DRAINING THE BIG FOOD - Feed the Truth
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
DRAINING
THE
BIG FOOD
SWAMP F E B RUA RY 2021
1
E X ECUT I VE S U M M A RY D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
MAPLIGHT is a nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) nonprofit FEED THE TRUTH is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit
organization that reveals the influence of money in organization committed to realizing a food system
politics, informs and empowers voters, and advances that prioritizes the future of our planet, equity, and
reforms that promote a more responsive democracy. people’s health over short-term corporate wealth.
AC KN OW L E D G E M E N TS
This report was compiled in partnership with Maplight by the Feed the Truth team comprised of: Lucy Martinez Sullivan, Executive Director;
TJ Faircloth, Director of Research and Programs; Nick Guroff, Director of Communications; KyungSun Lee, Program Associate.
Research design by Daniel G. Newman (Maplight), Laura Curlin (MapLight), TJ Faircloth (Feed the Truth).
Research was conducted by the Maplight team comprised of: Laura Curlin, Data Director; Bergen Smith, Data Analyst.
Copy was developed by Frank Bass, MapLight’s Contributing Editor.
Project development was overseen by Amanda Blackhurst (Feed the Truth) and Laura Curlin (Maplight).
Report design by Teal Media: Aruna Mall, Creative Director; Ellen Yee, Designer; Anna Hovland, Project Manager.
2
E X ECUT I VE S U M M A RY D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
DRAINING THE
BIG FOOD SWAMP
“Draining the Big Food M ET H O D O LO GY
To understand the depth of the swamp and
Swamp” looks at the size and what we’ll call the “Big Food swamp”—to play on
another definition of as much—we determined
correlating political clout of the number of food and beverage trade groups
one powerful industry that has under the IRS 501(c)5 and (c)6 designations
and pulled figures on their size, as well as their
long dominated Washington campaign contributions and lobbying disclosures
(in the case of the 50 largest trade groups by
politics: Big Food. revenue).2 We then identified the top 20 trade
associations with the highest political spending
(federal campaign contributions and lobbying
It’s a critical industry to spending) to focus our analysis as a means to
best understand the industry’s consolidated
examine given the implications political power.
of its vast market power, as
well as its corollary political R AT I O N A L E
Our reason for taking this approach? Trade
power. Big Food is a $1.1 trillion
1
associations are a primary vehicle for corporate
capture of federal policy. They combine,
a year industry dominated concentrate, and exert political power on behalf
by a few, highly-consolidated of multiple corporations. They help obfuscate
the unpopular political stances of corporate
corporations that influence members. And they help funnel hundreds of
millions each year into our political system, much
everything from how our food of which the public has little visibility on.
is grown and how we treat
essential workers to the health FINDINGS
What we discovered in this assessment?
of our children and our ability The Big Food swamp is not only wide, it is deep.
This is to say, while there are many actors, there
as a nation to achieve greater are a few with outsized political command and
racial, gender, and social equity. control. Not only are there just a handful of trade
groups calling the shots in Washington, but the
agenda of these trade associations tend to be
driven by the biggest, most destructive global
corporations.
3
TOP 100
FOOD
TRADE
ABOUT GROUPS
6,300
The top 100 food trade groups by assets represent
more than 70 percent of the total assets reported
by all food industry trade groups in their last tax
year, or some $5.3 billion in total assets.
FOOD
TOP 100 FOOD
TRADE GROUPS
REPRESENT
70%
TRADE
$2.1B $5.3B
GROUPS FOOD TRADE GROUP REVENUE
Only 68 food trade groups reported more
than $10 million in revenue in their last tax
year, with only two reporting more than
$100 million (Dairy Management, Inc. and
the National Restaurant Association).
$10M
68 GROUPS
$100M
2 GROUPS
4
TH E F I N D I N G S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
$33.7M
GIVEN TO FEDERAL
POLITICIANS BY
THE TOP 20 FOOD
TRADE GROUPS * S I N C E 2007
3 GROUPS 50% OF TOTAL
CAMPAIGN SPENDING
Among the top 20 food trade groups, just three
accounted for nearly 50 percent of the total
campaign spending: the Farm Credit Council, the
National Restaurant Association (NRA), and the
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.
