How Lobbying Shapes Laws More Than Elections

Elections may decide who gets the seat—but lobbyists help decide what they do once they’re in it.

In Part 1, we looked at how Citizens United unleashed a flood of dark money into U.S. elections, helping wealthy donors and special interests shape who gets elected. But the influence doesn’t stop there. In fact, campaign money is just the down payment.

The real returns come after the votes are counted—when lobbyists get to work.

What Lobbying Really Is—and Why It Matters

At its core, lobbying is the act of trying to influence lawmakers or government officials. It’s protected under the First Amendment as the right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.” And in theory, anyone can do it—citizens, nonprofits, trade unions, corporations.

But in practice, lobbying is a multibillion-dollar industry dominated by those with the money to hire professionals, make campaign donations, and get regular access to lawmakers.

Lobbyists aren’t just knocking on doors or handing out business cards. They’re:

• Writing the first drafts of legislation.

• Offering talking points and “model bills” to lawmakers and their staff.

• Sitting on advisory panels.

• Influencing which bills get committee attention or floor votes—and which quietly die.

The Numbers: Billions Spent, Year After Year

Lobbying isn’t a side game—it’s the main event. In 2023 alone, over $4.1 billion was spent on lobbying in the U.S. That’s more than the entire GDP of some countries.

And it’s not just a handful of players:

• Pharmaceuticals and health products: over $380 million.

• Insurance and finance: over $300 million.

• Big Tech: hundreds of millions across Facebook (Meta), Google, Amazon, and others.

• Fossil fuels and energy: major players like ExxonMobil and Koch Industries spend tens of millions annually.

Why spend so much? Because it works.

Case Studies: When Lobbying Shapes the Law

Big Pharma and Drug Prices

The pharmaceutical industry has long been one of the most powerful lobbying forces in Washington. It helped block efforts to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices for years. Even modest reforms have been delayed or watered down. One result: Americans pay far more for prescription drugs than citizens of any other developed country.

Wall Street and Financial Reform

After the 2008 crash, public pressure led to the Dodd-Frank Act, aimed at reining in risky financial behavior. But lobbyists for big banks worked overtime to weaken key provisions, secure loopholes, and delay enforcement through the rulemaking process. Today, many safeguards envisioned by the law exist only on paper—or not at all.

Big Tech’s Quiet Influence

Tech giants like Meta, Google, and Amazon have built bipartisan lobbying machines. They fund think tanks, sponsor events, and quietly shape data privacy laws, antitrust enforcement, and content moderation policy. Despite public concern, Congress has repeatedly failed to pass meaningful tech regulation.

Beyond Congress: The Hidden Influence

Lobbying doesn’t just happen on Capitol Hill. A huge amount of influence happens inside federal agencies—the ones tasked with writing the detailed rules that laws require.

This is called regulatory capture: when industries exert so much influence over the agencies meant to regulate them that the regulators become effectively beholden to the regulated. Think of the SEC working closely with Wall Street, or the EPA consulting fossil fuel lobbyists on environmental rules.

Then there’s the revolving door: members of Congress and agency officials retire—or are voted out—and walk straight into high-paying lobbying jobs. Their value? Insider knowledge, personal connections, and an open door to their former colleagues.

“Soft Power” and Astroturf

Not all lobbying looks like lobbying.

Sometimes, it looks like a concerned citizens’ group urging Congress to act—but the group is funded by an industry association. Other times, it’s a glossy report from a “neutral” think tank—written with corporate sponsorship.

This is known as astroturfing—fake grassroots movements created by powerful interests. The goal is to make industry-backed ideas look like they came from ordinary Americans.

Why Voters Can’t Compete

While voters get a say every two or four years, lobbyists have access every day. They don’t just donate—they educate (or spin), provide bill language, and serve as trusted advisers to understaffed congressional offices. In some cases, lawmakers openly admit they rely on lobbyists for technical details or policy advice.

Even when constituents flood phone lines or show up at town halls, they often struggle to match the daily presence, funding, and influence of professional lobbyists.

Reforms Have Been Tried—And Weakened

There are laws requiring lobbyists to register and report their activities, but many simply label themselves “strategic consultants” and sidestep the rules. Disclosure reports are vague, inconsistent, and often come long after the fact.

Attempts to curb the revolving door—like mandatory cooling-off periods—are limited and often ignored.

