Ivy Main: Dominion Energy Is Not Running a Charity, Nor Would a NextEra-Dominion Combo; Their $$$ Donations Are Aimed 100% at Influencing Policy in Their Favor

I’ve been saying this (“Public utilities shouldn’t be funding the campaigns of the people who govern them” – Ivy Main) for almost 20 years now, but sad to say, it’s as bad or worse than ever today here in Virginia. See below for Ivy Main’s argument for why it should be completely unacceptable to have a state-granted-monopoly, ostensibly state-REGULATED public utility (Dominion Energy) able to spend as much money as it wants to attempt to influence the very people who theoretically are supposed to regulate them!  And now, Dominion is quite likely to be acquired by Florida-based utility giant NextEra, which will then…what, just step into that state-granted/state-protected monopoly position, along with the ability to give unlimited money to legislators, spend unlimited amounts on lobbying and public relations (e.g., funding publications and organizations like the Cardinal News, VPAP, etc.) to burnish its image, ad nauseum? Seems insane, right? And yet, that’s how the “Virginia Way” operates – and has operated for many years.  Great, huh?

With that, see below for Ivy Main’s article, with my comments as always in brackets/green/bold/italics.

Virginia House Speaker Don Scott is adamant that the nearly $4 million in campaign funds he has accepted from Dominion Energy won’t affect how he views the Virginia utility’s attempt to merge with Florida-based NextEra.

Scott reportedly told a Virginia Public Radio reporter last week, “If you can’t take their money, eat their food and tell them no, then you need to go home.”

Scott is, by all accounts, a very smart man, but I just have to ask: is he kidding himself, or us? [The thing is, if you ask pretty much ANY politician, at the state or local level, they’ll give pretty much the same response, often in angry or indignant terms. Of course, the fact is that a powerful, wealthy corporation almost certainly isn’t giving money out of charity/the goodness of its corporate heart; it’s giving money in an attempt, perhaps ineffectual or misguided, to influence public policy in its favor. So either these corporations are really, really stupid, in that they’re just throwing their money away while never getting anything in return, or they’re not stupid at all, and realize that they DO get a return on their investment, even if it’s “just” special, preferential access to the recipients of their largesse. So sure, in theory a politician could “take their money, eat their food, and tell them no,” but do most politicians actually do that? And if so, do they ALWAYS do that, or do they sometimes not do so? More insidiously, I’ve heard that some of these folks actually come to believe that the corporate executives, lobbyists, etc. are their FRIENDS, or that they’re presenting unbiased information to them. Which is beyond naive, of course, yet that’s exactly what I used to hear about the Dick Saslaws of the world, for instance, about his “friend” – lol! – at Dominion Energy. The problem is, once you think a paid corporate hack is your “friend,” then your guard is down, you trust them, and…they’ve got you right where they want you, pretty much. Smooth, huh?]

I can’t answer for the Speaker, but I think I have enough of a grasp of human nature to know that what he is saying is bunk.

If someone gives you something – even if it goes to your political campaign and not into your pocket directly – it influences you. It has to. Humans are hard-wired for this. Giving and taking – cooperating with each other – is at the root of our success as a species. [BINGO! And claiming that no, you’re speeeecccial, so of course YOU would never succumb to that, is just laughable and insulting to all of our intelligence.]

It’s why government ethics laws, including Virginia’s, have broad prohibitions on their employees accepting gifts that might influence them in doing their jobs. (Politicians have different rules.)

No doubt some of us are more susceptible than others. Me, for example. Offer me something as trifling as a $3 item of corporate swag, and my feelings about you will grow a little warmer and fuzzier. Give me produce from your garden, and I am your friend for life. I know quite well that if I were to lose my mind and run for office, the only thing that would save my honor is my innate suspicion of anyone who tells me I’m great.

Many legislators I have talked to who take Dominion money believe themselves to be made of sterner stuff. Money, flattery – they figure they can accept it as their due and never give anything back. Not a one of them admits to being influenced. If you point out that their committee votes align with Dominion’s interests more often than not, they will insist it’s because Dominion’s lobbyists are so good at what they do.  [I’ve seen this too, MANY times over the years, and it never fails to make me cringe, gnash my teeth, etc.]

I wonder how many voters buy that argument. I suspect they look at campaigns awash in corporate cash and feel only disappointment in their leaders, or cynicism about government altogether.

Virginia is one of only five states that allow unlimited corporate donations to the campaigns of elected officials. [Just to be clear, this is completely antithetical to the concept of one-person-one-vote, as well as to democracy, rule of law, etc.] Until just this year, shockingly, it didn’t even bar those officials from using their campaign money for personal expenses. (Florida, the home state of NextEra, limits contributions to candidates for legislative office in any election to just $3,000.)

Defenders of Virginia’s status quo argue that there’s no harm as long as candidates disclose the donations, giving constituents the chance to vote out legislators if they are sufficiently outraged. [This is an utterly laughable argument, of course. Sure, voters could study campaign finance reports and vote accordingly, but how many actually do so? A tiny percentage, right?] Dominion hedges against this unlikely outcome by contributing to members of both parties. [That includes giving to some really, really far-right-extremist individuals; that’s not what matters to these corporations, obviously…only their own corporate self interest. We see this at the national level, by the way, with all the corporate donations and kowtowing to Trump’s corruption, authoritarianism, etc.]

