On Monday, the Financial Times of London revealed that the British military contractor BAE ranks very high on the list of corporations channeling funds to U.S. candidates for the 2006 elections, outspending some of the largest U.S. corporations, including ExxonMobil, Microsoft, and Citigroup.[1] -- "U.S. subsidiaries of British companies have doled out about $3.7m in political contributions ahead of November's congressional election," Stephanie Kirchgaessner reported, "with 68 per cent of the donations supporting Republican candidates." -- The three biggest beneficiaries of BAE's two political action committees are the chair of the House Appropriations Committee (Jerry Lewis, R-CA 41st), the ranking Democrat on the Defense Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee (John Murtha, D-PA 12th), and the chair of the House Armed Services Committee (Duncan Hunter, D-CA 52nd). -- Ironically, Rep. Hunter is "one of staunchest supporters of protectionist legislation on Capitol Hill," the Financial Times noted. -- "The companies' robust participation in the U.S. electoral process, along with subsidiaries of other foreign companies such as UBS, KPMG, and Daimler-Chrysler, underscores how perceptions have changed in Washington," wrote Kirchgaessner. -- "Just over 10 years ago, President Bill Clinton vowed that Democrats would stop accepting so-called 'foreign money' -- a promise that fizzled away as lawmakers came to realize the extent of foreign investors in the U.S." ...
1.
World
U.K.
BAE IS MAJOR DONOR TO U.S. CANDIDATES
By Stephanie Kirchgaessner
Financial Times (UK)
August 21, 2006
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/b4d46894-3139-11db-b953-0000779e2340.html
BAE, the British defense group, has emerged as one of the most powerful corporate contributors to candidates in the current U.S. election cycle, ranking number 18 in a list of the biggest corporate donors.
U.S. subsidiaries of British companies have doled out about $3.7m in political contributions ahead of November's congressional election, with 68 per cent of the donations supporting Republican candidates, according to an analysis by the FT of figures compiled by Political Moneyline, a website that tracks political contributions.
Although GlaxoSmithKline, the U.K. drugmaker, technically ranks as the single biggest corporate donor to U.S. candidates of all U.S. subsidiaries of U.K. companies, the combined spending of two separate BAE political action committees -- or pacs -- outranks the drug company.
The BAE figures analyzed by the FT include campaign contributions made by United Defense, a U.S. company, in the current election cycle before it was acquired by BAE last year.
The two committees dispersed a combined $439,499 to individual Republican candidates -- compared to $232,500 to Democrats -- outspending some of the largest U.S. companies, including ExxonMobil, the oil giant, Microsoft, the software maker, and Citigroup, the banking group.
The three biggest beneficiaries of BAE's two political committees so far reflect the company's U.S. ambitions and its place as one of the top 10 military contractors in the country. The three candidates that have each received $20,000 from BAE's committees are Jerry Lewis, a California Republican who chairs the House appropriations committee; John Murtha, a decorated Vietnam war veteran who is a leading critic of the war in Iraq, also serves on the appropriations committee and is the top-ranking Democrat on the defense subcommittee; and Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the House armed services committee, who is one of staunchest supporters of protectionist legislation on Capitol Hill.
Glaxo has contributed a total of $531,213 in the campaign season so far -- $376,627 of which was disbursed to Republican candidates -- followed by the banking group HSBC, Rolls-Royce, the engine manufacturer, and oil group BP.
Under U.S. election rules, U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies can form PACs -- vehicles that allow corporations to raise money from their employees to support candidates or ideological interests -- but contributions can only be made by Americans or green card holders. Foreign nationals are also prohibited by law from making any decisions about who should receive donations from the PAC, and foreign funds may not be used to pay for the cost of running the committees.
The companies' robust participation in the U.S. electoral process, along with subsidiaries of other foreign companies such as UBS, KPMG, and Daimler-Chrysler, underscores how perceptions have changed in Washington. Just over 10 years ago, President Bill Clinton vowed that Democrats would stop accepting so-called "foreign money" -- a promise that fizzled away as lawmakers came to realize the extent of foreign investors in the U.S.
"I think U.S. subsidiaries are feeling better about participating in the political process as benefits of what they bring to U.S. economy are better understood and appreciated," says Nancy McLernon, vice-president of the Organization for International Investment, which lobbies on behalf of U.S. subsidiaries.