Cashing In On Obstruction

How Mitch McConnell’s Abuse of the Filibuster and Other Senate Rules Benefits His Big Money Donors

By Tam Doan and Kurt Walters of Public Campaign Action Fund January 2013

Executive Summary
Since Republicans lost the majority in 2006 and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) became minority leader in 2007, the United States Senate has seen an unprecedented level of filibustering and obstruction. McConnell has been at the helm of a scorched earth policy of blocking nearly every bill and nominee that comes before the Senate, imposing an anti-democratic super-majority requirement to advance any legislation or appointment. This has meant little to no work on a wide range of lingering problems from anemic job growth to unwarranted giveaways of tax dollars to oil companies to the highest rates of inequality since the Gilded Age. This report links the big trends and donors in McConnell’s enthusiastic fundraising career with his willingness to foment legislative dysfunction, which serves to increase his power and enrich his corporate donors while leaving American families to struggle. The eight cases of obstruction examined in this report span several important policies and highly competent judicial and administrative nominees. These cases are among the many instances where McConnell placed the interests of his big money donors ahead of Kentuckians and everyday families. Highlights  On the very day debate began on a bill to repeal subsidies to Big Oil, an astonishing $131,500 in campaign contributions passed from the hands of oil donors in Midland, Texas into Mitch McConnell’s re-election war chest. Three days later the bill failed by filibuster. Companies that lobbied against bringing jobs back to America and ending tax breaks for offshoring have given McConnell one million dollars to win his elections and look out for their interests. Big McConnell donors such as GE, Microsoft, and Exxon Mobil also have billions in untaxed profits stashed overseas. Despite once supporting transparency, McConnell has led the effort to block the DISCLOSE Act and keep Americans in the dark about the money flowing into elections. Wealthy individuals and companies spending millions in secret money have overwhelmingly helped elect Republicans, an essential step in McConnell’s ambition to become majority leader of the Senate. Sen. McConnell took the unusual step of filibustering a district court nominee, former trial lawyer Jack McConnell, who was vehemently opposed by the insurance industry and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce after Jack McConnell won a multi-billion dollar case against lead paint companies. Sen. McConnell has received $1.7 million from insurance interests, and has taken tens of thousands of dollars from one of the lead paint companies in the case and its parent company.

Page 2 of 28

Introduction
Since Republicans lost the majority in 2006 and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) became minority leader in 2007, the Senate has seen a level of filibustering and obstruction that is literally without precedent in the institution’s history. The number of filibusters1 jumped to an average of 130 for each of the Congresses in which Republicans have been in the minority (110th through 112th), exactly double the average of 65 per two-year session from when Democrats were last in the minority. This is a historical aberration. There were more filibusters in 2012 alone (67) than there were in the 54 years between 1917 and 1970 (58). Use of Filibuster Over Time Via Cloture Votes2

Unfortunately, this has real consequences for the amount of legislation that is passed to benefit the American people. The 112th Congress passed only 212 public bills through December 21, 2012, significantly lower than any two-year period at least as far back as World War II.3 This is not just about divided government. When Democrats last held the Senate with a Republicancontrolled house, from 1981-1987, Congress still managed to pass an average of 587 public bills each session.4
1 2

This is measured by the number of cloture motions filed. Successfully invoking cloture takes 60 votes and ends a filibuster. “Senate Actions on Cloture Motions,” U.S. Senate. Accessed December 28, 2012: http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm 3 Mimi Marziani et al., “Curbing Filibuster Abuse,” Brennan Center for Justice, November 16, 2012. http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/curbing_filibuster_abuse 4 Mimi Marziani et al., “Curbing Filibuster Abuse,” Brennan Center for Justice, November 16, 2012. http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/curbing_filibuster_abuse

Page 3 of 28

Behind this dysfunction and gridlock has been Sen. McConnell’s willingness to break with Senate traditions and the culture of bipartisan compromise. Instead he has increasingly used Senate rules to block any legislation he disfavors, even if it holds broad popular support and a majority of votes in the legislature. Looking through the list of bills and nominees that Republican senators have filibustered in the past six years, a common theme emerges. Rather than addressing the concerns of everyday people in Kentucky, Sen. McConnell and his allies have spent their energy abusing Senate rules to block important policies and appointments opposed by a small number of politically powerful groups, many of which are large sources of campaign cash to McConnell’s re-election campaigns. As this report will show, special interests such as Big Oil, corporate tax dodgers, insurance companies, and Wall Street can count on McConnell to block legislation they don’t like. McConnell has even threatened to hold hostage middle-class tax cuts and other policies important to everyday Americans until he gets his way. Kentuckians could rightly wonder whom Mitch McConnell is standing up for in Congress. The Senate Rules Fight Faced with McConnell and his caucus’s insistence on an anti-democratic super-majority requirement for even routine pieces of legislation and nominations, even Senate traditionalists, like Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) who opposed reforming the filibuster as recently as 2010, now support reforming Senate rules to reduce abuse of the filibuster and other obstructionist methods. Reid and his colleagues in the Senate, including Senators Merkley (D-Ore.) and Udall (D-N.M.), now plan to bring forth a set of reforms such as the “talking filibuster,” requiring senators to actually take the floor and speak in order to block legislation, and eliminating the ability to filibuster the start of debate. He plans to use the “constitutional option” if necessary, allowing changes to Senate rules through simple majority vote on the first day of a new Congress rather than the two-thirds super-majority it requires otherwise. McConnell sees this as an affront: What the majority leader is saying is he will break the rules of the Senate in order to change the rules of the Senate. It has been the case in the past that it took a super majority of 67 which of course meant that most rules changes occurred because the two leaders agreed to them and were proposing them jointly, instead what the majority leader is saying is that he will propose to change the rules with 51 votes, meaning his side gets to decide what the rules are.5

5

“Changing Senate Rules,” Congressional Record Vol. 158, No. 148, Government Printing Office, November 26, 2012. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2012-11-26/html/CREC-2012-11-26-pt1-PgS6878-3.htm

Page 4 of 28

In fact, McConnell is objecting to the very same technique he supported when Republicans had the majority, with The Hill calling him “an outspoken proponent of the nuclear option,” another name for the constitutional option. While in the majority and facing Democratic filibusters of many of President Bush’s nominees, McConnell recognized the legitimacy of the constitutional option: “Unfortunately, this obstruction necessitates that we restore these norms and traditions, and that includes through the use of the so-called 'constitutional' option.’”6 Now, it is McConnell upending the “norms and traditions” of the Senate through excessive use of obstructionist tactics and objecting to Senate rules reform. This turnaround reflects a trend with McConnell, who seems willing to switch his principles to whatever position affords him the most power. In a political system where money is power, McConnell can gain influence by abusing Senate rules in ways he once condemned as long as he protects the bottom line of his large, corporate donors.