The ROI of Political Money

If campaign spending is the investment, lobbying is the return.

For wealthy interests, it’s a smart bet. A $10 million lobbying campaign can delay or defeat a regulation that would cost them hundreds of millions. And thanks to weak disclosure rules and insider access, they can do it quietly.

In Part 3, we’ll look at what can be done—what reforms are on the table, what’s working at the state level, and how voters can push back against a system where money talks louder than citizens.

Because democracy shouldn’t be pay-to-play.

Citizens United and the Rise of Dark Money

What if your vote mattered less than a billionaire’s donation?

That’s not just a cynical punchline—it’s the real-world result of a decade and a half of erosion in campaign finance law. The turning point? A 2010 Supreme Court decision that changed American politics forever: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Since then, the rise of “dark money”—undisclosed, often untraceable political spending—has made it harder than ever for voters to know who’s really behind the ads, the issues, and even the candidates themselves.

Before 2010: Limits, Loopholes, and a Fragile Balance

For much of modern history, federal campaign finance law tried to strike a balance between free speech and fair elections. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as McCain-Feingold) prohibited corporations and unions from using treasury funds to finance “electioneering communications” close to an election. It also strengthened disclosure requirements.

It wasn’t perfect—wealthy individuals and PACs still held disproportionate influence—but it offered some transparency. You could trace much of the money, and there were caps on how much different entities could spend directly or in coordination with campaigns.

That all changed in 2010.

Citizens United: The Floodgates Open

In Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court ruled 5–4 that corporations and unions could spend unlimited funds on independent political expenditures, under the First Amendment. In other words, money = speech—and corporations have the same speech rights as people when it comes to politics.

The Court drew a legal line: while direct donations to campaigns could still be limited, “independent” spending—that is, spending not coordinated with a candidate—could not. This distinction became a massive loophole.

Within months, so-called “Super PACs” were born: entities that could raise and spend unlimited sums, as long as they didn’t “coordinate” with candidates. Meanwhile, certain nonprofits, especially 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations, didn’t even have to disclose their donors.

Enter Dark Money

“Dark money” refers to political spending by groups that aren’t required to reveal their funding sources. That means voters can be bombarded with political ads—often highly targeted, emotional, or misleading—without ever knowing who’s paying for them.

Here’s how it often works:

• A wealthy donor gives to a 501(c)(4) nonprofit like Americans for Prosperity.

• That nonprofit gives to a Super PAC.

• The Super PAC runs attack ads in a tight Senate race, helping swing the outcome.

• The donor’s name never appears in public records.

This isn’t just a theoretical concern. In 2006, dark money made up less than 2% of outside spending. By 2012, it was over 40%. According to OpenSecrets, more than $1 billion in dark money has been spent since Citizens United—and that’s just what we can partially trace.

Impact on Elections—and Democracy

Dark money doesn’t just influence general elections. It’s increasingly used to dominate primaries, where lower turnout and more ideological voters make it easier to sway the outcome. Candidates seen as too moderate—or too independent—often find themselves outspent by anonymous attack ads from outside groups.

It’s also being used in judicial races. In state supreme court elections, where most voters know little about the candidates, even a modest dark money campaign can flip the outcome—potentially changing how state laws are interpreted for years to come.

Meanwhile, everyday voters are left in the dark. When you see an ad from “Americans for Truth and Prosperity” or “Citizens for a Strong Future,” what does that even mean? Who’s behind it? What do they want? Increasingly, we don’t know—and that’s by design.

The Debate: Free Speech or Hidden Power?

Supporters of Citizens United argue that money is speech, and that more voices—even corporate ones—enrich the political conversation. But critics say it creates an uneven playing field, where the wealthiest players drown out everyone else and obscure the true sources of power.

Efforts to reverse or mitigate the ruling have repeatedly failed. The DISCLOSE Act, which would require dark money groups to reveal their major donors, has been blocked in Congress multiple times. Some states have attempted transparency laws, but legal challenges and lax enforcement limit their effectiveness.

What’s Next?

The rise of dark money has changed not just how campaigns are run, but how power is wielded behind the scenes. And this influence doesn’t end on Election Day.

In Part 2 of this series, we’ll follow the money from the campaign trail to the Capitol, exploring how lobbying—not voting—often shapes the laws that govern our lives.

Because in Washington, it’s not just about who wins the race—it’s about who writes the rules.