THE TOP
BENEFICIARIES
Among the top beneficiaries:
Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., ($239,499),
Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., ($320,750),
Mitch McConnell $239,499
Kevin McCarthy $320,750
and other members of the Senate and
Collin Peterson $458,361
House agriculture committees such as the
former House Chair Collin Peterson, D-Minn.
($458,361).
5
TH E F I N D I N G S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
$300M
SPENT ON
LOBBYING BY THE
TOP 20 FOOD
TRADE GROUPS *S I N C E 2008
3 GROUPS
And, again, just three trade associations
50% OF TOTAL
LOBBYING DOLLARS
accounted for the lion’s share of this spending.
The National Restaurant Association (NRA), the
American Beverage Association (ABA), and the
Consumer Brands Association (CBA) accounted
for almost 50 percent of these lobbying dollars.
MORE THAN 80%
OF TOP 3 TRADE GROUPS’
LOBBYISTS ARE “REVOLVERS”
To make their lobbying all the
more effective, these three trade
associations alone deployed an
army of lobbyists, more than 80
percent of whom could be called
“revolvers” (individuals who now
lobby the officials and agencies
they once worked for).
6
WHY IT
MATTERS
7
W H Y IT M AT T E RS D R A I N I N G TH E B I G FO O D SWA M P
These figures on their
own are cause for alarm
and paint a vivid picture
as to why, for example:
5%
OF THE WORKFORCE IS
$
24B
INCREASE IN FEDERAL
85%
OF BEEF IS PRODUCED
LIVING IN POVERTY FARM SUBSIDIES BY 4 CORPORATIONS
The federal minimum wage has Federal farm subsidies have The food industry has continued
not increased in more than a increased by $24 billion in to consolidate, with only four
decade, the tipped minimum 2020—buoying the country’s corporations producing 85
wage has not increased in nearly largest farmers and the profits percent of all the beef in the
three, and approximately five of corporations like Archer U.S. and three corporations
percent of the U.S. workforce is Daniels Midland (ADM), Cargill, controlling over 50 percent of
living in poverty as a result.3,4 and Bayer as family farms the world’s commercial seed
In fact, the National Restaurant continue to decline by the market.8,9
Association continues to lead thousands each year.6,7
Big Food’s decades-long
opposition to increases to the
federal minimum wage.5
8
W H Y IT M AT T E RS D R A I N I N G TH E B I G FO O D SWA M P
They also provide context
for why, amidst the
COVID-19 pandemic:
National restaurant chains got big
bailouts while close to 20 percent of U.S.
restaurants closed for good, and many
small businesses saw no COVID relief
whatsoever.
10,11
The country’s three largest meatpackers
failed to provide adequate safeguards for
workers during the pandemic, and have yet to
be held truly accountable for unsafe working
conditions, avoidable outbreaks, and the
hundreds of employee deaths that resulted.
12
Lawmakers have sought to broadly
shield corporations from liabilities
associated with their inability and
unwillingness to adequately protect
their workforce.
13
9
J UST TH E F I RST C O U RS E D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
BIG FOOD’S BIG SPENDING:
JUST THE FIRST COURSE
But sadly, the discernable campaign they are often conduits for dark money from their
contributions and lobbying figures provide only member corporations. They will also employ tactics
one part of the picture as to why federal policy like passing corporate contributions through a
so deeply rewards large corporations at the series of affiliated non-profit organizations as a
expense of the general public. way of concealing political influence.15
Additionally, the numbers we are talking about
For instance, in the 2020 here are only reflective of Big Food’s federal
election cycle alone, the political footprint. Every year the industry spends
a staggering amount of money in politics,
agribusiness industry spent particularly vis à vis trade groups, at the local,
state, and international level as well.