6

Charles Hurt, “Support falters for the ‘nuclear option,’” Washington Times, March 23, 2005, A1.

Page 5 of 28

Mitch McConnell’s Big Money Career7
A scan of Senator McConnell’s campaign money over his career reveals key trends: McConnell has become increasingly dependent on donors that can give more, come from outside Kentucky, and represent corporate interests, putting him farther and farther out of touch with the needs of Kentucky residents. Over his last three elections, McConnell has honed his fundraising skills and money has followed his rise to power. He went from raising about $4 million in itemized contributions in the six year period leading up to his 1996 election and more than $20 million for his 2008 election.
Total Itemized Contributions Over 6 Year Election Cycles

Over a long career of fundraising, Sen. McConnell has raised a staggering $45 million at least, looking at just his campaign committee.8 He has raised an additional $6 million to his leadership PAC (“Bluegrass Committee”), which McConnell uses to bolster the campaigns of other Republicans and firm up his leadership status. McConnell was also able to turn his fundraising prowess into influence with his colleagues when he served as chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. In the 1998 and 2000 cycles—a rare two-term stint—McConnell brought in $91 million and then $96 million to be distributed amongst Republican colleagues and candidates, following just $72 million being raised in 1996. All the while, McConnell was leading efforts against campaign finance reform that would place limits on the kind of soft money he depended on at the NRSC.

7

Unless otherwise noted, all information on campaign contributions is based on analysis of data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics, downloaded in bulk on October 29, 2012 from the Sunlight Foundation (http://data.influenceexplorer.com). Itemized campaign contribution data (for donors giving more than $200 in a cycle) were available starting from 1989 to June 30, 2012. Thus, 2012 cycle totals are partial. Unless otherwise noted, totals include contributions to Sen. McConnell’s leadership PAC (“Bluegrass Committee”). 8 This career total since 1989 is provided CRP and includes records available starting in 1989 (McConnell was first elected in 1984). This amount does not include money raised by his leadership PAC, Bluegrass Committee. Accessed December 16, 2012: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=N00003389&newMem=N

Page 6 of 28

Unlike most other elected officials who view raising money as a necessary evil, McConnell relishes fundraising. "When he asked for money, his eyes would shine like diamonds," said former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.). "He obviously loved it."9 Control over the disbursement of that money also gave McConnell tremendous sway with his colleagues, which he was able to cash in as votes for majority whip in 2002. More large donors Over his career, only about 16 percent of the money to McConnell’s campaign committee has come from small donors, measured by unitemized contributions where donors gave less than $200 in a cycle. In the most recent cycle, McConnell’s share of small money has dropped to a mere five percent.10 McConnell is much more reliant on the large, itemized contributions of at least $200. Among his large donors, the average total contribution per cycle has risen over the years, particularly among PACs, which gave about $1,500 on average in the 1994 cycle and nearly $4,000 in the most recent cycle. This increase follows McConnell’s rise to power as minority leader, peaking in his last election in 2008. Average Total Contribution Per Cycle for PACs and Individuals
$6,000 $5,000 $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 INDs PACs

9

John Cheves, “Price Tag Politics: Senator’s pet issue: money and the power it buys,” Lexington Herald-Leader, October 15, 2006. http://wincoast.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-43005.html 10 “Mitch McConnell: Campaign Finance Summary,” Center for Responsive Politics. Accessed December 20, 2012: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?type=C&cid=N00003389&newMem=N&cycle=2012

Page 7 of 28

More out-of-state donors As McConnell gained rank within the Senate, the share of individual contributions he took from Kentucky residents declined, reaching an all time low of 13 percent in the 2012 cycle. Meanwhile, individual contributions from Texas, the Washington area (D.C., Maryland, and Virginia), and the New York tri-state area (New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut), have increased, representing McConnell’s rising favor with, respectively, oil tycoons, lobbyists, and bankers.11 In the 2012 cycle, the proportion of money from Texas (20%) and the New York tristate area (19%) each surpassed the share of money from inside Kentucky (13%). Percentage of Itemized Individual Contributions from Kentucky Compared to Other States
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 KY DC-MD-VA NY-CT-NJ TX

More corporate interests The money McConnell takes from business interests such as banks, hedge fund managers, health insurers, lobbyists, and oil companies dominates his campaign money profile. This type of money peaked in his most recent election in 2008 and is on track to play a large role in his 2014 campaign. Giving at least $8.7 million in contributions to his campaign committee and leadership PAC over his career, Wall Street is by far the largest sector of donors to McConnell. Within the finance sector, his biggest supporters come from the securities and investment industry, followed by real estate, insurance and commercial bank interests.

11

These sectors are represented best in these geographic areas, based on McConnell’s campaign finance records.

Page 8 of 28

Business-Labor-Ideological-Other Split Over Time
$12,000,000 $10,000,000 Business $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
*Note that unaffiliated individuals are not included in the chart above. Such individuals have either not been coded or could not be readily categorized into sectors, including those reported as retired, as homemakers, or without employer or occupation information.

Labor Ideological Other

Total Contributions by Sector
Sector Finance, Insurance & Real Estate Manufacturing, Sales & Services Health Lawyers & Lobbyists Agribusiness Energy & Natural Resources Ideological/Single-Issue Communications/Electronics Construction Transportation Defense Other Party Cmtes Labor Joint Candidate Cmtes Total $8,712,881 $4,796,563 $4,341,193 $3,195,248 $2,968,881 $2,917,008 $2,648,708 $2,042,186 $1,936,677 $1,701,098 $680,699 $632,556 $154,724 $69,750 $11,911 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Total Contributions by Industry
Industry Securities & Investment Lawyers/Law Firms Health Professionals Real Estate Insurance Oil & Gas Lobbyists Pro-Israel Commercial Banks Hospitals/Nursing Homes Pharma/Health Products General Contractors Misc Manufact. & Distributing Mining Misc Finance TV/Movies/Music Tobacco Republican/Conservative Business Services Electric Utilities Total $2,463,701 $2,007,866 $1,794,191 $1,702,792 $1,669,632 $1,336,211 $1,187,382 $1,169,435 $1,073,355 $954,850 $954,649 $836,721 $812,662 $751,599 $747,984 $694,075 $648,969 $630,040 $625,570 $604,799

*Note that unaffiliated individuals are not included in the chart above. Such individuals have either not been coded or could not be readily categorized into sectors, including those reported as retired, as homemakers, or without employer or occupation information.

