Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Survey: Business Owners Concerned About Lack Of Transparency In Political Contributions

November 5, 2010 by  

Survey: Business owners concerned about lack of transparency in political contributionsA new poll reveals that many American business owners are concerned about the pressure to donate to political campaigns and the growing number of undisclosed contributions made by corporations.

The survey, which was conducted by Zogby International, found that six in 10 business leaders said there is pressure to help fund political efforts. Approximately 77 percent said that organizations should disclose all of their direct and indirect political expenditures.

Of the 301 business leaders who were polled, two-thirds agreed that a lack of transparency in political activity encourages behavior that damages its reputations and puts a corporation at legal risk.

A Supreme Court decision in January 2010 ruled that political spending is a form of protected speech and opened the door to campaign spending by third-party organizations. Opponents of the 5-4 decision believe that allowing unlimited corporate spending on political ads will corrupt democracy.

"These huge undisclosed contributions that pay for campaign ads are distorting the political process and are a major reason why Congress has become so dysfunctional," said Ed Kangas, the former chairman and chief executive officer of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, the world's largest professional services organization.

According to The Associated Press, the Campaign Media Analysis Group projects that spending on political television ads will reach $3 billion this year, which would top the $2.7 billion spend in 2008. The news provider reports that the surge is due to several factors, including the Supreme Court decision and a high number of close races across the United States. 

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Survey: Business Owners Concerned About Lack Of Transparency In Political Contributions”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • Dan az

    If the adds didnt cost so much in the first place then it would at least lower the odds of corruption.With all the funds from the taxes that are generated from spending on adds ect. It just generates more money for the government to spend unwisely at tax payers expense.I think that the media should donate to the cause by giving equal time to all candidates or lose there lic.

    • GregS

      Well said, Dan! I agree 100%. If the media gave equal time to ALL the candidates, it would certainly level the playing field and lessen the need for huge amounts of money.

    • DavidL

      If the ads didn’t cost so much, then the ONLY result would be that corporations and the wealthy could buy this country “on the cheap”.

      The reaction to all this from the “business leasers” is astounding. Their view is as follows: “…Of the 301 business leaders who were polled, two-thirds agreed that a lack of transparency in political activity encourages behavior that damages its reputations and puts a corporation at legal risk.


      There are only two things to do about the corrupting effect of money in the system. In the short term (immediately) ALL CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ALL SOURCES MUST BE REPORTED. The long term fix is complete public financing of all elections. No more private corrupt money! Clean money elections already exist in several of our states.

      • s c

        DavidL, the ‘integrity of our democracy’ is completely irrelevant. That would amount to prostitutes and pimps concerning themselves with what a community “thinks.”
        My point is that America is supposed to be a constitutional republic. America was never intended to be a democracy. Most of those in Congress and both yahoos in the White House might give a damn about what happens in a democracy, but they’re also a willing part of the problem, DavidL.
        It’s not easy protecting a constitutional republic.
        With the utter lack of talent and ‘leadership’ in Washington, it’s up to us [THE PEOPLE] to see to it that we have AND keep a constitutional republic. Screw the idea of a democracy. A democracy is truly a ‘house that is divided against itself.’ It is also built on sand.

    • Robert Smith

      From Dan az: “I think that the media should donate to the cause by giving equal time to all candidates or lose there lic.”

      That used to be called the “fairness doctrine.”

      Most of the blabbermouths like Rush just hate it.


      • http://naver sook young

        I don’t think that Michael Moore or Al Franken like it too much either. Thank you.

        Sook Young
        Wife of the Samurai

  • Doc Sarvis

    Money in today’s politics is both essential and the most corruptable component. The Supreme Court’s decision may be the worst hit that fair elections has taken in our history. Opening the floodgates to corporate money as that decision did introduces all kinds of corruption and non-American influences into our system.

  • FlaJim

    This poll is highly suspect. For one thing, the sampling is far too low. For another, how are corporate donations any different than individual ones? They’re each subject to the same rules.

    Consider this, too. Back in 1979, Reagan’s run for the White House was funded by three donors who provided him with $250,000 seed money, something not possible today. Was that wrong? Was Reagan ever coopted?

    What’s more unsettling are the tens of millions of dollars from the dues of people forced into unions that they never approved being showered on the Dems.

    • eddie47d

      The Corporation can donate money in it’s name or give to a 527 or directly to the Chamber of Commerce. Then the CEO can turn around and donate for himself. So he has much more power than most individuals. Like unions, he can entice his employees into donating. With the CEO he can make life unbearable for his crew if they don’t donate.Give or you may loose your job or not get that promotion. Union member don’t have near that influence over their members. As an example;A Canton,Oh McDonald’s owner sent letters to all who worked there. If they didn’t vote for 3 Republicans on the ballot there would be no raises.That is true voter intimidation for you can say who you support but not say there will be consequences if you don’t.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        give a link to check that Canton story out!!!

        • http://naver sook young

          Sounds like he is just being childish and giving his usual factually unsound postings. If you have a site for that story, could you please post it so I can read it too? Thank you.