over $186 million on campaign
contributions, but this is To put in further context, the food industry’s
campaign spending is comparable with that of
only a portion of what was the energy and natural resources industry, which
contributed approximately $215 million during
spent on behalf of food the 2020 election cycle. And in the same election
industry interests. cycle, the food industry contributed approximately
14
four times more than the defense industry to
political committees.16
The rest? It’s what you’d call “dark money”—
money pooled through more opaque corporate
channels such as political organizations, trade
associations, shell corporations, and even
super PACs. These entities effectively shield the
identity of their donors from public view. Trade
associations contribute to this murky picture as
Former House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) (R) talks with Former U.S. Agriculture Secretary Edward Schafer during
the American Meat Institute's Annual Hot Dog Day Lunch in the courtyard of the Rayburn House Office Building July 23, 2008 in Washington, DC.
The event drew hundreds of people from Capitol Hill including members of Congress, their staffs, journalists and lobbyists.
10BUT IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY. 11
R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
The insurrection stirred by Trump’s ceaseless
lies about the election and the related vote
Big Food corporations are
against certifying a free and fair election have taking a range of more modest
propelled corporate political interference back
into the news (as it was when Trump lied about steps and positions from
his commitment to “drain the swamp” some
five years ago). As Paul Polman, former CEO
stopping all giving to election
of Unilever, recently asserted in the Harvard deniers to reviewing current
Business Review: “we need to fundamentally
rethink how businesses operate in Washington.” policies for political giving
Polman advocates the dissolving of corporate (ADM, McDonald’s, Safeway).
18
PACs, ending of corporate and trade association
lobbying, and a reversal of the Citizens
United Supreme Court ruling that opened the
floodgates for corporate money to flow into No major trade association has yet made a
politics, and “brought the U.S. political system to substantive commitment of any kind. But pressure
the point of legalized corruption.”17 is mounting.
12R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
RECOMMENDATIONS
Corporations and trade
groups should heed public
concern for what it is:
outrage not just with
the overt, highly visible,
and violent undermining
of democracy, but also
with the undermining of
democracy in total.
A temporary reckoning
with their mechanisms of
influence should become
commitments to pull back
as Polman suggests.
13R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
The Biden Administration
can build upon its ethics
commitments and start
by ensuring an end to the
revolving door between
government and industry.
It can also extend rules to
eliminate conflicts of interest
for government officials
who have affiliations with
food corporations and trade
associations.
14R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
Finally, corporations
and their various proxies
should immediately open
their books and disclose
the totality of their
political giving across
every geography they do
business in.
This level of transparency
can lay the groundwork for
a requisite and total halt in
corporate political giving.
The Big Food Swamp can
be drained if our elected
leaders show the resolve
and integrity the public has
long demanded.
15B I G FO O D’S B I G S P E N D : I N C O N T E XT D R A I N I N G T H E B I G FO O D SWA M P
BIG FOOD’S BIG
SPEND: IN CONTEXT
Donald Trump pledged to “drain the swamp
in Washington, D.C.”19 It was a message that
The trouble with departing
continues to resonate with the vast majority of from the status quo is that
Americans.20 But far from draining the swamp,
he deepened it. Vastly. And he did so after it is maintained by powerful
issuing an ethics plan with broad public appeal:
campaign finance reform, bans on revolving
and vested interests: global
doors, tighter rules on lobbying designations, and corporations, their primary
Congressional term limits.21
beneficiaries, and their
Instead he installed a veritable “who’s who” of
corporate executives, lobbyists, and lawyers to
surrogates.
run powerful agencies. Their conflicts of interest
were rife. And their disposition was often to
Overcoming as much will take enormous political
dismantle the very accountability mechanisms
and public resolve that prior administrations
they were charged with stewarding. A former
and congresses have failed to muster. But the
ExxonMobil CEO to run the State Department.
case for change is mounting. And this report
A pharmaceutical lobbyist to run Health and
is a contribution to the growing evidence and
Human Services. An anti-worker, corporate
impetus to realize a truer, fairer democracy.
lawyer to run the Department of Labor. And the
list goes on.
