Pecuniary
Largess as a Variable in Corporate Political Activities
D R A F T
We
developed a new variable called Largess which attempts to provide a financial
input to political activity (PA), but which turns out to also be a candidate
for a response. Schuler (1999) modifies
the Martin direct-effects PA model by suggesting a mediating-effects approach,
which seems to better posit a causal explanation between the economic
environment, organizational composition, and the corporate PA. Largess could be an antecedent or a
consequence between PA and the economic and organizational components. In contrast to 2002 Revenue, which was
excluded for all response, the Largess has been included in the prediction
model for the Size of Senate Network.
Its effect on the response and position in the factor model is being
determined at this time.
Pecuniary
largess was an attempt to provide better insight into the dollars given by
those companies which gave. A scaling
would have to be performed, based on sales or net income. Generally giving would increase as the former
variables increased; the idea was to come up with an excess increase/decrease
to use a predictor in the desired response variables. Based on amount of missing or incomplete
financial and PC data, we couldn't use excess increase/decrease, but we could
make a Total of all Federal soft/hard and Other total for 2002 (ALLGIVE02) and
compare with Net Income for 2002. This
variable is LARGESS02.
Largess
is measured in percent of Net Income since contributions are not tax
deductible. The units are
"colloquial" percent, just to keep the smaller numbers from
cluttering the analysis, .e.g., .003 == "0.3%" Some of the companies with greater Largess
give 1-3% of net income. Company #62,
Northrop Grumman Corporation, in fact gave almost 21% for 2002, on NI of $64M,
a bad year for NOC.
If
NI is <0, then we set the %PC as 999. (It should be infinity). This is AllGive02= FedTTLbux02 + SFTTTL02 +
bux_TTL02. E.g., #45, International
Paper, had -880M NI in 2002, but gave a total of 785,962 in Federal and other
areas. One could say IP has INFINITE
Largess, but in fact there is an "expected" or :ante" amount
which must be maintained, or is perceived to need to be maintained, in good
times or bad.
We
have 19 companies which gave ZERO in 2002, but which averaged about $800k NI
for 2002.
We
have 23 companies with Infinite Largess; They gave around $3/4M apiece even
though their overall net income was negative by this same amount! Maximum PC by these was > $10M.
If
any our 3 PC categories are missing data, then we set to zero since we are
interested in total numbers. Let missing
Income02 be the missing factor.
We
have 58 companies with missing NI figures for 2002 and 2003. but which gave a
median $13,523, with a $1,4M being the top 90th percentile of this group.
Remember,
this is WIP.
John A. Dobelman, Ph.D.