| Founder(s) | Charles Nagel |
|---|---|
| Type | Advocacy group |
| Founded | 1912 |
| Location | Washington D.C. |
| Key people | Tom J. Donohue President |
| Area served | United States industry |
| Focus | Business advocacy |
| Method | Media attention, direct-appeal campaigns Political lobbying |
| Motto | Fighting for your business |
| Website | uschamber.com |
The United States Chamber of Commerce (USCC) is an American lobbying group representing the interests of many businesses and trade associations. It is not an agency of the United States government.
The Chamber is staffed with policy specialists, lobbyists and lawyers. Politically, the Chamber is generally considered to be a conservative organization. It usually supports Republican political candidates, though it has occasionally supported conservative Democrats.[1] [2] The Chamber is one of the largest lobbying groups in the U.S., spending more money than any other lobbying organization on a yearly basis.[3][4]
Contents |
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's own history of itself describes it as originating from an April 22, 1912 meeting of delegates.[5] The Chamber was created by President Taft as a counterbalance to the labor movement of the time.[2]
The Chamber generally tries to maintain amicable relationships with both parties. For instance, the Chamber supported both Ronald Reagan's tax cuts and Bill Clinton's NAFTA efforts. In 1993 the Chamber lost several members over its support for Clinton's healthcare reform efforts. The Chamber had chosen to support healthcare reform at that time due to the spiraling healthcare costs experienced by its members. However, House Republicans retaliated by urging boycotts of the organization. The Chamber operated its own cable television station, Biz-Net until 1997 in order to promote its policies. The Chamber shifted somewhat more to the right when Tom Donahue became head of the organization in 1997. By the time health care reform became a major issue again in 2010, the organization opposed such efforts.[2]
More than 90 years later, the Chamber claims a direct membership of 300,000 businesses, and 3 million through its various affiliates such as state and local chambers.[6] Some of the Chamber’s members and donors are Goldman Sachs, Chevron, Texaco, and Aegon.[7]
The US Chamber is different from local and state chambers of commerce located in many cities, towns and states nationwide. The US Chamber focuses on national issues on the federal government level. Local and state chambers of commerce are independently started and operated organizations. Local chambers focus on local issues, and state chambers on state issues.[8]
The Washington, DC headquarters of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce occupies land that was formerly the home of Daniel Webster.[9]
In late 2011 it was revealed that the Chamber's computer system was breached from November 2009 to May 2010 by Chinese hackers. The purpose of the breach appeared to be glean information related to the Chamber's lobbying regarding Asian trade policy. [10]
The Chamber's positions include:
The Chamber has emerged as the largest lobbying organization in America. It spent $91.7 million on lobbying in 2008, and $144.5 million in 2009, up from $18.7 million in 2000. The Chamber's lobbying expenditures in 2009 were five times as high as the next highest spender: Exxon Mobil, at $27.4 million.[19] The Chamber had more than 150 lobbyists from 25 different firms working on its behalf in 2009. The major issues that it advocated on were in the categories of torts, government issues, finance, banking and taxes.
As of October 2010, the Chamber had a worldwide network of 115 American Chamber of Commerce affiliates located in 108 countries.[20] The US Chamber says that a “relative handful” of the Chamber’s 300,000 members are “non-U.S.-based (foreign) companies.” It adds that, “No foreign money is used to fund political activities.” A US Chamber executive has said that the organization has had “foreign multinationals” (foreign companies) as members for “over a century, many for decades.”[21] The US Chamber states that it receives approximately $100,000 annually in membership dues from its foreign affiliates.[22]
In the 2008 election cycle, aggressive ads paid for by the USCC attacked a number of Democratic congressional candidates (such as Minnesota's DFL Senate candidate Al Franken) and supported a number of Republican candidates including John Sununu, Gordon Smith, Roger Wicker, Saxby Chambliss and Elizabeth Dole.
During the 2010 campaign cycle, the Chamber spent $32 million, 93 percent of which was to help Republican candidates.[23] The Chamber's spending out of its general funds was criticized as illegal under campaign finance laws.[24][25][26][27] In a front-page article titled "Large Donations Aid U.S. Chamber in Election Drive", The New York Times reported that the Chamber used contributions in campaigns without separating foreign and domestic contributions, which if true would appear to contravene prohibitions on lobbying by foreign nations and groups. In question was the Chamber's international branches, "AmChams," whose funds are unaccounted for and perhaps mix into the general collection.[25][28][29][30] All branches, corporations, and members of the Chamber pay dues; the question is how they divide the money for expenses in national campaigns.
