Unmask Donors

President Obama Could Unmask Big Political Donors

By Teresa Tritch

Long before Ted Cruz became the first presidential contender to officially declare his candidacy, the competition for big-money donors was well underway.

Of all the individuals and groups aiming to curry favor and buy influence, perhaps none are more motivated than private-sector federal contractors. The United States spends about half a trillion dollars each year on goods and services from corporations large and small.

Each one of hundreds of corporate contractors and subcontractors has an incentive to contribute to political candidates and their parties because, quite simply, pay-to-play works. In a recent report, the Sunlight Foundation, a watchdog group, tallied the lobbying and campaign expenditures of 200 companies from 2007 to 2012. In all, the companies spent a total of $5.8 billion and were awarded $4.4 trillion in federal business and support, or $760 for every $1 spent. Much of that was for aid related to the auto and banking bailouts, though fully $1 trillion of the total awards were paid under federal contracts to buy goods and services.

It stands to reason that giving-to-get has only worsened in the past several years, as the Supreme Court’s decisions in Citizens United and McCutcheon opened the floodgates to unlimited and undisclosed donations, the so-called “dark money” that now pervades the body politic.

President Obama has talked a good game against the corrupting influence of dark money. This month, more than 50 public advocacy and good government groups publicly challenged him to back up his rhetoric with action. In a letter to Mr. Obama, they called on him to issue an executive order requiring full disclosure of political spending by corporations receiving federal contracts, as well as by their directors and officers.

He should do so without delay. As the nation’s chief executive, Mr. Obama has authority over federal contracting. Last year, he used the authority to significant effect by requiring federal contractors to pay their employees at least $10.10 an hour. He can and should use his power to require disclosure of political spending by contractors.

An executive order would help rescue elections and democracy from the damaging effects of secrecy and anonymity. It would also help redress the president’s own complicity in that damage.

In 2008, even before the Supreme Court’s decisions, Mr. Obama undermined the public financing system for presidential elections by refusing to use it. In 2012, after he had rightly denounced Citizens United, his re-election campaign nevertheless went all in for raising and spending unlimited sums, in effect joining rather than trying to beat the increasingly corrupt system.

Since then, Mr. Obama has continued to speak out against dark money, most incisively this year in the State of the Union speech and on the five-year anniversary in January of Citizens United.

It is past time for the president to bring his words and actions into line. An executive order to require disclosure of political spending by federal contractors is a good place to start.