Changes at the U.S. Chamber Have Caused Some in the GOP to Jump Ship
By Paloma Quiroga, March 5th 2022
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has recently revitalized its website and unveiled its new logo this past October in an effort that seems to point to a rebranding of its values and direction as a trade organization.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s new design and logo
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has recently revitalized its website and unveiled its new logo this past October in an effort that seems to point to a rebranding of its values and direction as a trade organization. This rebranding, however, has put the Chamber in a political conundrum as it has led to its loss of reputation in Washington D.C., especially among GOP and Republican leaders.
The Chamber has publicly affirmed that its priorities have not shifted and is instead doubling down on its core values as an organization and reverting assumptions that it takes sides with any political party. Supposedly, its bottom line hasn’t fundamentally changed as it continues to focus on creating American jobs, stimulating economic growth, and helping businesses work on solving the nation’s most critical challenges. Of course, at Change the Chamber, we believe and have evidence that its stance and actions on climate are not in the best interests of U.S. businesses and the global economy because it continues to refuse to support science-based targets and related legislation for climate solutions or take into account how climate change will affect U.S. businesses in the future. It has a history of funding the election of climate deniers and obstructors, and its actions do not match its statements on the need to take action to try to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change. You can see our facts and reports on the Chamber’s recent activities HERE. Additionally, you can see more about how we are calling on corporate members to change the Chamber’s negative actions regarding climate and the press coverage HERE.
The Chamber imagines a new future for itself
The planned succession of CEO from Thomas Donohue, who had led the organization for 24 years since the 1990’s, to Suzanne Clark, who just recently assumed the mantle in 2021, has opened the door to new approaches for the organization.
Though this change only just recently occurred, the Chamber’s transformation started back in 2019 when it changed the formula it uses to rate and choose members of Congress for Chamber endorsement, angering some members of the GOP because of the inclusion of new formula metrics like “bipartisanship” and “leadership.” This change in internal policy comes with others as well. For instance, any lawmaker who votes with the Chamber at least 70% of the time gets its support, regardless of their party affiliation.
As a result, the Chamber backed up and endorsed twenty-three vulnerable house Democrats in swing seats. The Chamber believes doing this can create more needed bipartisanship in D.C. and stifle political gridlock on economic and other Chamber priority issues. Rep. Andy Kim (D-NJ), a Chamber-backed Democrat freshman, in full bipartisan spirit states, “I hate that everything in this election season is trying to be just binary, as if only one party can be strong with the economy” – a statement reflective of the Chamber’s values. As a youth coalition that needs a functioning Congress to address our country’s challenges, we agree that bipartisanship and leadership should be supported. Of course, we recognize that Republicans have refused to protect voter access and support the climate policies in Build Back Better, even though both of these are needed for a sound future for our democracy. Sometimes we cannot wait for bipartisanship.
But the Chamber’s move to be friendlier with Democrat allies has been a political gamble for the organization that might not work out in its favor. As it turned out, fourteen of the Chamber-endorsed Democrats supported a piece of pro-union legislation, the Protecting the Right to Organize Act or PRO Act, approved by House Democrats in early February – putting them at extreme odds with the Chamber and many of its decidedly anti-union members. This is an issue that is changing since many Republican congress members we spoke with talked about the need for more decent-paying jobs in the clean energy transition. Yet their traditional resistance to unions has prevented that from happening. Several Republicans told us they know their party has to build a better narrative and more decisive actions to create the clean energy transition with family-supporting quality wages for workers.
GOP Backlash
Several key officials left the Chamber after mounting criticisms from the GOP. One former political strategist, Scott Reed, who the Chamber fired, claimed that he resigned due to the organization’s leftward movement and constant bashing of former President Trump.
According to House Minority leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) the Chamber’s bipartisan move is part of a supposed liberal agenda driven by the Democratic party attacking Trump and driving the country apart. This is despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of the candidates that the Chamber backs are still Republicans.
All of this comes at the heels of the Republican party’s populist transformation, due in no small part to former president Trump’s extreme politics. As a result, the GOP has now made enemies out of business leaders and the Chamber who, like Tom Cotton (R-AR) stated, have lost their way and become too liberal. Even Business Roundtable, another rival trade association, has come under fire for being in line with some Democratic priorities. These transformations have created a rift between some of the GOP leadership and the Chamber and have left some of the Chamber’s former Republican allies either angry or disappointed because they wanted to see unconditional GOP loyalty from the Chamber.
The future of a post-GOP U.S. Chamber of Commerce
What does this political identity crisis mean for the Chamber? And what will it mean for climate action? The Chamber’s decision to take a more moderate stance and bipartisan role in politics, though causing its loss of credibility among some in the GOP, can hopefully lead to more pro-climate priorities as it won’t be beholden to the GOP’s anti-climate rhetoric and can instead focus on fulfilling its member and stakeholder demands. Regardless, the Chamber’s hand won’t move by itself on climate action and requires the continued and concerted effort by climate activists and member corporations committed to climate legislation to hold the Chamber accountable.
At the other end of the aisle, Democrats seem to be wary. Though some Chamber-backed Democrats are happy with the Chamber’s endorsement, they are also staying true to Democrat priorities and sometimes, therefore, pushing for agendas that are not aligned with the Chamber.
The Chamber has an exciting opportunity to move toward better business leadership and reward endorsements to federal legislators that support its priorities, regardless of party affiliation. Many stakeholders see the Chamber now as a fossil fuel skewed organization, ignoring many of its own corporate members that have asked for more substantial support for climate policies and dangerously ignoring the business damages and economic disruptions that are occurring with climate change. The Chamber should include several science-based climate legislative votes as positives on its annual congressional scorecard. This would bring the Chamber more respect and a better reputation. The Chamber’s lack of pro-climate vote alerts is disappointing and damaging to U.S. businesses. In fact, the Chamber donated to the elections of many of the climate deniers and obstructors in Congress that are holding back progress now as indicated in our report HERE.
To truly be a champion for its corporate members and U.S. businesses, the Chamber needs to promote positions that improve the living conditions of workers and move into action for climate. It needs to do this by legislatively encouraging wages for workers that can support a family as a pro-business stance. It also needs to stop pushing the idea that uneconomical carbon sequestration will allow the fossil fuel industry to continue business-as-usual while obstructing the needed legislation for the already cost-effective energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies that can help the U.S. meet the 2030 science-based targets necessary to stabilize climate.