Corporations have spent four years struggling with the volatile Mr. Trump and the best way to react to his unpredictable actions, some of which contradicted the values of their employees and customers. After Trump’s refusal to commit to a smooth transition, many business leaders began a more sustained conversation about what – if anything – they could do.
On November 23, more than 160 executives signed a letter demanding a swift presidential transition. Some of the executives discussed withholding donations from Republican candidates for the Georgia Senate if party leaders did not do more to facilitate the transition.
On January 5, the day before the Capitol violence, senior executives from Merck, Disney, Pfizer, Morgan Stanley and others revisited the notion of withholding contributions in a call with historians and constitutional experts, said two people who participated in the call. A survey of callers showed that 100 percent believed it was a good idea to warn lobbyists in particular that their companies would no longer support election “deniers”, according to a copy of the survey results obtained by The New York Times. However, no concrete plan has emerged.
That changed after Wednesday.
Early Thursday, calls began for companies to end their support for Republican lawmakers who supported Trump’s agenda during his term or opposed certification of the election. Steve Schmidt, co-founder of Project Lincoln, a group of Trump’s critical conservatives, said in a Twitter post that his organization “will carry out a brutal campaign of corporate pressure”, targeting councils, executives and companies that helped finance politicians who may have triggered the attacks on Capitol Hill. His group was already lobbying Citi, AT&T and Charles Schwab for their support for Mr. Hawley and Mr. Cruz, who took on leadership roles in opposition to electoral certification.
In an interview on Monday, Schmidt said companies – including banks like Citi and JPMorgan – that suspended all political donations instead of focusing specifically on opponents, were not getting it.
“The issue is not suspending all political donations,” he said. “The issue is not even suspending all donations to conservatives who supported Donald Trump. The point is to suspend donations to seditionists, people who incited a revolt ”
In the past, big banks have denied political donations to express their disapproval, usually only temporarily. In 2015, Goldman Sachs and PNC Financial Services suspended donations to Scott Garrett, a Republican with an influential position on the House’s Financial Services Committee, after he opposed Republican congressional candidates who were gay. That same year, representatives from Citi, JPMorgan and other major banks met to talk about a coordinated freeze on donations to Senate Democrats to express disapproval of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a strong critic of the big banks.
Lauren Hirsch contributed reports.