[Editor’s Note: Microsoft underwrites GeekWire’s independent coverage of civic issues. Read more about underwriting on GeekWire here.]
Advocates urged Microsoft to take bolder action on U.S. political reform, and to permanently stop giving money to legislators who sought to overturn the presidential election, after the leak of a partial transcript of internal comments in which Microsoft President Brad Smith spoke candidly about the company’s use of campaign contributions to build beneficial relationships with politicians.
Microsoft had previously suspended spending by its political action committee (PAC) and said it was assessing its policies following the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol.
The company responded over the weekend by taking the unusual step of releasing a full transcript with the context of Smith’s remarks, and promising to announce its decision by Feb. 15, saying it wants to first get input from employees whose voluntary donations fund the PAC.
In a statement, the company said it “believes that opposition to the Electoral College undermined American democracy and should have consequences.”
The full transcript, as released by Microsoft, showed Smith calling Jan. 6 “a horrific day for all of us, whether we’re in the United States or somewhere else. I think it was even more difficult, say, for our Black and Jewish employees, given the hateful symbols that were on display.”
“This has obvious implications for the future donations of the PAC,” he said, explaining that the questions being considered include whether to suspend the PAC’s donations to members of Congress who voted against the Electoral College, and for how long. In addition, he said, the company is considering whether to take “even stronger steps” against members of Congress who led the effort to overturn the Electoral College, or fed disinformation to the American public.
That was enough to stave off, for now, a threat by the Lincoln Project advocacy group to launch a campaign against Microsoft after the initial leak gave the impression of a more complicit stance from the company.
However, the company continues to face criticism on Twitter and other social media for Smith’s comments, and for not acting more quickly.
Jon DeVaan, a former Microsoft engineering executive turned political-reform advocate, called on the company to permanently cease donations to seditious members of Congress, unless they publicly recant their position, by taking into account both their voting record and unfounded allegations of election fraud.
First off, I applaud that you are considering withholding donations to members of Congress who are seditious. I hope that in addition to their direct voting record, you consider those that persist in promoting The Big Lie of election fraud. 2/n
— jondevaan (@jondevaan) January 24, 2021
A respected engineering leader at Microsoft for more than 36 years, DeVaan played a key behind-the-scenes role in developing some of the company’s most important products. He is currently on the board of the the bipartisan political reform group representUS. In his Twitter thread, he urged Microsoft to persuade other large companies to take similar action on campaign funding, and to take an active role in political reform, by championing the For the People Act as a first step.
“Microsoft can commit significant resources to [reform the] political movement,” DeVaan wrote, addressing his Twitter thread directly to Smith. “I think it reasonable for employees to demand this kind of effort to counterbalance the negative aspects of participation in the current system. I hope you do.”
A longtime Microsoft employee, Carmen Crincoli, has publicly called for the company to go further, by using its PAC solely to fund U.S. campaign finance reform.
Microsoft is one of many companies that suspended donations by its PAC following the U.S. Capitol breach and Electoral College vote. Such a pause is normal at the beginning of a new Congress, but Smith told employees that the company is taking the opportunity to assess the situation.
According to the transcript, Smith said Microsoft found that 80% of the PAC’s contributions in the past four years have gone to members of Congress who voted to uphold the Electoral College, and 20% to those who had voted against certifying the election results. Sources inside the company say Smith was referring to the total number of donations, and the percentage split in dollar volume would be less than 20% to objectors.
By law, the PAC can make donations up to $5,000 per election cycle, per candidate. A steering committee determines Microsoft’s PAC donations, based on four criteria, as outlined by Smith: “First, does the person have a job or a role, let’s say on a committee, that impacts our business? Second, does the person represent a geography where we have a significant employee presence? Third, does the person advance policy goals that align with Microsoft’s business policy objectives? And fourth, does the person share our values around diversity and inclusion?”
According to the transcript, Smith said he knows that many might question the need for a PAC: “I will acknowledge that I’ve asked that question myself over the last few years, do we really need this PAC? And I have to tell you, the answer is, yes, we do.”
He continued:
I can tell you that, you know, it plays an important role, not because the checks are big, but because of the way the political process works. Politicians in the United States have events, they have weekend retreats. You have to write a check, and then you’re invited, and you participate.
So, if you work in the Government Affairs team in the United States, you spend your weekends going to these events. You spend your evenings going to these dinners, and the reason you go is because the PAC writes a check. But out of that ongoing effort, a relationship evolves and emerges and solidifies.
And I can tell you, as somebody who sometimes is picking up the phone, I’m sometimes calling members and asking for their help on green cards, or on visa issues, or help to get an employee or family member who’s outside the United States, or on the issues around national security, or privacy or procurement reform, or the tax issues that our finance team manages.
And I can tell you there are times when I call people who I don’t personally know. And somebody will say, “Well, you know, your folks have always shown up for me at my events, and we have a good relationship, let me see what I can do to help you.”
So, I do believe it is important for our company to have this kind of effort, and at the same time, it’s important for us to take stock of the recent events, get feedback, have a conversation, and make decisions that will continue to reflect where we stand, and the values that we believe are important. You’ll see all of that unfold with dialogue with employees.
Microsoft’s stated principles and policies for participating in public policy issues include this: “No campaign contribution will be given in anticipation of, in recognition of, or in return for an official act.” Company officials say Smith’s comments were focused on building relationships and not intended to imply direct quid-pro-quo.
The comments nonetheless left an unsavory impression, particularly when coupled with some of the Microsoft PAC’s past contributions to legislators including U.S. Sens. Rick Scott and Josh Hawley, who led efforts to overturn the election results.
The defensive posturing of Microsoft on this issue and the tortured rationalization / admission that donating to both sides is meant to buy access is really not a good look.
— Tony Bradley got the COVID vaccination (@RealTonyBradley) January 23, 2021
DeVaan, the former Microsoft executive, said in his Twitter thread, “I appreciate that Microsoft is being transparent about its involvement in the political system.” However, he added, “there is more at stake here than the Microsoft self-interested calculus you articulated at the recent employee event.”