In any event, retribution is unlikely. Former Del. Tim Hugo, excoriated in the Washington Post back in 2013 for using campaign funds to pay a $9,000 personal cell phone bill, nonetheless sailed to reelection that fall. Hugo didn’t lose his seat until the 2019 “blue wave” election shifted his district to Democratic.

Indeed, our campaign laws feel like a relic of the Old South’s reverence for personal honor. It’s as though adding limits would impugn the integrity of the gentlefolk who selflessly serve the public. [Exactly. Of course, the “Old South” – based on the enslavement, brutalization, etc. of fellow human beings on a mass level – never really had a “reverence for personal honor”; that’s just self-serving bullshit.]

According to the same nostalgic fantasy, campaign contributions are akin to philanthropy. In that bygone world that never existed, a corporation like Dominion would choose the recipients of its largesse based not on who can be expected to vote in its favor, but according to who it believes most capable of making laws benefitting the public. [Laughable. And anyone who actually believes this, let alone tries to convince you that it’s true, should be laughed at – and preferably laughed out of office.]

But Dominion is not running a charity. It would not spend millions of dollars on legislators’ campaigns if it did not expect a return on its investment. Moreover, if donations did not produce the expected benefits, the company would stop making them. In the cold calculus of the real world, political spending equals influence equals profits.  [Exactly; this is all a cold calculus on Dominion’s part. Note that they don’t give any money to Blue Virginia, because: a) they know it would be futile; b) I would never accept it anyway. Although, in fairness, Dominion money sloshes around everywhere, to the extent that almost everyone involved in Virginia politics has – knowingly or not – accepted Dominion money either directly or indirectly…such as through parties, party committees, other politicians who DO accept Dominion money and then donate it, etc.]

Dominion is also not concerned with ensuring that only smart, civic-minded people get into office. It confines its campaign spending to lawmakers who are already in office, with most of the money going to those in leadership positions or who are on the committees that have the greatest power to affect its bottom line. [Yep, just check it out on VPAP if you’re curious…]

If giving money to campaigns did not make the company richer, you would expect Dominion to welcome campaign finance reform measures outlawing donations from public utilities. Prohibiting those donations would save the company tens of millions of dollars every year.

But Dominion opposes the reform bills. The company claims its participation in “the political process” is on behalf of its employees and customers; it makes no mention of its shareholders. [Which is why we’ve never gotten any serious campaign finance reform in Virginia, and why we may never get it in the future either.]

Dominion’s lobbyists say the company favors a comprehensive approach to reform that addresses all donations, rather than singling out public utilities. Meaning, it won’t support this bill, but it might be okay with a different one that – oh, too bad! – has less chance of passing. Meanwhile, it intends to keep its favored legislators on its dole.  [Great job by Ivy Main, by the way, in really ripping away the layers and layers of obfuscation, self-serving rhetoric, bullshit, etc. that we’ve been inundated with for decades.  Also, think about why it takes someone like Ivy Main to say this stuff, and why we don’t almost ever hear it from the news media or anyone else funded by these corporate interests? Hmmm…]

Virginia’s loose campaign finance laws have survived years of reform efforts that came from members of both parties, only to be killed on orders of both parties’ leaders. But the Democratic Party of Virginia has stopped accepting money from Dominion, and today, most rank-and-file Democrats eschew donations from utilities. [See below for information on Dominion donations by legislator, including Dominion disproportionately donating to Republicans…]

This puts Scott and several other leaders at odds with those they lead. With a Democratic trifecta now, there’s a valuable opportunity for the party to prove to voters that it cares more about their interests than its own. [They should start by holding a special session and coming out clearly against the NextEra acquisition of Dominion Energy…but don’t hold your breath.]

This year, the need for reform is especially urgent. If NextEra acquires Dominion to become the nation’s largest utility without the General Assembly acting to limit campaign spending, nothing will stop NextEra from flooding campaigns with so much cash that all pretense of legislators’ independence will be lost.

That shouldn’t be acceptable to anyone. [It shouldn’t be acceptable, but at this point, unfortunately, it’s feeling more and more like a fait accompli, done deal, etc.]

First published in the Virginia Mercury on August 31, 2026.

[P.S. On a related note, it’s worth pointing out that Dominion Energy is currently pushing to build massive new fossil-fuel-fired power facilities, like this one in Cumberland County, DESPITE THE FACT that Virginia law, namely the Virginia Clean Economy Act, calls for Dominion Energy to be 100% renewable by 2045 – just 19 years from now. Also note that a new gas-fired power plant could last 40, 50 years or more, which means that it could be running into the 2060s, 2070s or byeyond – long past the 2045 deadline for Dominion Energy to be at ZERO percent fossil fuels, and even as every day we read news of the latest fossil-fueled climate catastrophe, such as we just saw in Nepal, with lots worse to come. How is this state of affairs even remotely acceptable???]

*************************************