Food Company Lobbying Tops $1 Million For Some

A lot of the attention on the intersection between food and the U.S. legislature recently has focused on the impending revision of the Farm Bill. Thousands of jobs and the health of millions ride on the billions of dollars that will be doled out by the Farm Bill, so it's an understandable target of interest.

But the Farm Bill is far from the only piece of legislature that affects the food world. In fact, every year, food and beverage companies spend tens of millions of dollars trying to influence dozens of bills under consideration by the Senate and House of Representatives. These bills ranges from overhauls of elementary school nutrition program to tweaks to rules on patent protection -- and all are subject to lobbying.

The parties that spend the most trying to influence these bills are inevitably those that have the most to gain or lose as a result of the outcome. It's no surprise, then, that PepsiCo spends lavishly to increase protection for patents, while French food services company Sodexo, which has has trouble with unions in the past, directs its attention to labor law.

Such detailed information on lobbying would have been almost impossible to find a few decades ago. But thanks to the magic of the Internet, it's now only a few clicks away. With the help of website OpenSecrets.org, we've assembled a list of the 10 food and beverage companies that have spent the most on lobbyists so far in 2011. Click through below to find out who "won" the dubious honors.

RATE IT!   |  

VOTE

Seems Reasonable

Absurd

CURRENT TOP 5 PICK YOUR OWN TOP 5

USERS WHO VOTED

NEW! CREATE YOUR OWN SLIDESHOW

Comments

[August Stover]

05:35 PM on 12/18/2011

Oh, and I know for a fact that YUM! Brands has lobbyists at every level of government, trying to make SNAP useable in their restaurants for people like the homeless who can't prepare food (at least, that's what they claim their motivation is). I've worked as an intern in Michigan's state legislature, and those guys were always dropping by the office.

[August Stover]

05:32 PM on 12/18/2011

Actually, Subway is the largest fast food chain. A recent HuffPost article confirmed this for me.

[Cygnia]

12:55 PM on 12/16/2011

The idea of this article is relevant by exposing the enormous amounts of money flooding our legislative system for influencing the food supply chain in the US; clearly these amounts far surpass any money spent by 99.9% of individuals and or non-profits also seeking a voice in how we govern our food supply. However, the information in this article is incomplete without details on the positions these companies are taking on the topics of their interest. What specifically are they lobbying for in regards to labeling requirements and childhood obesity for instance?

[TenaciousMutt]

12:41 PM on 12/18/2011

This is a general article that talks about who's lobbying for what:

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2010/08/millions-spent-lobbying-food-safety-during-second-quarter/

Haven't yet checked out the Senate website mentioned in the article.

[Karl Wilder]

12:04 PM on 12/16/2011

Of course...they all seem to be worried about nutritional labeling. We want to know how gross the 'food' is Mc Donald's.

[Ray Wigton]

09:28 PM on 12/15/2011

It seems only right that companies have something to say about how a law effects them. When making labeling laws, we need to know how it impacts the people who have to comply with it. We definitely need some patent reform, but I doubt that any two Americans who are informed on the subject of patents and intellectual property rights etc. could agree on any part of it. We need to protect our industry and stop exporting our jobs. We need a fair playing field for all businesses. Most corporate lobbying is just plain wrong. It is a major part of what is wrong with this country - buying influence. What happened to "of the people, by the people, for the people?"

[El Chingaso]

09:23 PM on 12/15/2011

If "we" do the right thing -- by not patronizing these awful companies -- they'll just fade away. The U.S. will be a much better place...

[KurtMichaelFriese]

06:38 PM on 12/15/2011

Going by the numbers here, they spend - combined - more than the campaigns of both President Obama and his eventual Republican opponent (again, combined).

Like daddy used to say, "Don't tell me your priorities (America), show me your budget."

[fishnetdiver]

06:01 AM on 12/15/2011

Instead of 'What They're Lobbying About' how about "What they're lobbying FOR and AGAINST". Is Hershey FOR the Trade Laws or AGAINST them? just an example...

[PunisherWarJournal]

05:12 AM on 12/15/2011

Starbucks sucks, but I didn't start drinking coffee until I got stationed here in Italy. I'm told that I'm forever ruined when I return to the U.S. - the home of the syrup-laden, espresso-flavored "coffee" drinks that our sorry-excuse-for-what-passes-as-coffee is sold to our unsuspecting, ignorant masses. Not my words.

And as a guy who makes his own lemon-lime soda (Wow!), the one "soft drink" (poor term) that I must have is Coca-Cola.

[cameron d]

12:09 AM on 12/15/2011

A member of the lower socio-economic class and fast food free for 5 years.

[JHKH]

06:02 PM on 12/14/2011

I haven't had a soda in decades (yeah, I'm that old); and I haven't "dined" at any of the establishments on this list for years. My only sin is the once-in-two-years latte at Starbucks (with 1/2slice of pumpkin bread). I guess I could be guilty of handing out Hershey's products for Halloween -- mea culpa!

[Noodlegirl]

02:56 PM on 12/14/2011

On a recent trip to southern France, a friend insisted on going to McDonalds...I protested, but she said it was good. Turns out she was right! So McD's is OK, if you're overseas!

[daigz]

05:49 PM on 12/14/2011

Strangely enough, it's true. My guess is it's because cattle aren't raised in such horrid conditions in a lot of other countries.

[O K Ali]

01:11 AM on 12/15/2011

I ate it more when I was stationed in Germany than I ever did stateside.

[TenaciousMutt]

02:45 PM on 12/14/2011

These lobbyists are taking aim at kids. Check out how many have pushed for legislation to allow them to target children by allowing marketing within the school zone.

Many states are considering allowing food companies to lease advertising space on the side of school busses.

http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/legislation/search.aspx

[FiscalConservative2012]

02:38 PM on 12/14/2011

if all this info is so "readily available", then why not go a step further and actually indicate whether the lobbying was to the Dems or to the Repubs?

My guess is the answer wouldnt be very popular around here........

[edgySF]

03:20 PM on 12/14/2011

It's not that we're all mindlessly pro-dem here...it's just that the democratic party is more sympathetic to our causes than the republicans.

Plenty of dems are disillusioned; hence, OWS...people out in the streets protesting, rather than waiting around for elected officials to have integrity.

[JHKH]

06:03 PM on 12/14/2011

My guess is the answer is : Both. Obviously.

[PunisherWarJournal]

05:13 AM on 12/15/2011

Ding!

[Someone Out There]

02:37 PM on 12/14/2011

Lobbying is legalized bribery. We need a constitutional amendment banning it.

[NicoPicoRico]

05:36 PM on 12/14/2011

Agreed, but would banning it stop it from going on?

[Someone Out There]

04:01 PM on 12/15/2011

Not anymore than banning theft has eliminated that. We could, at least, punish those guilty of it.

[daigz]

05:51 PM on 12/14/2011

Your definion is absolutely correct. I've never quite understood how it can be legal.