Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Thomas Ferguson is a professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, and a Mother Jones contributing writer. He is the author of many scholarly studies into money and politics, including Golden Rule: The Investment Theory of Political Parties and the Logic of Money-Driven Political Systems (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995).

The sample of large investors and statistical methods used in this article follow the discussion in chapters 4 and 6 of Golden Rule. The sample includes firms and large private investors at the top of the American economic pyramid — specifically, the 400 largest firms listed in the Fortune 500; equally large, privately held firms; large Wall Street firms; and Forbes magazine’s 400 richest Americans. In contrast to many studies of campaign spending, this study looks at the individual contributions of the top officers of all the firms, as well as “soft money” and political action committee (PAC) donations.

NOTE: This chart shows the percentages of companies in Ferguson’s sample that gave “early money” to Clinton’s presidential campaign. The sample contains a total of 774 firms/investors, including 13 defense contractors, 56 telecommunications firms, 45 oil and gas companies, and 35 investment banks. The results for telecommunications, defense, and oil and gas are all statistically significant at the .05 level or better, regardless of which significance tests one prefers, or precisely how one calculates the level of contributions. By contrast, the lower results for the investment bankers are always statistically borderline (.10 or worse) — a warning that this industry’s rate of early support for the Clinton campaign might not really differ from the low (20 percent) average of the sample as a whole. (All data comes from the Federal Election Commission.)

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate