During every election cycle, U.S. residents give millions of dollars to candidates and political committees. But, other than liking a specific candidate, what motivates them?

“Contributions are a form of investment,” explains Steve Weiss, communications director for the Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog agency that tracks campaign contributions. “What the donor is hoping for is access. More money gets better access; donors hope to be able to discuss their legislative agenda with elected officials, in order to convince the lawmakers that their position is the one to adopt.”

Contracting Profits took a look at some of the political contributions made by building service contractors during the 2004 election cycle, and found that they are an active bunch, contributing to a variety of individuals and groups in both parties. We searched the Center for Responsive Politics’ Opensecrets.org campaign-finance database to find out where employees of 50 random large cleaning firms sent their donations. (Federal law doesn’t require committees to report small contributions, so only donations of $200 or more were included in this non-scientific survey.)

We found that the largest chunk of contributions went to Republican candidates (most notably President Bush) and committees (such as the Republican National Committee, Congressional Campaign Committee and state-level parties). There also were quite a few contributions to Democrats — namely Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, a former presidential candidate; and Illinois Senate candidate Barack Obama, as well as two large contributions from one individual to the Kansas State Democratic Committee. One-fifth of the contribution total went to political action committees (PACs), which represent a variety of interests, from franchising to promoting business in New Jersey.

Even though there’s a common stereotype that business owners tend to vote Republican, they don’t always donate to candidates they vote for, says Weiss.Republicans are getting the bulk of business-interest money because they’re the party in power, he explains.

“Republicans are the majority party in Congress, and they decide what legislation proceeds and what is blocked,” he explains.

Business interests tend to give more money to incumbents than challengers, unless the incumbent’s in trouble.

“They give to who they think will win, and in most cases, that’s the incumbent,” Weiss says.

One thing to note is that these thousands of dollars were contributed solely by individuals, and not by corporations or labor unions. Corporations and unions are prohibited from contributing directly to political candidates and committees, but they can set up affiliated political action committees, says a spokeswoman for the Federal Election Commission, a government agency that oversees elections and campaigns. Employees and other interested parties can then contribute to the PAC.

“The only political thing a company can spend corporate funds on is administrative expenses for the PAC,” the spokeswoman says. For instance, if a BSC administered a PAC, the company itself could fund phones and office space, but not contribute to the PAC fund as well.

Corporate-affiliated PACs get their funds primarily from company officers and other executive and administrative personnel. ServiceMaster, for instance, has a PAC, and several executive-level employees contributed hundreds of dollars each to that fund this cycle (we didn’t include contributions to company-run PACs in our survey).

Rank-and-file employees also can contribute, but there are strict limits as to how often and through what means they can be solicited. They can’t be coerced, nor can they be given raises or bonuses with the expectation that they donate the money back to the PAC.




POSTED ON: 9/1/2004