The Influence Your Money Can Buy: Post-Bailout Lobbying Numbers
A series of recent reports, from the Journal to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), have offered staggering stats on the lobbying dollars paid out by banks, automakers, and other companies getting bailout money under the Troubled Assets Relief Program.
But all these numbers can be a bit befuddling in the aggregate. Is it really true, as the CRP states, that companies benefiting from the bailout have received a 258,449% return on their lobbying investments? Not really -- because lobbying expenditures are not broken down by topic area, there's no way to determine what portion of companies' K Street spending was dedicated to securing a slice of the bailout pie.
(For true TARP geeks, here's a great rundown of the cavalcade of legislation that sparked the lobbying interest of bailout participants.)
So what can we conclude about lobbying spending by bailed-out banks?
Well, Wall Streeters claim that the taxpayer money they received isn't being directly used to lobby Congress, but until the passage of TARP transparency bills like the one I mentioned yesterday, there'll be no way to know for sure.
We do know this: Between October 1, when the Senate passed the first bailout, and the year's end, the top 20 TARP recipients have spent $7.86 million on lobbying. This is the same top 20 group that actually cut back on lending during the first part of this year. (Thanks to TPM intern Chris for his help with data collection.)
Check out a full-scale version of the chart right here. That fourth-quarter bank lobbying bonanza was crucial to amassing support for the second half of the bailout, which Congress released to President Obama last month. And you should be proud -- you almost certainly helped foot the bill!



















"Well, Wall Streeters claim that the taxpayer money they received isn't being directly used to lobby Congress, but until the passage of TARP transparency bills like the one I mentioned yesterday, there'll be no way to know for sure."
That could mean anything for sure. I'm aware of some lobbyists that work this way. Some politicians on the hill can't stand lobbyists. So, a bank might go to a lobbyists to build a case for their position on some legislation they want passed. The lobbyist lawyers builds the argument, then passes it back to the banks to present the well formed argument back to the politician.
On a side note...I've been watching Michelle Obama going from department to department giving speeches. She's starting to sound pretty good and is well received. I wonder if she'll run for President in 2012?
Now that would be audacious.
February 20, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I mean 2016.
February 20, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes that would be truely audacious
February 20, 2009 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The second paragraph of this TPMdc story is the point I WAS GOING TO MAKE.
These guys spend millions (usually in the single digits) to reap Billions (usually in the 10s or 100s of billions).
What an investment. It is the single highest paying dividend in human history, buying your politicians. Sometimes it costs as little as $2500.
I am stunned by the puny amounts Cornyn was taking in , in order to shield Stanford's billions. It is beyond ridiculous, beyond ludicrous. We have always been footing the bill, and the number have gained exponentially. The more dire and closer to doomsday, the bigger the haul. We are truly witnessing theft on a scale UNIMAGINED by earlier generations, yet their shills still go on public airwaves and justify this stuff, or it is swept under the rug by corporo-media juggernauts.
Somehow, someway, the Corporo-Beasts still get the avg. homeowner or welfare queen in the spotlight as the "blight on society". What a stretch, what an astronomical reach of pseudo journalism to equate avg. homeowners or welfare queens with the CorporoBeast who are ravaging and feeding off our carcasses.
February 20, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink