drew, $2,500; and Rep. Rob Wittman (Va.), $5,000. The IAFF was the first major union to endorse Biden for president during his campaign.
The International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, better known simply as the Ironworkers, contributed $2,500 to the campaign of Florida Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart.
The United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) gave $1,000 to the campaign of Rep. Hal Rogers, the lone member of Kentucky’s congressional delegation who objected to the Electoral College results.
The Seafarers International Union of North America contributed $1,000 to the campaign of Florida Rep. Brian Mast.
Several unions also contributed to Republican campaign committees. While these contributions are not made directly to individual candidate’s campaigns, the money still ends up going to the reelection efforts of lawmakers who objected to Biden’s victory. That’s especially true in the House, where more than half of the GOP caucus voted to challenge the results.
The unions that contributed to the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) for House GOP candidates included the IAFF, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association and the National Association of Letter Carriers, which each gave $15,000. The National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association gave $15,000 to the NRCC and another $15,000 to the committee’s building fund.
ALPA gave $15,000 apiece to the NRCC and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), and another $45,000 to each committee’s building fund. The Ironworkers gave $15,000 apiece to the NRCC and the NRSC. The chair of the NRSC is Florida Sen. Rick Scott, one of the eight objectors to Biden’s victory in the Senate.
[S]everal of the unions above have been more likely than other unions to give money to Republicans each cycle, making it less surprising they would end up making contributions to election objectors.
The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin writes, “Corporate America must commit to action on voting rights”, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/15/corporate-america-needs-commit-action-voting-rights/
Corporate leaders on Wednesday did their best to declare that they really do favor voting rights. NBC News reports: “More than 150 companies, including PepsiCo, Amazon and Target, threw their support behind updating the Voting Rights Act in a letter released Wednesday. The signatories, all U.S. employers, urged Congress to enact the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation that would restore a key provision of the 1965 law that was stripped out by the Supreme Court in 2013.”
The letter, however, was silent on the rash of Jim Crow laws pushed by Republicans in state legislatures or on whether they would support some version of H.R. 1. This is totally insufficient. While the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act is important, their silence about the ongoing threat of voter suppression and vote manipulation (i.e., the empowerment of partisan players to overturn election results) amounts to enabling these nefarious activities.
Voting rights advocates and the White House should encourage corporations to sign a democracy pledge that would include such concrete items as:
Supporting the proposed, slimmed-down version of H.R 1/S.R. 1 that Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) offered.
Making Election Day a paid holiday.
Helping all their employees register to vote.
Offering their own business facilities as voting locations.
Refusing — and actually meaning it this time — to support any politician at any level of government who promotes the big lie of a stolen election or who sought to overturn the election results in 2020. (That would still leave them free to support scores of Republicans in House, Senate and state elections.)
Funding public service announcements and lobbying state legislatures in defense of voting rights.
Making clear that they would consider state voting laws when deciding to locate new operations.
Refusing to commit advertising dollars to social media platforms that do not follow their own guidelines on election disinformation and hate speech.
Civil rights groups can recognize companies that sign on and allow them to advertise their seal of approval as good corporate citizens. Civil rights groups can also monitor their performance to make certain they are living up to their obligations. Chief executives who do not embrace their civic obligations should expect public pressure. Consumers should know if they are spending their money on products and services that share their values.