Page 9 of 28

More personal wealth The value of McConnell’s personal assets, as reported on his annual personal financial disclosure, has grown dramatically in recent years, exceeding the average wealth of his fellow Senators starting in 2008. In 2010, he was the tenth wealthiest Senator, having steadily climbed the ranks since 2004, when he occupied the 41st spot. In other words, over the last few years, while most American families reeled in the aftermath of the financial crisis, McConnell got rich and led legislative efforts that created more hardship for middle class families. Recent Growth in McConnell’s Personal Wealth

Source: Center for Responsive Politics, Personal Finance Profile for Senator McConnell

Page 10 of 28

Cases of Obstruction
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has led a scorched earth policy of filibustering nearly every bill and nominee that comes before the Senate, imposing an anti-democratic super-majority requirement to advance any legislation or appointment. This has meant little to no work on a wide range of lingering problems from low job growth to unwarranted giveaways of tax dollars to oil companies to the highest rates of inequality since the Gilded Age. Inaction, frustration, and economic stagnation are part of McConnell’s political strategy as he hopes the public will place the blame on President Obama for the lack of progress. According to his own statements, McConnell’s number one goal was making Obama a one-term president. While he didn’t succeed in that mission, he did manage to help keep Washington a corporationfriendly town. The following eight cases of obstruction span several important policies and highly competent judicial and administrative nominees. These cases are among the many instances where McConnell placed the interests of his big money donors ahead of Kentuckians and everyday families. Policy Case 1: Repeal Big Oil Subsidies On March 29, 2012, the Senate voted 51 in favor and 47 opposed to cut off debate and bring a final vote on a bill to remove $24 billion in tax breaks and giveaways to the five largest oil companies in America, some of the most profitable companies in the history of the world. In most legislatures throughout the world, or indeed most Senates in the history of the United States, this majority support would mean bill passage and over the next 10 years, $24 billion that would have gone to some of the largest oil companies would instead be split between reducing the federal debt and extending incentives for clean energy and energy efficiency. Instead, due to McConnell’s intense focus on obstructionist techniques, this vote merely added one more bill to the pile of legislation blocked by the filibuster. McConnell took to the Senate floor that day to talk about high gasoline prices, but his stated interest in getting things done for Americans was belied both by his record of obstruction and the enormous contributions he takes from the oil and gas industry. In fact, oil and gas interests have given $1.3 million to McConnell’s campaign committees and leadership PAC over his career, a top-10 donor industry for him, despite having almost no presence in Kentucky. His Big Oil donors are not subtle. On March 26th, just three days earlier and the very same day that Senate debate began on the Repeal Big Oil Subsidies Act, McConnell pulled in an astonishing $131,500 in contributions from oil-related donors in Midland, Texas, the oil industry’s base for extraction in the Permian Basin. It is unclear from expense reports whether

Page 11 of 28

McConnell himself was able to attend, but it’s clear that the oil industry has his ear—and his vote. These donors have influence beyond their money, as well. Among the Texas fundraiser attendees were former Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, who took a bus tour to promote President George W. Bush’s economic policies with McConnell’s wife, then-Labor Secretary Elaine Chao;12 Miles Boldrick, in whose home Mitt Romney would later spend the night;13 and Javaid Anwar, who lent Rick Perry the use of his private jet.14 In fact, George W. Bush himself contributed the legal maximum to McConnell along with his wife ($10,000 total) just five days later. They listed their address as Midland, Texas rather than their homes in Crawford or Dallas, raising the possibility that they were involved in hosting the event. Of course, late March 2012 was not the first or only time McConnell stood up for his financial backers in the oil industry. Just months before, in December, 2011, McConnell announced he would hold hostage the extension of the payroll tax cut—vital to the middle class during a weak economy—unless a completely unrelated provision approving the Keystone XL pipeline was included.15 The pipeline was and continues to be a major priority for Big Oil. Incorporating a broad range of energy-related votes, Oil Change International rates McConnell’s vote record as favoring fossil fuel interests 94 percent of the time.16 Policy Case 2: Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring In recent years, as American workers faced record job losses and large companies continued to move positions abroad, federal policymakers have attempted to incentivize job creation in the U.S. and close tax loopholes that reward companies for moving their operations overseas. Among the attempts to eliminate such loopholes was the Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act (S.3816), a bill introduced in September 2010 that included ideas Obama announced support for in May 2009. The bill would have 1) granted a two-year payroll tax holiday for every job brought back to the US, 2) put an end to deductions companies can take when moving operations abroad, and 3) eliminated deferral of taxes on overseas profits for companies moving overseas. Similar provisions were originally included in the “tax extenders” bill (H.R. 4213), debated at length the summer of 2010. But these provisions were stripped as this Senate bill failed cloture vote after
12 13

Martin Crutsinger, “Bush economic team hits the road to promote tax cuts,” Kentucky New Era, July 29, 2003. Alex Guillen, “Mitt Romney Slept Here,” Politico Morning Energy, August 22, 2012. http://www.politico.com/morningenergy/0812/morningenergy566.html 14 Matthew Ericson et al., “Who’s Financing the ‘Super PACs,’ New York Times, May 7, 2012. Accessed December 18, 2012: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/31/us/politics/super-pac-donors.html?smid=tw-nytimespolitics&seid=auto 15 Ben Geman, “Senate GOP digs in on Keystone pipeline push,” The Hill, December 16, 2011. http://thehill.com/blogs/e2wire/e2-wire/199979-senate-gop-digs-in-on-keystone-pipeline-push 16 “Mitch McConnell – Votes,” Oil Change International. Accessed December 20, 2012: http://www.dirtyenergymoney.com/view.php?searchvalue=mcconnell&com=&can=&zip=&search=1&type=search#view=voter ecord