The truth of these allegations is unknown, as neither the Chamber nor its detractors can provide any concrete evidence to support or refute the allegations.[31] In reference to the matter, Tom Donohue wrote his council and members on October 12, 2010. He stated, “Let me be clear. The Chamber does not use any foreign money to fund voter education activities—period. We have strict financial controls in place to ensure this. The funds we receive from American Chambers of Commerce abroad, bilateral business councils, and non-U.S. based global companies represent a small fraction of our more than $200 million annual revenues. Under our accounting system, these revenues are never used to support any political activities. We are in full compliance with all laws and regulations.”[32][33][34] Organizations Moveon.org, Think Progress, and People for the American Way rallied against the Chamber at the Justice Department to start an injunction for a criminal investigation.[35][36] As of yet, the Justice Department has not taken any inquiries as a serious legal threat. The Chamber is not required to produce records of its coffers or fundraising.[37]
President Barack Obama and other legislators asked the IRS and Federal Elections Commission to ensure that the foreign funds that the Chamber receives are not used for political activities.[38][39] Obama criticized the Chamber for not disclosing its contributors.[40] The Chamber has responded that “No foreign money is used to fund political activities.” [21] After the election, the Chamber reiterated the nature of Obama's policy dictated action from the Chamber, however the conflict would not be made "personal".[41][42]
In addition to the expenditures from the Chamber's own funds, in 2010 its political action committee gave $29,000 (89 percent) to Republican candidates and $3,500 (11 percent) to Democratic candidates.[43] The Chamber's PAC received a total of 76 donations from individual donors ($200 or more donation) totaling $79,852 in 2007-2008, or an average of three donations per month.[44]
In 2011, the Chamber hosted a "GOP Holiday Party" honoring the Republican National Committee.[45]
In April 2009, the Chamber began an ad campaign against the proposed Employee Free Choice Act.[46] Critics such as the National Association of Manufacturers have contended that additional use of card check elections will lead to overt coercion on the part of union organizers. Opponents of the Employee Free Choice Act also claim, referring to perceived lack of access to a secret ballot, that the measure would not protect employee privacy. For this reason the Chamber argued the act would reduce workers' rights.[47]
The Chamber threatened to sue the Environmental Protection Agency in order to have what the Chamber termed "the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century" on climate science before any federal climate regulation is passed in October 2009.[14] In response to this position, several companies quit the Chamber, including Exelon Corp, PG&E Corp, PNM Resources, and Apple Inc.[15] Nike, Inc has decided to resign from their board of directors position but to continue their membership. Nike stated that they believe they can better influence the policy by being part of the conversation.[48] Peter Darbee, CEO of former chamber member PG&E (a natural gas and electric utility company in California), said, "We find it dismaying that the Chamber neglects the indisputable fact that a decisive majority of experts have said the data on global warming are compelling... In our view, an intellectually honest argument over the best policy response to the challenges of climate change is one thing; disingenuous attempts to diminish or distort the reality of these challenges are quite another."[49] In response to an online campaign of Prius owners organized by Moveon.org, Toyota has stated that it is not leaving the Chamber.[50]
It has been reported that the Chamber has falsely inflated the number of members, claiming that it has 3 million members versus actual membership of 300,000.[51] The Chamber says this is a "misunderstanding of the U.S. Chamber's structure", as the membership of the US Chamber of Commerce is 300,000, but the membership of all of its regional affiliates combined is 3 million.[6]
In November 2009, the Chamber was reported to be seeking to spend $50,000 to hire a "respected economist" to produce a study that could be used to portray health-care legislation as a job killer and threat to the nation's economy.[52]
In December 2009, activist group Velvet Revolution, under the name StopTheChamber, posted a $200,000 reward for "information leading to the arrest and conviction of Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donahue".[53]
Some in the business community have criticized the Chamber's approach to public issues as overly aggressive. Hilary Rosen, former CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America added, "Their aggressive ways are out of step with a new generation of business leadership who are looking for more cooperative relationship with Washington."[54] In 2010 the U.S. Chamber created a page on their web site to respond to controversies that arise.[55]