Political Contributors Follow The Leaders

Are corporate contributions based on belief in who the best or more capable candidate might be, or on political expediency? The news media recently reported that, while for the years 2006 through 2009, the majority of corporate contributions went to Democrats, thus far in 2010, the opposite is true, with close to sixty percent of all corporate political contributions apparently going to Republican candidates, or to the Republican Party. Since much of the public is under the perception that corporate America is predominantly more conservative, and thus tends to lean Republican, during 2006 through 2009, the opposite was true. Was that a change in belief, or merely a recognition in the weakening and softening of support for President Bush and many Republican office holders? Obviously, that was the same period that there was a change in the party of the President (which many anticipated because of anti-Bush sentiment), and in 2008, both the President and both Houses of Congress swung dramatically to the Democrats.

Largely because of the continued troubling economy, the perception by many Americans that the measures taken have both not worked and been wasteful, and the weakening poll numbers of both the President and the incumbents (and since the Democrats are presently in power, there are far more Democratic incumbents), there appears to widespread belief that there will be a major realignment in the power balance between the political parties at the 2010 mid-term elections.

Of course, the Tea Party's success and popularity has made it far more difficult to predict results, and even President Carter has likened his short-term popular election in 1976 to a dissatisfaction of the American public, similar to what is intensifying the Tea Party's appeal. American politics has traditionally been cyclical, and American voters have traditionally taken out their dissatisfaction and frustration by voting "the bums out." Therefore, many political pundits are predicting a dramatic victory for the Republicans in 2010.

Is corporate money therefore following the leader? It has in the past, and it certainly appears that it is once again during this election cycle. However, the Republicans should carefully remember this caveat that their dramatic victory in 2010 could strengthen President Obama's and the Democratic Party's chances in 2012, especially if the public does not perceive noticeable and dramatic improvement.