The bottom line is that corporate actions meant to influence a decision in favor of personal gains are unethical, regardless of whether or not lobbying remains legal. Mega-corporations rarely dump millions of dollars into federal and state campaigns for the benefit of American citizens – they are driven by profit motives. An additional ethical implication of corporate lobbying is a specter of “corporate nepotism” that restricts the profession of lobbying to those who have previous connections in Washington or Wall Street, while excluding those who don’t. Consequently, corporate lobbying remains a closed-circuit process limited to only the most influential actors. In the 2012 election cycle, nearly one-third of the $6 billion in identifiable
…show more content…
As is stands, while companies like ExxonMobil create countless negative externalities (like increased carbon emissions and land degradation), they are rarely held accountable towards the citizens that these externalities are likely to effect. Further, overwhelming corporate resources dictate the political agenda; corporate executives and lobbyists gain a level of access to political participation that no other members of society receive. If a CPA limits political participation in any way, or imposes harm onto others without providing reparations, then it should be considered an unethical …show more content…
Rather than follow strict regulations, companies often times devote “…an inordinate amount of time trying to navigate around the regulations without actually violating them” (Verschoor 2004, 21). Ergo, opponents could respond to the idea of a government office for accountable lobbying with the notion that corporate executives will simply find a way to circumvent said office; or, in the case of increased rights for citizens to sue corporations, that companies will simply expand and improve their legal teams. Regulations can lead corporations to focus on evading responsibility rather than accepting it. However, if the general public abandoned the “business as usual” view of state-corporate relations, there would be increased societal pressure for corporations to act in an ethically responsible manner. Much of the apathy among the general public would turn into political fervor if the immoral activities of corporations were made transparent and denounced publicly (Eabrasu 2012,
As is stands, while companies like ExxonMobil create countless negative externalities (like increased carbon emissions and land degradation), they are rarely held accountable towards the citizens that these externalities are likely to effect. Further, overwhelming corporate resources dictate the political agenda; corporate executives and lobbyists gain a level of access to political participation that no other members of society receive. If a CPA limits political participation in any way, or imposes harm onto others without providing reparations, then it should be considered an unethical …show more content…
Rather than follow strict regulations, companies often times devote “…an inordinate amount of time trying to navigate around the regulations without actually violating them” (Verschoor 2004, 21). Ergo, opponents could respond to the idea of a government office for accountable lobbying with the notion that corporate executives will simply find a way to circumvent said office; or, in the case of increased rights for citizens to sue corporations, that companies will simply expand and improve their legal teams. Regulations can lead corporations to focus on evading responsibility rather than accepting it. However, if the general public abandoned the “business as usual” view of state-corporate relations, there would be increased societal pressure for corporations to act in an ethically responsible manner. Much of the apathy among the general public would turn into political fervor if the immoral activities of corporations were made transparent and denounced publicly (Eabrasu 2012,