> If you know of a corporation (including a union) that's actually pooling their resources and giving them to campaigns or politicians, you should report it, be

> If you know of a corporation (including a union) that's actually pooling their resources and giving them to campaigns or politicians, you should report it, because that is illegal. You can't keep asserting that that is legal - it's not. Yes, it absolutely is. Here's the link to Lockheed Martin's own description of their employee-contribution-pooling PAC, as mentioned previously: https://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/who-we-are/corporate-governance/political-disclosures.html https://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/who-we-are/corporate-gover... That is how it's done, and it's completely standard and legal. Everybody (who wants to buy influence) does this. The message this sends is reinforced by much more spending on third-party lobbying groups. In 2016, for example, this PAC channeled $2.6M worth of employee contributions directly to candidates[1], plus an additional $13.6M to lobbyists to ensure that the message was received as intended[2]. > I'm getting rather tired of this discussion, because you seem to be mostly interested in hammering away at the same (misguided) point about bribery, despite the fact that this very article outlines the evidence that unions don't need to bribe or buy politicians with money; they already hold that influence over elected officials, without needing to pay anything for it. [...] I'm getting tired of carrying on a conversation about a point that's contradicted by the article were commenting on. Again, sorry, you're wrong. Quoting from the article, emphasis mine: "Construction companies, which have given millions of dollars in campaign donations in recent years, have increased their projected costs by up to 50 percent when bidding for work from the M.T.A., contractors say." "The unions working on M.T.A. projects have donated more than $1 million combined to Mr. Cuomo during his administration, records show." "WSP USA, formerly known as Parsons Brinckerhoff. The firm, which designed some of New York’s original subway, has donated hundreds of thousands to politicians in recent years, and has hired so many transit officials that some in the system refer to it as “the M.T.A. retirement home.”" Finally, let me add: in my previous career I was a consultant for public transport infrastructure planning. This is something I have direct experience of. Politicians are specifically disinterested in cost savings on infrastructure projects because that would work against the interest of their donors. In private, this is something they will tell you without shame. So I've seen this problem point blank. 1: https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00303024&cycle=2016 https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00303024&c... 2: https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000000104&year=2016 https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D00000010...