Page 12 of 28

cloture vote, only to finally pass with a bare-bones extension of unemployment benefits and without the measures to bring jobs back from overseas. Provisions similar to the first two were included in the Bring Jobs Home Act, which also perished by filibuster in July 2012. After Obama announced his support for these ideas in 2009, McConnell artfully stated “I cannot endorse a plan that gives preferential treatment to foreign companies at the expense of U.S.based companies and the 52 million people they employ,"17 when in reality it is large American multinationals that receive preferential treatment at the expense of small American businesses and American workers. Unfortunately McConnell helped block all these recent efforts to bring jobs back to the U.S., looking out repeatedly for his large corporate donors and opponents of these measures, including the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.18 Companies with key stakes in these policies understand how important it is to invest in McConnell’s fundraising committees. Taking the companies that lobbied on S.3816 in 2010 as a sample, we find that McConnell raised close to $1 million from executives and PACs associated with 37 of the companies that reported lobbying on the bill in at least two of their filings.19 The largest donor in this group is General Electric (giving at least $174,812 to McConnell over the years), followed by Microsoft Corp ($100,750), Koch Industries ($85,450), and Exxon Mobil ($74,300). (See Appendix for full list.) These 37 companies have collectively stashed $445 billion in untaxed profits overseas instead of using those funds to create jobs in America. GE, Microsoft and Exxon Mobil also stand out in this regard, with offshore profits of $102 billion, $61 billion, and $74 billion respectively. Other McConnell donors that lobbied on the issue and sit on large overseas stores of cash include Johnson & Johnson ($42 billion abroad), IBM ($38 billion abroad), and Hewlett-Packard ($29 billion abroad). Policy Case 3: DISCLOSE The DISCLOSE Act is legislation aimed at shedding light on “dark money,” political spending by groups not required to disclose their donors, a practice allowed by Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United and the vagaries of U.S. tax law. Once, Mitch McConnell voiced opinions in support of the goal of disclosure, saying “Public disclosure of campaign contributions and spending should be expedited so voters can judge for themselves what is appropriate.”20 But that was in 1997.
17

“Obama Unveils Plan to Close Tax Loopholes,” FoxNews.com, May 4, 2009. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/04/obama-unveils-plan-close-tax-loopholes/ 18 “Obama Unveils Plan to Close Tax Loopholes,” FoxNews.com, May 4, 2009. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/04/obama-unveils-plan-close-tax-loopholes/ 19 Lobbying information is based on an analysis of data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics. 20 “Editorial: McConnell’s hypocrisy on campaign disclosure,” Lexington Herald-Leader, August 1, 2010. http://www.kentucky.com/2010/08/01/1372068/mcconnells-hypocrisy-on-campaign.html

Page 13 of 28

Times have changed and the big money problem has worsened in American politics. Regardless, McConnell seems less concerned nowadays with voters having information to judge undue influence for themselves. Today, this very same politician decries the DISCLOSE Act as “unAmerican” and “an attempt to identify and punish political enemies.” 21 Accounts from the Senate make it clear that the blockage of this formerly-bipartisan idea by filibusters in both 2010 and 2012 is almost solely because of the “enormous pressure”22 McConnell put on senators in his caucus to oppose the legislation, even over considerable objections in private. The bill fell just one vote short of the 60-vote threshold in 2010 and failed on another party-line vote in 2012. What could account for the difference between his previous support for transparency and his now vehement opposition to the DISCLOSE Act? McConnell would have you believe that he is simply maintaining consistent support of the First Amendment against attempts to impinge on the freedom of speech. The facts paint a different picture. First of all, it’s critical to note that Republicans enjoy a massive partisan advantage in secret money spent on their behalf, a 5-to-1 advantage in the 2012 elections. So-called “social welfare” nonprofit organizations (or 501(c)4’s) and trade associations (or 501(c)6’s) are not required to register as political committees with the Federal Election Commission or disclose their donors. These dark money groups spent $245.4 million benefitting Republicans, dwarfing the $49.6 million similar groups spent to help Democrats.23 McConnell is the same person who said the top three priorities for building a political party are “money, money, money”24 and opportunistically sought to ban contributions by political action committees (PACs) in 1996, when PACs gave more money to Democrats than Republicans, without thinking this might violate the First Amendment.25 Even a top Republican aide said in 2005 that McConnell’s opposition to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law is “not 100 percent principle” because “[b]ehind closed doors, McConnell's case against the law also encompassed the practical—the damage the law does to Republican fundraising.”26

21

Mitch McConnell, “Disclose Act is un-American,” USA Today, July 5, 2012. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/story/2012-07-05/Disclose-Act-Mitch-McConnell/56046300/1 22 Dan Froomkin, “Disclose Act Vote Railroaded By Mitch McConnell, Senate Dems Claim,” Huffington Post, July 18, 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/18/disclose-act_n_1683573.html 23 “Non-committee FEC filers,” Sunlight Foundation Reporting Group. Accessed December 17, 2012: http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/outside-spending/noncommittees/ 24 John Cheves, “Price Tag Politics: Senator’s pet issue: money and the power it buys,” Lexington Herald-Leader, October 15, 2006. http://wincoast.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-43005.html 25 “Campaign Financing: Shaking it Up,” PBS News Hour, June 24, 1996. 26 Jonathan Allen, “McConnell gets ready to step into Frist's shoes: Loyal, understated whip awaits his turn at the summit,” The Hill, Oct. 25, 2005.

Page 14 of 28

Beyond the partisan advantage dark money grants Republicans—increasing McConnell’s chances of becoming majority leader—he also has personal ties to some of the biggest dark money groups. The largest dark money group, Crossroads GPS (Grassroots Policy Strategies), is run by McConnell’s former protégé, Steven Law. Law says most of what he learned about politics, he learned from McConnell, and it shows. First as a Senate staffer for McConnell, then on his own helping the U.S. Chamber of Commerce transition to becoming a big political spender and as head of Crossroads GPS and American Crossroads, Law’s career has involved raising enormous sums of money for political uses. Crossroads was this past year’s highest spending dark money group, with $70.6 million in disclosed spending, and every penny either attacking Democrats or supporting Republicans. McConnell has returned the favor, speaking at two of the group’s fundraising events, and pressuring members of his caucus who privately support transparency to maintain party-line opposition to legislation like the DISCLOSE Act that would require Crossroads to disclose its donors. With the incredible effort McConnell has put into using every obstruction measure possible to block the DISCLOSE Act, the failure of Congress to prevent massive amounts of secret money being spent in the 2012 election can be almost entirely laid at McConnell’s feet. Policy Case 4: Employee Free Choice Though growing inequality is a moral and economic concern in America, Congress has failed to reinstall policies that could help reverse this trend by strengthening the rights and voices of workers.27 Academics and policy-makers have argued that restoring balance to the union election process through the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) would help rebuild the middle class. Unfortunately, due in part to the powerful influence of large corporate campaign donors, McConnell and the Senate effectively blocked EFCA in 2007 and 2009 through the use and threat of the filibuster. In March 2007, the House passed EFCA28 before it died by cloture vote in the Senate that June.29 In March 2009, Senator Ted Kennedy introduced the bill again30 and fellow Senators spent months trying to amass and maintain 60 votes. In the end, the 60-vote threshold was too high a barrier to overcome.
27

Noah, Timothy, “Revive Labor’s Power,” New York Times, October 19, 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/10/18/shrink-inequality-to-grow-the-economy/revive-labors-power 28 Roll Call Vote 118, H.R. 800, May 7, 2007. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll118.xml 29 Roll Call Vote 227, H.R. 800, June 26, 2007. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00227 30 “Employee Free Choice Act of 2009,” GovTrack. Accessed December 27, 2012: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/s560

