We keep hearing about
various presidential candidates, particularly Hillary Clinton, and their
connections to Wall Street but few of us are aware just how significant a role
in actual dollars that the securities and investment industry plays in Washington.
A recent analysis by the Center for Responsive
Politics quantifies that role for us.
While most of us think of
the big name companies on Wall Street that made the headlines during the 2008
economic crisis, in fact, there is a new frontier when it comes to
influence-peddling from the finance world; private investment firms and hedge
funds, the new playgrounds for America's one percent. Here is a graphic
showing the top contributors from the "new" securities and investment sector thus far
in the 2016 cycle:
Here is a bar graph
showing the how campaign contributions from the securities and investment
sector have grown since 1990 and in particular, since 2008:
In total, the securities
and investment sector has contributed $1.469 trillion to both parties with $948
billion coming from individuals (no doubt wealthy individuals) and $115.8
billion coming from PACs. Total donations peaked at $137.6 billion in the
2012 presidential election cycle with 69 percent of the total going to the
Republicans. During the 2012 cycle, the securities and investment sector
was the second largest contributor among all sectors and over the period from
1990 to 2016, it holds third place overall. In this cycle and the 2014
mid-term cycle, the securities and investment sector has taken first place as
the largest contributing sector to American political theatre.
Here is a bar graph
showing the contribution split between the Democrats and the Republicans:
For the most part, the
Republicans have been the majority beneficiary of the funds sourced from the securities and investment sector as you can see on this table:
Of the total $1.469
trillion donated since the 1990 cycle by the securities and investment sector, the Republicans have received $650.4 billion or 55 percent of the
total compared to $533.1 billion or 45 percent of the total for the Democrats.
As I noted above, gone
are the days of stock brokerages and banks dominating political contributions
made by the securities and investment sector. In the "new
economy" of the post-Great Recession era, hedge funds and private
investment firms are "top dog", in fact, Goldman Sachs is the top
contributor among what are considered traditional Wall Street firms and its
total donations of $2.317 million put it in 10th place, well behind first place
Renaissance Technologies with total donations of $13.8 million.
Let's look at the top two
contributors:
1.) Renaissance
Technologies: Renaissance Technologies is based in East Setauket,
New York and is "...an investment management
company dedicated to producing superior returns for its clients and employees
by adhering to mathematical and statistical methods." As of
September 30, 2015, its funds were valued at $43.6 billion. It was founded in 1982 by
Jim Simons, a mathematician. He is widely considered to be one of the
best money managers in the world. Current Renaissance co-CEO, Robert Mercer, is the top individual when it
comes to funding outside spending groups, having donated a total of
$12.505 million to conservative candidates in the 2016 cycle as you can see here:
2.) Soros
Fund Management: Soros Fund Management is a privately held investment
management company that was founded in 1969 by George Soros. It is based
in Manhattan, NY and is currently chaired by founder George Soros with his son,
Robert Soros, being Deputy Chair and President. It is considered to
be one of the most profitable hedge fund firms. George Soros is a
big backer of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton as shown here:
His
$7 million donation to the Hillary Clinton-backing Priorities USA Action Super PAC is, by a
wide margin, the largest donation to Priorities USA by an individual or entity.
While
Hillary Clinton and the GOP candidates may claim that political
donations don't impact how they vote, it stretches the bounds of credibility
to believe that wealthy donors who are willing to pony up millions of dollars
to their preferred candidate don't at least expect to get the ear of the
president should their candidate win the White House. The current
iteration of Wall Street is no different than any other sector of the economy.
Washington is for sale and they know what (and who) they want to
buy.
This is why it really makes no difference who wins.
ReplyDeleteCorrect statement! The system need real change.
ReplyDelete