          Sook Young
          Wife of the Samurai

          • eddie47d

            Sook, What is this “childish” talk you ramble on about? Facts are facts and degrading someones elses opinion makes you the childish one! Maybe if your husband allowed you to read many sources you would have known about this McDonald’s’ owner. Now go out and have a great weekend.

          • http://naver samurai

            This is close to war edduh!

        • eddie47d

          Google McDonalds owner forcing employees to vote Republican.

          • http://naver samurai

            Watch your mouth, moron! We’ll google the info, but giving a specific source or site would have been better. Are we still pissed from Tuesday’s outcomes, hmmm? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

          • http://?? Joe H.


          • http://naver samurai

            Joe H., thanks for the , fellow patriot! I really needed it. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

          • eddie47d

            Samurai; I’m not you’re moron so stop playing dictator. We can all see your war mentality for you put it out there front and center. Doesn’t take much.

  • http://com i41

    You all forgot the Soros connection. He is the largest donor elcection after election of Soros the communist jackwagon’s meddleing. The idea of transparency is no go, ACORN and constant name change games of the NMCDUP never will change or be stopped. Untill people wake up and realize democrats are all lip licking socialists. All wanting total government control, over every facet of everyones’ being. First by regulations and unelected wonkish governemnt agency dorks, that try and understand these regs. These bills are so convoluted, they countermand each other.

    • Robert Smith

      i41: ” All wanting total government control, over every facet of everyones’ being. ”

      Bzzzzz, wrong. It’s the Republicans who want to control Americans.

      They are the ones who proclaim control over womens’ bodies.

      They are the ones who deny death with dignity.

      Can’t get much more personal than that.


      • s c

        RS, either give us the name of your favorite drug pusher and the name of the drug that keeps your mind as sharp as a handful of jello, or get a life, get a brain and ram your half-assed crapola wherever it feels good, comrade.
        You are still brainwashed. You still sound like a parrot. Do you have ANY what redundant means? I suspect it’s also your middle name. I could be wrong, but that’s the impression you create.

      • http://naver samurai

        Not as much as the libs who believe in killing innocent babies, warping and destroying the Constitution, giving handouts and letting the people stay home and not work. The one’s who ram legislation down the throats of the average American and say we have to pass it to be able to read it? The one’s who believe in keeping taxes and spending high and having the average American work for the first 6 months of the year to pay for unconstitutional welfare programs and handouts to foreign nationals? The one’s who side with Mexico against Arizona in court when it comes to immigration? The one’s who are under control of Wall Street, George Soros, Saul Alinsky, and who knows who else? Rob, I think that you have smoked way too much pot and it has completely destroyed your little lib, gay loving, baby killing, marxist mind. Remember also rob, who won the elections overall last Tuesday? Was it the patriots or your kind? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        • http://?? Joe H.

          Let’s not forget they also want to do away with the death penalty for some of the most disgustingly hienous criminals society has ever seen thus denying the family of murder victims any closure!!! But it’s full speed ahead for killing millions of innocent babies who have not even commited the sin of breathing!!! Also let’s not forget it was a progressive that suggested that women should have the right to kill their kids up to the age of 2 or 3!!!

          • http://naver samurai

            Thank you, fellow patriot! I guess I should remember that Rob is probably smoking some strong stuff when he is posting. By the way, who’s the moron that said to kill kids up to 2-3 years old? I’d like to send them a “friendly” e-mail. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

  • GregS

    As long as big unions are allowed to make undisclosed contributions to political campaigns, other groups should be allowed to do the same. The critics of large, undisclosed contributions are ALWAYS blaming large corporations, but they conveniently leave out any mention of large labor unions. Such was the case with the DISCLOSE Act. Unions were exempted.

    Furthermore, disclosure causes many problems for small, non-profit citizens groups, who play a vital role in the political process, but are classified as “corporations” to protect their members from lawsuits. These groups are usually hard-pressed for funds as it is, and disclosure for them would be very costly, and would involve a lot of red tape. It would effectively gag them and keep them from playing a role in the political process. In many cases, these groups represent we the people.

    • Robert Smith

      Can you tell us about some of these groups?


      • GregS

        Why does it matter who the groups are??? It’s ANY non-profit citizen’s group, which is classified as a “corporation.” This ranges from animal-rights groups to environmental groups to just about ANY group concerned about ANY issue. They are all composed of individual citizens who pool their money towards the election campaigns of candidates running for office, in order to counter large sums of money given by single individuals to opposing candidates.

  • eddie47d

    Unions are hundreds of individuals who collectively donate small amounts of money to form a larger pool of resources.More importantly they are individul voters.Unlike Corporations or charities who do not vote.A CEO or president of a charity can vote for whoever they want and even make it well known if they would like. Hundreds of union members as a whole can give $150,000 (or whatever) to put an ad on TV. One CEO can come up with $200,000 in a lump sum and have an ad put on TV. So that one CEO still has far more power as an individual than those hundreds of union members. Sure unions can raise millions throughout the USA but Corporations can rise hundreds of millions more. So unions will always be at a disadvantage even though they represent a larger group of voters.