Page 15 of 28

Big corporate interests kept the heat on throughout that time by spending millions on lobbying and elections. More than 300 companies and trade groups lobbied on the bill in just 2009, spending upwards of $563 million on lobbying.31 The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, whose vice president for labor policy likened this policy battle to “Armageddon,”32 spent $123 million lobbying on this issue. The Chamber also spent at least $17 million in the 2008 election, mostly through outside spending. These interests had a friend in McConnell, who warned the bill would “fundamentally harm America.”33 Over his career, McConnell has taken at least $3.4 million in campaign contributions from 150 of the companies and trade groups that lobbied against the Senate version of the bill (S.560).34 McConnell’s donors include the PAC and executives of Home Depot, which have given at least $55,000 to his campaign committee and leadership PAC over the years, while the company lobbied heavily on the bill, spending $935,000 in 2009. In October 2008, during the lead-up to this policy battle, Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus, who has personally donated to McConnell, warned that EFCA would mean "the demise of a civilization." He went on to say that "[i]f a retailer has not gotten involved with this, if he has not spent money on this election, if he has not sent money to Norm Coleman and these other guys," then such retailers "should be shot; should be thrown out of their goddamn jobs." 35 Fellow retailers who weighed in on the issue included McDonald’s, which has given McConnell at least $32,650, and Wal-Mart, which has given $53,800 and lobbied heavily on the bill. Both companies have faced recent worker and community protests for better pay and worker rights. The Associated Builders and Contractors, which has given McConnell $74,250, sent a letter in April 2009 to every member in Congress stating their opposition, saying there is “no room for compromise” and “nothing can be done to make this legislation more palatable.”36 McConnell was sympathetic to these concerns and those of the overwhelming number of his campaign donors who lobbied on this bill. (See Appendix for full list.)

31

This amount includes lobbying expenditures for other issues and bills, since lobbying expenditure reports do not allow for disaggregation of expenditures by issue or bill. Organizations that specified the bill in at least two filings in 2009 were included in this count. 32 Steven Greenhouse, “After Push for Obama, Unions Seek New Rules,” New York Times, November 8, 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/us/politics/09labor.html?pagewanted=all 33 Amanda Terkel, “McConnell: Employee Free Choice Act will ‘fundamentally harm America and Europeanize America.’,” ThinkProgress, January 23, 2009. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/01/23/35208/mcconnell-efca/ 34 Organizations that specified the bill in at least two filings in 2009 were included in this count. 35 Frank Thomas, “It's Time to Give Voters the Liberalism They Want,” Wall Street Journal, November 19, 2008. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122705706314639537.html 36 Candace Beeke, “Associated Builders and Contractors battle Employee Free Choice Act,” Houston Business Journal, April 21, 2009. http://blog.mlive.com/westsidestory/2009/04/associated_builders_and_contra.html

Page 16 of 28

Policy Case 5: Helping Families Save Their Homes In 2009, one in every four homeowners was underwater, owing more on their mortgages than their homes were worth37 and more than a million families nationwide had lost their homes the previous year.38 In Kentucky, the foreclosure rate remained higher than it had been in decades.39 In April 2009, as the foreclosure crisis escalated, the House passed the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act,40 which included a key provision to create flexibility for bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages for homeowners facing foreclosure, the so-called “cramdown” provision. In the Senate, despite his efforts, Senator Durbin was not able to garner 60 votes to keep the cramdown provision in their version of the bill,41 after months of negotiating and working with banks and Republicans. It was during this process that Durbin noted, with regard to Capitol Hill, that banks “frankly own the place.”42 With Wall Street interests topping McConnell’s donor list with at least $8.7 million, it is fair to ask whether Wall Street owns Senator McConnell in particular. Some of McConnell top donors from the finance sector fought against Durbin’s provision. The American Bankers Association, which has given at least $85,000 to McConnell over the years, left the negotiating table Durbin convened43 and spent $8.5 million lobbying against the bill in 2009.44 Other opponents included the Mortgage Bankers Association ($37,500 in campaign contributions to McConnell) and the Financial Services Roundtable ($24,000). The country’s four largest banks stood to lose the most from the cramdown provision, including billions in outstanding unsecured debt on underwater homes, loans that could be written off completely by mortgage adjustments.45 The nation’s largest bank, JPMorgan Chase, 46 is also one of McConnnell’s biggest donors, giving at least $134,475 over his career.
37

Ruth Simon and James Hagerty, “One in Four Borrowers Is Underwater,” Wall Street Journal, November 24, 2009. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125903489722661849.html 38 Chris Palmeri, “Over one Million People Lost their Home in 2008,” Bloomberg BusinessWeek, January 14, 2009. http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2009/01/over_one_millio.html 39 Emily Spurlock, et al. Housing Foreclosures in Kentucky, Kentucky Legislative Research Commission, July 9, 2009, pg. 18. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/lrcpubs/rr365.pdf 40 Roll Call Vote 104, H.R. 1106, March 5, 2009. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll104.xml 41 Roll Call Vote 174, S.Amdt. 2014 to S. 896, April 30, 2009. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00174 42 Ryan Grim, “Dick Durbin: Banks ‘Frankly Own The Place’,” Huffington Post, May 30, 2009. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/29/dick-durbin-banks-frankly_n_193010.html 43 Ryan Grim, “Bankruptcy Bill Watered Down, Still Fiercely Opposed By Banks,“ Huffington Post, May 28, 2009. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/27/bankruptcy-bill-watered-d_n_191998.html 44 This amount includes lobbying expenditures for other issues and bills, since lobbying expenditure reports do not allow for disaggregation of expenditures by issue or bill. 45 Alex Ulam, “Why a Mortgage Cramdown Bill Is Still the Best Bet to Save the Economy,” The Nation, October 20, 2011. http://www.thenation.com/article/164096/why-mortgage-cramdown-bill-still-best-bet-save-economy# 46 “Top 50 Holding Companies Summary Page,” U.S. Federal Reserve National Information Center, http://www.ffiec.gov/nicpubweb/nicweb/Top50Form.aspx

