| 1 | University of California | $1,481,065 | ||
| 2 | Goldman Sachs | $1,037,395 | ||
| 3 | Harvard University | $848,270 | ||
| 4 | Microsoft Corp | $809,799 | ||
| 5 | Google Inc | $796,564 | ||
| 6 | JPMorgan Chase & Co | $703,358 | ||
| 7 | Citigroup Inc | $681,618 | ||
| 8 | Sidley Austin LLP | $604,938 | ||
| 9 | University of Chicago | $601,589 | ||
| 10 | Stanford University | $586,204 | ||
| 11 | Skadden, Arps et al | $564,345 | ||
| 12 | Time Warner | $544,601 | ||
| 13 | UBS AG | $537,469 | ||
| 14 | Wilmerhale Llp | $526,992 | ||
| 15 | IBM Corp | $525,857 | ||
| 16 | Columbia University | $517,399 | ||
| 17 | Morgan Stanley | $513,623 | ||
| 18 | National Amusements Inc | $506,751 | ||
| 19 | Kirkland & Ellis | $501,335 | ||
| 20 | US Government | $483,956 |
To Obama Campaign, Payments 2006
| 1 | University of Chicago | $156,054 | ||
| 2 | Kirkland & Ellis | $143,138 | ||
| 3 | Henry Crown & Co | $79,500 | ||
| 4 | Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal | $74,950 | ||
| 5 | Northwestern University | $72,930 | ||
| 6 | Exelon Corp | $71,850 | ||
| 7 | Sidley, Austin et al | $71,432 | ||
| 8 | Mayer Brown | $69,960 | ||
| 9 | Jenner & Block | $62,710 | ||
| 10 | Soros Fund Management | $61,605 | ||
| 11 | Goldman Sachs | $61,500 | ||
| 12 | Clifford Law Offices | $59,550 | ||
| 13 | Simmons Cooper LLC | $58,500 | ||
| 14 | Tejas Securities | $57,250 | ||
| 15 | JP Morgan Chase & Co | $56,600 | ||
| 16 | Ariel Capital Management | $55,650 | ||
| 17 | Skadden, Arps et al | $54,071 | ||
| 18 | Winston & Strawn | $52,450 | ||
| 19 | Piper Rudnick LLP | $45,600 | ||
| 20 | Holland Capital Management | $43,350 |
Total Political Payoffs (Dollars, To Dem%, To Rep%)
| 1 | AT&T Inc | $40,838,395 | 44% | 55% | |
| 2 | American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees | $40,690,630 | 98% | 1% | |
| 3 | National Assn of Realtors | $34,635,003 | 48% | 51% | |
| 4 | Goldman Sachs | $30,878,682 | 63% | 35% | |
| 5 | American Assn for Justice (Trial Lawyers of America) | $30,103,429 | 90% | 9% | |
| 6 | Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers | $29,684,341 | 97% | 2% | |
| 7 | National Education Assn | $29,624,876 | 93% | 6% | |
| 8 | Laborers Union | $27,797,489 | 91% | 7% | |
| 9 | Service Employees International Union | $27,363,922 | 95% | 3% | |
| 10 | Carpenters & Joiners Union | $26,789,808 | 89% | 9% |
| AIG TOTAL | $9,342,839 | 50% | 50% |
sigh, thats an amazing lost of money for share holders
ReplyDeleteHow so. Think of it in terms of the favors they reap.. not the small amount they spent. fwiw. Just saying.
ReplyDeleteExactly....What an amazing return they received for such relatively small contributions. For example, compare AIG's $9 million payoff to what they've reaped...measure three ways:
ReplyDelete1) $180 billion bailout (just the explicit part and just to date). That's 20,000 times their "investment".
2) Heck the $9 million pales in comparison to just the bonues they've paid SINCE the bailout.
3) The company still has a market cap of $3.75 billion. It should have been $0 a long time ago. That's 416 times their "investment."
The contributions aren't what they're getting the return on.
ReplyDeleteThe influence of these corporations isn't from their contributions -- that's just a smokescreen, an illusion meant to make the population believe that all the candidates need is monetary in order to have a reasonable chance of winning. It's an illusion meant to make the system appear uncontrolled.
No, the real influence is the interconnection between the people who sit on the boards of the various corporations and who otherwise pull the strings from behind the scenes. And in particular, their control over those corporations that own the media.
Any candidate who isn't favorable in the eyes of those people either never sees any media exposure at all or, if they are already sufficiently well known, never sees any favorable media exposure.
This works because very few people would ever vote for someone their primary source of information (the media) hints is a bad candidate, and even fewer would vote for someone they've never heard of.
As long as the mass media retains its control over the "information" the people use to make decisions with, the system as it is will remain in place, and candidates who really have the interests of the people at heart will have little chance of running and almost no chance of winning.