More Than 50 Percent of Super PAC Mega-Donors are from Wall Street
Financial sector has already given more to outside groups than during any entire election cycle in history.
Unencumbered by much in the way of campaign finance regulation, Wall Street mega-donors are on pace to eclipse even their own "exorbitant precedents" during the 2016 election cycle, according to a new report from national watchdog group Public Citizen.
The analysis, which uses data from the Center for Responsive Politics and the Federal Election Commission, finds that employees and businesses in the finance, insurance, and real estate sector already had given more to outside groups--specifically, super PACs devoted to presidential candidates--by the end of March than during any entire election cycle in history.
On top of that, the securities and investment industry, a subset of the finance sector that includes hedge funds and private equity funds, also has given more to outside groups than in any full election cycle.
Further, the report reveals:
- A relative handful of donors--a mere 100 individuals and businesses--are providing an extraordinary amount of money--more than 60 percent of the$430.8 million given to presidential super PACs so far.
- Wall Street is providing far more than its share of this handful of donors--more than 50 percent.
Taylor Lincoln, research director for Public Citizen's Congress Watch division and author of the report, entitled Doubling Down (pdf), noted that "this pace of giving is particularly remarkable" in part because the donors "set these records without supporting two of the three remaining candidates." Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump both eschewed super PAC support during the primaries.
However, Doubling Down points out that Trump "appears to be edging away from his disavowal of super PAC support." But Sanders rival Hillary Clinton "has countenanced super PAC support all along," the report reads, "even as Sanders has savaged her for doing so--especially for accepting support from Wall Street."
Public Citizen draws special attention to the role big-money donors can play in a presidential transition team, "which plays a key role in determining the trajectory of the new administration."
Indeed, said Heath Brown, assistant professor of public policy at the City University of New York and an expert on presidential transitions: "History has shown that donors make up a vastly disproportionate share of winning presidential candidates' transition teams."
And if Wall Street benefits from that historical precedent, "it likely will continue to push its agenda of weakening and blocking rules stemming from the Dodd-Frank Act, which was designed to reduce the size of big banks and curb the kind of reckless behavior of banks that led to the 2008 financial collapse," Public Citizen warned in a statement.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Unencumbered by much in the way of campaign finance regulation, Wall Street mega-donors are on pace to eclipse even their own "exorbitant precedents" during the 2016 election cycle, according to a new report from national watchdog group Public Citizen.
The analysis, which uses data from the Center for Responsive Politics and the Federal Election Commission, finds that employees and businesses in the finance, insurance, and real estate sector already had given more to outside groups--specifically, super PACs devoted to presidential candidates--by the end of March than during any entire election cycle in history.
On top of that, the securities and investment industry, a subset of the finance sector that includes hedge funds and private equity funds, also has given more to outside groups than in any full election cycle.
Further, the report reveals:
- A relative handful of donors--a mere 100 individuals and businesses--are providing an extraordinary amount of money--more than 60 percent of the$430.8 million given to presidential super PACs so far.
- Wall Street is providing far more than its share of this handful of donors--more than 50 percent.
Taylor Lincoln, research director for Public Citizen's Congress Watch division and author of the report, entitled Doubling Down (pdf), noted that "this pace of giving is particularly remarkable" in part because the donors "set these records without supporting two of the three remaining candidates." Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump both eschewed super PAC support during the primaries.
However, Doubling Down points out that Trump "appears to be edging away from his disavowal of super PAC support." But Sanders rival Hillary Clinton "has countenanced super PAC support all along," the report reads, "even as Sanders has savaged her for doing so--especially for accepting support from Wall Street."
Public Citizen draws special attention to the role big-money donors can play in a presidential transition team, "which plays a key role in determining the trajectory of the new administration."
Indeed, said Heath Brown, assistant professor of public policy at the City University of New York and an expert on presidential transitions: "History has shown that donors make up a vastly disproportionate share of winning presidential candidates' transition teams."
And if Wall Street benefits from that historical precedent, "it likely will continue to push its agenda of weakening and blocking rules stemming from the Dodd-Frank Act, which was designed to reduce the size of big banks and curb the kind of reckless behavior of banks that led to the 2008 financial collapse," Public Citizen warned in a statement.
Unencumbered by much in the way of campaign finance regulation, Wall Street mega-donors are on pace to eclipse even their own "exorbitant precedents" during the 2016 election cycle, according to a new report from national watchdog group Public Citizen.
The analysis, which uses data from the Center for Responsive Politics and the Federal Election Commission, finds that employees and businesses in the finance, insurance, and real estate sector already had given more to outside groups--specifically, super PACs devoted to presidential candidates--by the end of March than during any entire election cycle in history.
On top of that, the securities and investment industry, a subset of the finance sector that includes hedge funds and private equity funds, also has given more to outside groups than in any full election cycle.
Further, the report reveals:
- A relative handful of donors--a mere 100 individuals and businesses--are providing an extraordinary amount of money--more than 60 percent of the$430.8 million given to presidential super PACs so far.
- Wall Street is providing far more than its share of this handful of donors--more than 50 percent.
Taylor Lincoln, research director for Public Citizen's Congress Watch division and author of the report, entitled Doubling Down (pdf), noted that "this pace of giving is particularly remarkable" in part because the donors "set these records without supporting two of the three remaining candidates." Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump both eschewed super PAC support during the primaries.
However, Doubling Down points out that Trump "appears to be edging away from his disavowal of super PAC support." But Sanders rival Hillary Clinton "has countenanced super PAC support all along," the report reads, "even as Sanders has savaged her for doing so--especially for accepting support from Wall Street."
Public Citizen draws special attention to the role big-money donors can play in a presidential transition team, "which plays a key role in determining the trajectory of the new administration."
Indeed, said Heath Brown, assistant professor of public policy at the City University of New York and an expert on presidential transitions: "History has shown that donors make up a vastly disproportionate share of winning presidential candidates' transition teams."
And if Wall Street benefits from that historical precedent, "it likely will continue to push its agenda of weakening and blocking rules stemming from the Dodd-Frank Act, which was designed to reduce the size of big banks and curb the kind of reckless behavior of banks that led to the 2008 financial collapse," Public Citizen warned in a statement.