Page 17 of 28

Nominee Case 1: Jack McConnell Sen. McConnell has blocked or slowed more than just legislation in the interest of his deeppocketed donors. He also has taken the filibustering of judicial and administrative nominees to new heights. When John J. “Jack” McConnell (no relation) was nominated to the District Court of Rhode Island on March 10, 2010, business and insurance interests mobilized to block the former trial lawyer from appearing on the bench. Naturally, Mitch McConnell was there to back up his allies and donors with the very rare step of filibustering a district court nominee, the lowest level subject to Senate confirmation. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce in many ways led the charge against Jack McConnell, evidently because of his history representing plaintiffs against big businesses for lawsuits around asbestos, tobacco, and lead paint. Rhode Island reporters noted the connection behind the opposition of the country’s largest business trade group and the delays by Senate Republicans, despite the nominee’s bipartisan support from his home state, writing “[Jack McConnell’s] nomination has been stalled for more than a year for no apparent reason other than that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce doesn’t like the fact that he has made a living suing businesses…that harm the public.”47 When Jack McConnell’s nomination finally came to the floor for a cloture vote a full 420 days after he was nominated, Mitch McConnell’s floor comments gave no reason to doubt the reporters’ assertion. The Kentucky Republican specifically noted the U.S. Chamber’s position on the nomination while claiming evidence of a “persistent hostility to American job creators” in the nominee’s legal history.48 The business lobby was not opposing Jack McConnell simply for ideological reasons. Many of Mitch McConnell’s donors are from the same companies that have had to pay out millions after lawsuits argued by Jack McConnell or his firm. Attorney McConnell’s landmark lead paint case, in which he represented the state of Rhode Island, resulted in $1.7 to $3.4 billion in costs for Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries, and Millenium Holdings to clean up 240,000 Rhode Island homes contaminated by their lead paint. NL Industries’ PAC and employees, as well as those of its parent company have given $43,755 to McConnell over the years. Similarly, Georgia-Pacific has been the target of several asbestos lawsuits argued by Motley Rice, Jack McConnell’s old law firm. The billionaire Koch brothers who own Georgia-Pacific’s parent company, Koch Industries, have immense levels of political influence, funding a vast network of dark money groups like Americans for Prosperity that has collectively been termed
47

Scott MacKay, “Isn’t it time Jack McConnell gets a Senate vote?” NPR, May 3, 2011. http://wrnipoliticsblog.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/isnt-it-time-jack-mcconnell-gets-a-senate-vote/ 48 Mitch McConnell, “News Release: John McConnell Unfit for a Lifetime Federal Judgeship,” May 4, 2011.

Page 18 of 28

“Koch World,”49 and the PAC and employees of Georgia-Pacific and Koch Industries poured over $80,000 into Sen. McConnell’s coffers. Another interested party with Sen. McConnell’s loyalties is the insurance industry. Three different insurance industry trade groups all signed on to a letter by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposing Jack McConnell’s nomination to the bench. The insurance industry has given Mitch McConnell $1.7 million, but this amount still pales in comparison to the sums at stake for insurers in class action lawsuits like the ones Jack McConnell argued. On May 4, 2011 Jack McConnell’s nomination finally moved forward via a cloture vote of 63-33 and then was confirmed on a narrower 50-44 basis, reflecting the reluctance of some rank-andfile Republicans to carry out Mitch McConnell’s strategy of filibustering even district court nominees. Still, a similar judicial nominee, Louis Butler, was sunk due to analogous business opposition stemming from his previous rulings on lead paint and medical malpractice cases. 50 Nominee Case 2: CFPB Director On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act, the most sweeping reform of Wall Street since the Great Depression. This came after months of attempts by Republicans and Wall Street lobbyists to water down the bill and an astounding 10 filibusters on the bill in the Senate. Faced with an Act of Congress he could not find the votes to repeal, McConnell and the Republican minority in the Senate sought to effectively nullify Dodd-Frank through additional obstruction. A primary tactic was the decision to filibuster any nominee to become director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), regardless of his or her qualifications. McConnell led 44 Republican senators to write a letter saying that no nominee would get Senate approval until the CFPB was “reformed” in ways that would destroy its effectiveness. 51 Since the CFPB was designed to protect Americans against the abuses of big banks and predatory lenders, debilitating the bureau has been and remains a huge priority for the financial sector and McConnell. Wall Street, incidentally, is the single biggest sector contributing money to McConnell, who has taken at least $8.7 million from financial interests over his career. Even after Obama passed over Elizabeth Warren, a favorite of liberal groups who was strongly opposed by conservatives, and nominated Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to be
49

Ken Vogel and Tarini Parti, “Inside Koch world,” Politico, June 15, 2012. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77453.html 50 “Senate deal cuts Butler from federal judgeship vote,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, December 20, 2010. http://www.jsonline.com/news/usandworld/112207769.html 51 “44 U.S. Senators to Obama: No Accountability, No Confirmation,” Office of Sen. Richard Shelby, May 5, 2011. http://shelby.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/5/44-u-s-sens-to-obama-no-accountability-no-confirmation

Page 19 of 28

director of the CFPB in July 2011, Republican obstruction did not let up. Rather than the bureau beginning in earnest its work of protecting consumers on the scheduled launch date of July 21, 2011, the CFPB sat through months of delays in the Senate waiting for a director, culminating in a cloture vote for Cordray on December 8, 2011. In the end, the 44 letter signers and one additional Republican voted against cloture, using the filibuster to block an up-or-down vote on Cordray’s nomination. McConnell and the rest of his caucus even tried to use a technicality to prevent Obama from using his recess appointment powers by holding pro forma sessions—essentially a few senators calling the Senate into session without conducting any significant business—throughout the traditional winter recess. Obama called their bluff by installing Cordray on January 4th, prompting McConnell to claim that Obama “arrogantly circumvented the American people by 'recess' appointing Richard Cordray.”52 This came from the same man who had spent the past 18 months trying to subvert the will of the American people, through their elected representatives, by nullifying a legitimate Act of Congress he lacked the votes to repeal. Once Cordray and the CFPB began to conduct business, it was clear why McConnell and his donors in the banking industry were so keen to impede their work. The first enforcement action the new agency took was a $210 million settlement with Capital One—McConnell’s eighth largest donor ($121,500)—including $150 million in refunds to two million American consumers on whom Capital One had used deceptive marketing practices. It’s probably no coincidence that over half of the money McConnell received from Capital One, $61,500, came in the year and a half between the passage of Dodd-Frank and the eventual installment of Richard Cordray. Similarly, the next action coming out of the CFPB was a $112.5 million settlement with American Express, which has given $69,950 to McConnell. Just like for Capital One, the return on investment would have been astronomical if McConnell’s obstruction had succeeded in saving American Express from paying out millions to customers it had wronged. After the passage of Dodd-Frank, McConnell was quoted as saying of regulatory agencies that “anything we can do to slow down, deter or impede their ability to engage in this oppressive overregulation, which is freezing up our economy, would be good for our country.”53 Millions of Americans who’ve seen compensation for mistreatment by big banks and credit companies would disagree. But it’s hard to argue that it would have been good for McConnell’s donors.

