Public Failure, Private Ordering: Successful Self-Regulation of Corporate Political Spending
A forthcoming article on Private Ordering, authored by CPA.

A forthcoming article on Private Ordering, authored by CPA.
Republicans have received around $284,000 compared to Democratsʼ roughly $215,000, though Chubb has only donated to Republicans in the past two years, according to data compiled by the Center for Political Accountability…
Despite a downward trend in the overall number of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) shareholder proposals, support for shareholder proposals demanding increased political accountability and transparency surged in the 2025 proxy season…
CPA’s 2025 report, Corporate Political Spending: What Are the Real Risk?, underscores the reputational and legal hazards of misaligned political spending.
Campaign spending disclosure proposals passed at five companies this season, and eight others saw similar resolutions.
Companies have a duty to protect shareholders from a range of risks – especially those that threaten revenue and competitiveness in a global economy. As corporate political spending grows more complex, so do the financial and reputational risks it poses.
“If you’re going to give, you have to have robust disclosures and oversight,” Freed said.
This proxy season, 13 companies have seen basically the same disclosure resolution on their ballots, according to figures from the non-partisan Center for Political Accountability, with the final one facing a vote last Friday…five majority votes in one season is almost unheard of. The resolution won one majority vote last year.
When retribution from the Oval Office threatens the nation’s legal system, there is cause for worry in C-Suites across America.
“While the companies making these contributions may be seeking a favorable regulatory environment, these political donations further erode public trust and expose companies to legal, reputational, and business risks…”