Out of the gates, the Biden Administration is
offering some promising signs of change. He’s
signed the strongest presidential ethics order
to date.22 His appointments to the Consumer
Financial Protection Bureau are restoring
teeth to a vital enforcement agency the Trump
Administration sought to dismantle.23 And the
president is distancing himself from the nepotism
of his predecessor.24
But there are other indicators that the current
Administration will settle for a less bombastic,
but still troubling status quo. For instance,
waivers to the new ethics order have already
been requested as part of former President
and CEO of the U.S. Dairy Export Council
Tom Vilsack’s appointment as Secretary of
Agriculture.25
16E N D N OT E S D R A I N I N G T H E B I G F O O D SWA M P
ENDNOTES
1 “What is Agriculture’s Share of the Entire U.S. Economy?,” USDA Economic 15 Center for Responsive Politics. “Dark Money,” OpenSecrets.org,
Research Service, last updated October 15, 2020 accessed February 5, 2021
2 Cooksey-Stowers K, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD. Food Swamps Predict 16 Center for Responsive Politics. “Interest Groups Overview,”
Obesity Rates Better Than Food Deserts in the United States. Int J Environ OpenSecrets.org, accessed February 5, 2021
Res Public Health. 2017;14(11):1366. Published 2017 Nov 14. doi:10.3390/
ijerph14111366. The authors put forward the following definition: 17 Paul Polman. “3 actions CEOs must take to uphold U.S. democracy,”
“Food swamps have been described as areas with a high-density of Harvard Business Review, January 20, 2021
establishments selling high-calorie fast food and junk food, relative to
healthier food options.” Judd Legum and Tesnim Zekeria. “Major corporations say they will
18 stop donating to members of Congress who tried to overturn the election,”
3 U.S. Department of Labor. “History of Changes to the Minimum Wage Law,” Popular Information, January 10, 2021
accessed February 5, 2021
19 “Trump’s First Hundred Days? A transcript of the weekend’s program on
4
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “A profile of the working poor, 2018,” Fox News Channel,” Wall Street Journal, Opinion, October 23, 2016
Report 108, July 2020
20 Grace Sparks. “Very few Americans are satisfied with campaign finance laws,
5 Restaurant Opportunities Centers United. Stop the Other NRA, May 2017 but most don’t know a lot about them,” CNN, April 4, 2019
6 Jonathan Knutson. “USDA says 2020 farm income to rise,” 21 Trevor Hughes. “Trump calls to ‘drain the swamp’ of Washington,”
Post Bulletin, December 6, 2020 USA Today, October 18, 2016
7 Sarah Eames. “Number of family farms continues to decline,” 22 Tamara Keith. “Biden’s ethics plan is stringent. Some want it to be even stronger,”
The Daily Star, April 14, 2019 NPR, February 2, 2021
8 Bernice Napach. “How 4 companies control almost all the meat you eat,” 23 Tory Newmyer. “Biden’s choices for CFPB, SEC signal pivot to robust
Yahoo Finance, February 19, 2014 enforcement,” The Washington Post, January 18, 2021
9 Center for Food Safety and Save our Seeds. Seed Giants vs. U.S. Farmers, 24 Nicole Lyn Pesce. “No Biden family members will have a role in government or
February 2013 foreign policy, President Biden says,” Market Watch, February 3, 2021
10 Kara Voght. “Small restaurants are furious about a loophole in the 25 Ellyn Ferguson. “Biden’s choice to lead USDA helped monitor OxyContin maker,”
Stimulus Bill. They should be,” MotherJones, March 27, 2020 Roll Call, January 11, 2021
11 Jordan Valinsky. “10,000 American restaurants have closed in the last
three months,” CNN Business, December 9, 2020
12 Irina Ivanova. “Meatpackers showed ‘callous disregard’ for workers’ lives,
key congressman claims,” CBS Moneywatch, February 2, 2021
13 David Dayen. “Unsanitized: Key Senate Democrats may agree to
McConnell’s corporate immunity measure,” The American Prospect,
December 7, 2020
14 Center for Responsive Politics. “Agribusiness Summary,”
OpenSecrets.org, accessed February 5, 2021
17F E E DTH ETRUTH .O RG
D R A I N I N G T H E B I G FO O D SWA M P
18You can also read