52

“Arrogantly Circumventing the American People with an Unprecedented ‘Recess Appointment’ of an Unaccountable Czar,” Office of Sen. Mitch McConnell, January 4, 2012. 53 Peter Schroeder, “McConnell: Cutting funds for Dodd-Frank regulatory agencies good for economy,” The Hill, June 23, 2011. http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/168057-mcconnell-cutting-funds-for-dodd-frankagencies-good-for-nation

Page 20 of 28

Nominee Case 3: Donald Berwick In April 2010, President Obama nominated Donald Berwick to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. A pediatrician who worked to improve the management of health care systems, Berwick was someone hospital executives described as a “visionary, inspiring leader.”54 Foreseeing a protracted Senate confirmation process and needing an administrator to help implement the new health care law, Obama installed him through a recess appointment in July 2010, much to the ire of Senate Republicans. Senator McConnell called the appointment “outrageous.”55 Since Berwick could only serve the recess appointment through the end of 2011, Obama renominated him in January 2011. Shortly afterward, Senate Republicans united in expressing their opposition to Berwick’s nomination56 and many vowed to block his confirmation.57 Seeing the uphill battle, Berwick resigned at the end of his term, a fate that even opponents of Obamacare found unfortunate, citing the need for more “quality thinkers” like Berwick in Washington.58 Berwick’s opponents pointed to controversial views such as the ones expressed in these remarks to the British National Health Service: “You could have protected the wealthy and the well, instead of recognizing that sick people tend to be poorer and that poor people tend to be sicker, and that any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized, and humane must—must—redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and less fortunate. Excellent healthcare is by definition redistribution.”59 As many Americans with private health insurance know from experience, tending to the sick and the poor is not a priority for health insurance companies, where the drive for profit leads to lower quality care while executives spend millions on politicians to fight health care reform. Given his leadership role, Senator Mitch McConnell has been a favorite for this interest group, taking $2.2 million from insurance and HMO companies over the years, including $158,877 from Humana’s PAC and executives, $115,700 from Blue Cross Blue Shield and Wellpoint, and $46,900 from UnitedHealth Group.

54

Robert Pear, “Obama to Bypass Senate to Name Health Official,” New York Times, July 6, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/health/policy/07recess.html 55 Mitch McConnell, “Senator Mitch McConnell: Americans Deserve to Hear How Donald Berwick Would Ration Medicare,” Life News, July 12, 2010. http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-news/2551328/posts 56 “Hatch, Enzi Spearhead Letter to President Urging Him to Withdraw Berwick Nomination to Head CMS,” Press Release by Ranking Member of Senate Committee on Finance (Orrin Hatch), March 3, 2011. http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/ranking/release/?id=862493f5-d9d7-418e-b47a-17b23142c0b6 57 Robert Pear, “Obama’s Pick to Head Medicare and Medicaid Resigns Post,“ New York Times, November 23, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/24/health/policy/dr-donald-m-berwick-resigns-as-head-of-medicare-and-medicaid.html 58 David Whelan, “Donald Berwick's Resignation And The Triumph Of The Bland,” Forbes, November 23, 2011. http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidwhelan/2011/11/23/donald-berwicks-resignation-and-the-triumph-of-the-bland/ 59 “Transcript: Dr. Donald Berwick's Speech To The British National Health Service,“ Kaiser Health News, July 8, 2010. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2010/July/07/berwick-british-NHS-speech-transcript.aspx

Page 21 of 28

Conclusion
Senator Mitch McConnell has led a campaign of obstruction that has debilitated the Senate and Congress as a whole. Time and again, he has abused Senate rules to block majority-supported legislation opposed by his deep-pocketed corporate donors—even when it hurts everyday Kentuckians and Americans. If the Senate is to return to its function of actually serving the constituents that elected officials are charged with representing, Senate rules must be reformed such that a small group of senators cannot exploit the filibuster, secret holds, and other obstructionist techniques to block the will of the American people. In addition, Fair Elections reform is vitally needed so that the voices of everyday people are heard in Washington over the din of lobbyists and high-priced fundraisers. Campaign finance reform that enables politicians to run a campaign relying on small contributions from their actual constituents, amplified with a public match, will once again make legislating about doing what’s right for ordinary Americans, not just pleasing a tiny sliver of wealthy donors.

Page 22 of 28

Methodology
This report was prepared using publicly available data from government, nonprofit, and media entities to compare Sen. McConnell’s record of obstruction with the campaign contributions he has received. Contribution information is based on our analysis of data reported to the Federal Election Commission, coded by the Center for Responsive Politics, and ultimately accessed through bulk downloads provided by the Sunlight Foundation. The available information includes contributions to McConnell’s campaign committees since 1989 and contributions to his leadership PAC, Bluegrass Committee. The totals reflect a partial 2012 cycle, as bulk data were available through June 30, 2012 at the time of this report’s composition. Campaign contribution data may also be revised over time. Records of filibusters were prepared through a combination of data from the U.S. Senate on attempts to end filibusters through motions and votes to invoke cloture, as well as publicly recorded statements by McConnell and other players. McConnell’s status as leader of the Republican caucus and his public statements indicate he has played an enormous role in the uptick in obstruction, even if detailed information on the role specific senators play in filibusters is not publicly available. Information on lobbying and lobbying expenditures by various organizations is based on analysis of data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics, covering quarterly disclosure filings of lobbying entities with the Senate Office of Public Records.

About Public Campaign Action Fund
Public Campaign Action Fund is a national nonpartisan organization dedicated to passing comprehensive change in America’s campaign finance laws. The organization works to hold elected official accountable for opposing reform and for the special favors they do for contributors. Learn more at www.campaignmoney.org. For more information, contact Kurt Walters (kwalters@campaignmoney.org).

Page 23 of 28

APPENDIX 1 — Total Contributions to McConnell from Organizations that Lobbied on S.381660
Client General Electric Microsoft Corp Koch Industries Exxon Mobil American Express International Paper National Mining Assn AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals PhRMA Boston Scientific Corp Managed Funds Assn Hewlett-Packard Arch Coal Google Inc Johnson & Johnson Anadarko Petroleum Bristol-Myers Squibb Medtronic Inc Deere & Co DuPont Co Barclays American Petroleum Institute 3M Co US Chamber of Commerce National Assn of Manufacturers PPG Industries Retail Industry Leaders Assn Shell Oil Emerson IBM Corp NCR Corp Texas Instruments Advanced Micro Devices Ameriprise Financial CA Inc Convergys Corp Technology Assn of America TOTAL
60

Total to McConnell Since 1989 $174,812 $100,750 $85,450 $74,300 $69,950 $54,500 $40,000 $33,700 $32,200 $30,900 $30,000 $24,750 $23,000 $19,000 $17,750 $17,300 $17,250 $17,000 $13,000 $12,500 $12,000 $10,800 $10,750 $10,548 $10,100 $8,500 $7,500 $7,100 $3,500 $2,450 $2,000 $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $980,360

Unrepatriated Offshore Profits, 2011 (millions) $102,000 $60,800 N/A $47,000 $7,700 $4,500 N/A N/A N/A $10,346 N/A $29,100 N/A $24,800 $41,600 N/A $18,500 $17,977 $2,597 $13,350 N/A N/A $7,100 N/A N/A $2,920 N/A N/A N/A $37,900 $1,200 $4,120 $414 $89 $1,999 N/A N/A $445,014

Lobbying Reports on Issue/Bill 4 4 2 4 4 2 5 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 4 3 2 2 3 2 2

Organizations that reported lobbying on S.3816 in at least 2 lobbying reports in 2010 were included.

Page 24 of 28

APPENDIX 2 — Total Contributions to McConnell from Organizations that Lobbied on S.56061
Client Kindred Healthcare General Electric Ashland Inc United Parcel Service Peabody Energy Associated Builders & Contractors National Restaurant Assn National Assn of Home Builders Verizon Communications Verizon Communications Marathon Oil National Auto Dealers Assn Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of Amer. Home Depot Wal-Mart Stores Duke Energy American Trucking Assns American Hospital Assn Comcast Corp YUM! Brands Honeywell International Food Marketing Institute Federation of American Hospitals Blackstone Group National Multi Housing Council National Mining Assn Devon Energy MetLife Inc International Dairy Foods Assn Natl Assn REITs Darden Restaurants Intl. Council of Shopping Cntrs Associated General Contractors Lockheed Martin McDonald's Corp Boston Scientific Corp American Health Care Assn Total to McConnell Since 1989 $202,450 $174,812 $144,576 $104,321 $99,900 $74,250 $72,218 $70,500 $65,250 $65,250 $64,600 $62,000 $57,000 $55,500 $53,800 $52,850 $50,000 $46,000 $45,500 $44,450 $43,500 $43,464 $41,500 $41,300 $41,250 $40,000 $39,700 $39,500 $37,500 $37,000 $36,000 $35,000 $35,000 $33,250 $32,650 $30,900 $30,250 Lobbying Reports on Issue/Bill 4 7 9 2 6 7 9 5 8 5 4 4 4 16 17 5 4 17 10 7 4 5 8 2 4 6 2 3 3 3 3 10 4 7 5 4 9

61

Organizations that reported lobbying on S.560 in at least 2 lobbying reports in 2009 were included.

Page 25 of 28

NFIB FedEx Corp American Commercial Lines American Meat Institute Hewlett-Packard Occidental Petroleum Real Estate Roundtable International Franchise Assn Arch Coal Ingram Industries American Bakers Assn Limited Brands Nat. Assn of Wholesaler-Distributors Carlyle Group American Beverage Assn Tyson Foods CR Bard Inc Intel Corp American Hotel & Lodging Assn Target Corp Marriott International Dean Foods CVS/Caremark Corp National Stone, Sand & Gravel Assn Mutual of Omaha Republican Jewish Coalition National Ready Mixed Concrete Assn American Gaming Assn Assn of KFC Franchisees American Rental Assn Property Casualty Insurers Assn Williams Companies Harris Corp Caterpillar Inc Deere & Co Amway/Alticor Inc National Roofing Contractors Assn DuPont Co Intl Foodservice Distributors Assn Monsanto Co Livingston Group Halliburton Co Goodrich Corp Allstate Insurance

$29,040 $28,800 $27,000 $26,000 $24,750 $24,500 $23,500 $23,100 $23,000 $23,000 $20,875 $20,600 $20,375 $19,950 $19,500 $19,400 $18,795 $18,300 $17,000 $16,500 $15,500 $15,500 $15,500 $15,500 $15,000 $14,600 $14,500 $14,400 $14,000 $13,501 $13,500 $13,500 $13,500 $13,500 $13,000 $12,700 $12,500 $12,500 $12,500 $12,250 $12,250 $12,000 $12,000 $11,750

3 5 4 4 4 6 4 8 10 4 7 4 5 4 4 6 2 2 6 9 8 8 6 4 2 2 4 2 4 8 11 7 4 2 9 4 7 5 4 11 5 9 4 3

Page 26 of 28

3M Co US Chamber of Commerce ConAgra Foods National Assn of Manufacturers Petroleum Marketers Assn Associated Equipment Distributors St Jude Medical Walgreen Co HealthSouth Corp Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians Illinois Tool Works Brinker International Assisted Living Fed. of America Procter & Gamble PPG Industries Business Roundtable American Frozen Food Institute National Chicken Council National Retail Federation Retail Industry Leaders Assn National Assn of Chain Drug Stores MeadWestvaco Corp Dairy Farmers of America Cummins Inc Lowe's Companies Best Buy Rockwell International Tenet Healthcare JC Penney Manufactured Housing Institute National Utility Contractors Assn Tyco Electronics National Council of Farmer Co-Ops Servicemaster Co Babcock & Wilcox CMS Energy Society of American Florists Building Owners & Managers Assn Altec Industries Emerson Charter Communications Assn for Manufacturing Technology National Funeral Directors Assn Dunkin' Brands

$10,750 $10,548 $10,500 $10,100 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $9,750 $9,500 $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 $8,500 $8,500 $8,500 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000 $7,500 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $6,500 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $5,250 $5,200 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,000

4 13 4 4 4 3 2 3 4 4 4 4 2 6 4 4 9 8 6 7 4 4 4 4 3 9 5 4 4 5 6 5 5 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 7

Page 27 of 28

American Apparel & Footwear Assn Nat. Electrical Manufacturers Assn American Nursery & Landscape Assn Brick Industry Assn Providence Health & Services Texas Instruments United Services Automobile Assn Group Cox Enterprises Rockwell Collins Inc National Grocers Assn National School Transportation Assn Snack Food Assn United Fresh Produce Assn Canal Barge Co Ball Corp Alcoa Inc Intl Assn Amusement Parks & Attractions Convergys Corp Carpet & Rug Institute Toyota Motor Corp Meredith Corp Ingersoll-Rand Ashley Furniture Berkshire Hathaway GenCorp Inc TOTAL

$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $750 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $3,352,775

6 5 4 5 2 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 12 4 4 3 3 3

Page 28 of 28