At its heart is the decision of some companies to stop making political donations to Republican lawmakers who voted to void a U.S. presidential election on fraud allegations, even after that hoax was proven false, and a lot of Donald Trump supporters did US Capitol in an attempt to kill anti-Trump lawmakers and reinstate Trump as president despite losing his election. For some (but not all) brand-conscious companies, trying to end democratic rule in the US and appoint a new leader via Fiat is a bridge too far. Few companies are ready to be seen as partners in an uprising.
However, the majority of the House Republicans were on the side of this insurrection. Now these Republicans are mad about losing those corporate donations that some of them have relied on in shocking proportions and are wondering what to do about it. Options do not appear to include recognizing their own role in attempting to erase the results of a presidential election. Options include exposing the company to threats. This shows the US's trust in institutionalized corruption.
"Advisors to some Republican lawmakers say they are considering punishing companies that have stopped PAC donations by banning their lobbyists from coming into their offices to lobby for the law," the Journal reports.
Oh. Oh no, that would be awful. Imagine banning corporate lobbyists from convention bureaus – whatever we do.
Lost in the mildness of this little sentence is its premise. Republican lawmakers pose a clear threat to their former corporate donors: let the checks come, or we'll refuse to meet you. Keep paying us and we'll keep listening to what you have to say. Cut off the money and we'll hang you all up to dry.
It all comes out like a mob shakedown, which is essentially what it is. "Aides to congressional lawmakers who have been banned from corporations' PAC funds say it may detract from the force with which they question part of the progressive agenda," the Journal writes.
If nothing else, it exposes the heart of conservatism once again. You may have got the impression that Republican lawmakers seriously believed in business freedom and other Yada. In fact, "lawmakers' helpers" say what they fight for depends on who gave them money and who didn't.
It's not bribery, it's not independence. It only exchanges money for legislation and is so institutionalized that the country's most impressive business-oriented newspaper reports it with no particular fanfare.
The Journal pays attention to both sides of the story while reporting that Democratic lawmakers are angry at companies that have suspended political donations to both parties, believing (correctly) that this is a cowardly move by companies unwilling to join Attempted coup denounce government as something uniquely unacceptable. And it is reported that the anger of business-minded lawmakers from both parties could damage business priorities on the cusp of a likely new wave of progressive legislation: "Advisors to Republican and Democratic lawmakers say they may be less willing." help to undermine these proposals by speaking out against them publicly, by offering amendments to be watered down in committee, or by supporting competing proposals. "
Got a nice little bat here, Corporate America. I don't want anything to happen.
In the end, no one seems to take these threats very seriously. Institutionalized bribery through political coffers is so ingrained in our system that the system cannot function without it, and the Journal notes that lobbyists themselves believe that corporations will abandon their attempts to distance themselves from Republican insurgents when new laws are introduced and guidelines are suggested that will have an impact on you. The money taps will turn themselves back on for rioters.
That could happen and it couldn't happen. Trying to overthrow an election in the United States is literally one of the worst measures a legislature could push, even from a purely business perspective. No American company is eager to begin devising contingency plans to deal with the possible overthrow of the government. It is a market driver – but not in a positive direction. Indeed, corporate America may decide to get the coup plotters out of Congress, even if it comes with momentary pain, rather than allied with one of those people at a time when even the nation's most powerful press voices furiously condemn them his Seditionist.
Even a higher minimum wage is not really an existential crisis for a company that is not already dependent on slave labor. The rise of Putin-style kleptocratic rule under a future anti-democratic kingpin, in which any company may only exist if that company does not interfere with the kleptocracy's own interests, could come.