Are financial services employees giving less to political campaigns this season? Are congressional threats of additional oversight to blame? Or maybe it is the economy? These are all questions prompted by the Washington Independent, an online alternative media outlet, that has compiled some interesting data about campaign contributions.
The Independent combed the Federal Election Commission's database to examine giving to national campaigns by employees of the 10 largest Troubled Asset Relief Program recipients, it but only included a chart of the five leading banks. It compares giving in the first quarter of 2007 and the first quarter of 2009 to come up with its conclusion that the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the weak economy are slowing donations. While the thesis may ultimately be true, the data doesn't necessarily support it.
| Bank |
Q1 2009
Giving |
Q1 2007
Giving |
| Citigroup Inc. (NYSE:C) |
$5450 |
$128,405 |
| Bank of America Corp. (NYSE:BAC) |
$3150 |
$21,550 |
| Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE:WFC) |
$5300 |
$33,740 |
| J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) |
$1589 |
$187,645 |
| Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE:GS) |
$3325 |
$341,207 |
| Total |
$18,814 |
$712,547 |
Source: FEC, Washington Independent |
For starters, 2007 is not only the run-up to a presidential election, but a presidential election without an incumbent, meaning a wider field of candidates were raising money on both sides of the aisle. By comparison, 2009 is the start of a midterm election cycle. Why didn't the Independent instead compare giving in the first-quarter 2005, which immediately followed a presidential campaign, to the first-quarter 2009 for a more accurate comparison? - Matthew Wurtzel
See story from the Washington Independent
See The Deal's 2008 election coverage
Continue reading below