    • GregS

      Regardless of where or whom unions get their money from, your argument is NOT a valid excuse for exempting them from disclosure, if other groups are required to disclose.

    • s c

      Eddyuardo, here’s the truth [that which you and your "friends" find so very offensive]. Most union members are closet communists. They’re too comfortable and dumbed-down to understand that they are the mutated brats of bolsheviks. They want everything their way. Thinking is the last thing on their ‘collective’ minds.
      The devastation of Detroit is but one of their legacies. Show me a good union member, and I’ll show you an EX-UNION MEMBER who finally did the math and told the union to STICK IT. Once again, you are consistently CLUELESS. You’re just another progressive who doubles as a useful idiot.

      • eddie47d

        Take off you’re green mask sc,halloween is over and there is that resemblance to Pelosi. If all union member are communist(not even close)then all corporates are fascist goons. You always take the ridicules to the next level so your message is meaningless.

        • http://?? Joe H.

          Show me the words all union members in his post!!!

  • 2WarAbnVet

    I know where of great deal of the money comes from. For several weeks before the election I received, on almost a daily basis, slick lying ads sponsored by the NEA. I’m certain it put millions into the election to push many Democrats. I already felt great contempt for the NEA, holding it chiefly responsible for the decline of the educational product in our country, but I found that it is possible to despise it even more.

    • s c

      2WarAbnVet, the NEA is an effing union. That’s all you need to know about it. Unions have all the character and backbone of a pimp who caters to political conventions.
      Unions can’t exist without easy money (redistributed wealth, payoffs, favors, etc.). In effect, union leadership amounts to unelected dictators. Gee, I didn’t use one expletive to express my opinion of unions. By the way, your opinion of unions will never be lower than mine.

      • eddie47d

        The same could be said about the Chamber of Commerce. They take money from the wealthy and redistribute it back to the wealthy to make them wealthier. I know you look at the money makers as God’s choosen people but someday you will stop buying into that lie. Then maybe (I doubt it) you’ll stop attacking those who actually do the work.

  • alpha-lemming

    This just in!!

    Keith Oberwellian (MSDNC) suspended.. INDEFINATELY.. SANS PAY. For Democrat campaign contributions in violation of NBC ethics requirements.

    Am I missing something or is this the first time ethics have been demanded of Democrats?? Been a resume enhancer up to this point.


    With each succeeding national election we are being bombarded with increasing breaking of the election laws, the laws concerning donations and ballot ethics, even elegibility. The people doing all this illegal poisoning are ruining your ability and the value of your ballot and right to a free election. It has to stop, it is a imperative that every thing possible be done to bring it to a halt and harsh measures should be employed to punish those convicted.

    “It is not the person who cast the vote that is so important, it is the one who counts the ballots.”…Joseph Stalin.

  • Deborah

    Earlier Obama went to the Supreme Court and asked them to outlaw special interest money. This would of man him the “go to man” for payoffs for favors. The Supreme Court was wise, I think, by allowing the politicians the ability to corrupt themselves WITHOUT Obama holding all the financial gains.
    Never can trust the greed of people, especially the politicians. So Obama was pissed about that decision. Then he wanted to take the ability for corporations to make contributions, away from him, in support of his opposition. The Supreme Court once again, and for the first time in history, gave a voice and vote to the corporations. This again rubbed against Obama’s thin skin.
    The Supreme Court has become invalid, unless being used against the American people. Muslims hate Jews and guess what we have on our Supreme Court? Mostly Jews, yep.
    The Supreme Court normally rules against the American Citizens so it surprised me and made me question their true intent of their decision. Since it pissed Obama off, I think their decision was best for the time being.
    Now, if we could only get them to accept cases that would strengthen the Constitution I’d be happy. They don’t of course. They’ve been deemed expendable by the Muslim in White House and his merry band of Brotherhood of Muslims.
    I wonder if we need to fire each and every one of the cowards in the Supreme Court for not upholding the Constitution of the United States and place in a court that will comply and protect the Constitution?
    We the People, less government and most understandably no muslims for president ever again!

  • eddie47d

    If that were true you’d have a point but since it isn’t you are a political hack! Your buddy Hitler used the same excuses and Jews as his scapegoat. If one or two Catholics rose to power(and that would be a majority to you) you’d be soundly dire warnings. If a Mormon were elected you would say the sky is falling and evil has broached the White House. If there is a communist member somewhere in Washington you claim there is a commie conspiracy and armageddon is around the corner. You stand there and beat your self righteous chest and proclaim doomsday. You are a hopeless slanderer who has turned this country into a soap opera nation. Come back with more honesty and then maybe the Constitution will truly have meaning.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      you mean kinda like you do about the republicans???? Why do I try??? A diamond isn’t as dense as your head!!!

    • eddie47d

      You’re hemorrhoids are showing Joe!


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.