Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
How Corporate Lobbying Led to Big Business-Big Government Cronyism
How Corporate Lobbying Led to Big Business-Big Government Cronyism
Jan 26, 2026 7:28 PM

In America we have a form of government in which power resides in a cadre of elected (and unelected) individuals who represent the interests of the citizens. Because of this structure, it is natural and necessary for people and groups to attempt to influence decisions made by government officials. After all, if we don’t tell our representatives what our interest are, how will they be able to represent our views?

This process, known as “lobbying”, is an organic function of our political way of life. But our representatives are human, and thus share the mon to all of us. Our representatives don’t have the time and attention to meet with and listen to each of us individually, so we form groups that lobby on our behalf. In this way we can pool our resources and leverage our individual power and influence at a relatively low cost to us.

The problem with this system is that it allows relatively small groups with adequate resources to lobby on behalf of their very narrow interest in a way that can be detrimental to the munity. Large corporations, for example, once lobbied to reduce the regulatory burden on their industries. But many corporation realized they could gain petitive advantage by lobbying for specific regulations that benefit their firm and hamstring petitors.

That is why many corporations spend the GDP of a small nation on lobbying efforts. Since 2009, General Electric spent around $134 million on lobbying activities while AT&T spent $91.2 million and Boeing spent $90.3 million. Would for-profit corporations spend so much on influencing the goverment if it didn’t help their bottom line?

Surprisingly, this state of affairs is a relatively new phenomenon. Lee Drutman has a superb, in-depth examination of why business came to love lobbying and regulation and how it affects us all:

Prior to the 1970s, few corporations had their own lobbyists, and the trade associations that did represent business demonstrated nothing close to the scope and sophistication of modern lobbying. In the 1960s and the early 1970s, when Congress passed a series of new social regulations to address a range of environmental and consumer safety concerns, the munity lacked both the political will and the political capacity to stop it.

These new bined with the declining economy, awoke the sleeping political giant of American business. Hundreds panies hired lobbyists for the first time in the mid-1970s, and corporate managers began paying attention to politics much more than they ever did before.

When corporations first became politically engaged in the 1970s, their approach to lobbying was largely reactive. They were trying to stop the continued advancement of the regulatory state. They were fighting a proposed consumer protection agency, trying to stop labor law reform, and responding to a general sense that the values of free enterprise had been forgotten and government regulation was going to destroy the economy. They also lobbied as munity.

Facing mon enemy (government and labor), they hung together so they wouldn’t hang separately. But as the labor movement weakened and government became much more panies continued to invest in politics, ing fortable and more aggressive. Rather than seeing government as a threat, they started looking to government as potential source of profits and assistance. panies devoted more resources to their own lobbying efforts, they increasing sought out their own narrow interests. As corporate lobbying investments have expanded, they have e more particularistic and more proactive. They have also e more pervasive, driven by the petitiveness of the process to e more aggressive.

A corporation is merely a group of individuals, specifically the stakeholders in pany, who have similar interests and goals. Like all citizens, they have a right to lobby their government and attempt to influence their representatives. But the natural sinfulness of man can lead corporations to put the interest of the firm ahead of society. We need a way to limit the outsized impact and considerable harm that can occur when Big Business is wed to Big Government in a marriage of cronyism.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
‘Pimpin’ Ain’t Easy,’ and Neither is Parenting
During a recent family trip to visit relatives, we settled down for a night of wholesome family entertainment to watch “Inside Man” (well, maybe not all that wholesome; it is a film about a bank robbery, after all). This post has almost nothing to do with the plot of the movie, so if you haven’t seen it, don’t fret. It is a film worth queuing on your Netflix, however, and I mend it despite the fact that I don’t much...
Two Career Marriages
A genuinely thorny pastoral issue that often arose in the course of my counseling was the question of two-career marriages. What should a couple do if the wife wanted/needed to work outside the home when children were present, especially when the children were young? Because I served suburban churches (from 1972-1992) some of my congregants needed to be e families just to survive. Others did not but made a choice to pursue two careers anyway. The scenario always varies from...
How Would St. Francis Vote?
Denver Bishop Charles Chaput, whom I had the personal joy of meeting and hearing speak a few years ago, gave an address at a mass for Catholic public officials in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, just before the November elections. Chaput, who is one of my favorite bishops, makes profound and clear moral sense of chaotic sub-Christian thinking on a regular basis. “The world does need to change, and in your vocation as public leaders, God is calling you to pursue that task...
Check out this Energy Debate
A debate about the future of energy policy is being held over at sp!ked, sponsored by Research Councils UK. From their notice: THE FUTURE OF ENERGY Expanding supply or managing demand? In the opening articles, mentators address the question from different viewpoints. ADAM VAUGHAN, online editor, New Consumer magazine argues that saving energy is the way forward: ‘By taking a number of simple steps, consumers can save energy and money – and help save the planet.’ JOE KAPLINSKY, science writer,...
Costly Coal Clean-up
Coal has long been a target of environmentalist anger. Soot, strip-mining, smokestacks—so many ugly features. Much of that opposition is overblown, of course (we’ve got to get energy from somewhere), but some of it has merit. This story from Ohio exhibits one of the genuine problems. The state’s taxpayers have to foot a $300 million bill for cleaning up the environmental messes panies have left. Some, but only a small part, of that is being paid for by corporate fees...
Trimming the Fat
As I’ve noted previously, it is probably best for the cause of limited government that political power be divided rather than in the hands of a single party, no matter which party. This AP story offers evidence in support of that claim from early action by the newly Democratic Congress. At the same time, a close reading of the article indicates that congressional Democrats’ cutting of Republican pork may not result in any meaningful or lasting scaling back of needless...
Bozell’s Odd Understanding of Coercion
According to the Church Report’s Jennifer Morehouse, Parents Television Council President L. Brent Bozell is renewing an argument for the FCC to require a la carte cable programming. “It’s time to let the market decide what it wants on cable programming,” says Bozell. I’m sympathetic to this view. I would prefer the option to be able to pick and choose which cable channels I pay for and get access to, instead of having to decide on subscription levels which include...
Passing on the Pork
As noted at WorldMagBlog (among many other places), the ing Democratic majority in Congress is suspending the process of earmarking, at least temporarily. Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., the ing chairmen of the House and Senate mittees, have pledged that “there will be no congressional earmarks” in the ing budget. Earmarks will be available again in the 2008 budget cycle, after “reforms of the earmarking process are put in place.” There’s a lot of smoke right...
Objective and Subjective Well-Being
Gary Becker and Richard Posner examine the increasing gap between the rich and poor in terms of wealth and e. This gap was most recently highlighted in a report that “the richest 2% of adults in the world own more than half of global household wealth,” and the richest 1% hold 40% of wealth. The report was issued by the World Institute for Development Economics Research of the United Nations University (PDF). Becker seems to accept that wealth inequality is...
Government Works to Protect Tithing
Following up on the story from a couple months back about restrictions to bankruptcy filings prohibiting filers from budgeting for tithing, and in the midst of the controversy surrounding Rick Warren’s invitation to Sen. Barack Obama to appear at a Saddleback Church event, es both houses of Congress have passed the “Obama-Hatch Tithing Bill.” The bill would “protect an individual’s right to continue reasonable charitable contributions, including religious tithing, during the course of consumer bankruptcy. The measure passed the United...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved