May, 20 2020, 12:00am EDT

Small Biz Oppose Corporate Immunity Push
Creating a "race to the bottom" would devastate small businesses already struggling.
WASHINGTON
Main Street Alliance sent a letter to Congressional leaders last week warning them of the danger to small businesses by pushing forward corporate immunity, a long time goal of large corporations looking to undo decades of worker and consumer protections.
Download a PDF of the Full Letter, or copy below:
May 15, 2020
Dear Leader McConnell, Leader Schumer, Speaker Pelosi, and Leader McCarthy:
Main Street Alliance is a national network of 30,000 small business owners. We are writing to express our deep opposition to the creation of corporate immunity for irresponsible businesses that expose customers and workers to coronavirus. Corporate immunity is unnecessary to protect small business owners, as state law already protects responsible business owners who act reasonably. Moreover, creating this type of blanket immunity from lawsuits by injured workers or consumers would give bad actors a competitive edge at the cost of people's lives, adding to the harm that responsible Main Street businesses are already suffering. This would create a race-to-the-bottom dynamic that creates unfair competition for businesses concerned about reopening before it is safe to do so.
Our Main Street Alliance member businesses are eager to resume operations as soon as possible, but they are very concerned about safety. This is partially because they seek to be responsible community members and prevent the spread of this deadly virus. But it is also because none of our members wants their business or brand associated with the spread of illness or death to employees or customers. As one of our members recently explained:
" All it takes is one person to get sick and then you become a hotspot and that raises fear in customers' minds even higher, and they'll come back even slower."
Arguments for corporate immunity during this pandemic are premised on a false choice that illogically pits public health and safety against the economy and the viability of businesses. In reality, we need to pursue a pragmatic, science-based approach to creating a pandemic-resilient economy that considers both the needs of small business owners and the public need for health and safety. This can be accomplished by providing small business owners with clarity on proper health and safety standards and also financial support to weather this crisis and retool their businesses for safety until there is a widely available vaccine. This can be done and is being done in countries around the world.
Main Street small business owners need two things in order to operate safely during this period of time:
- Clear, easy to understand, science-based, industry-specific, enforceable standards for worker and consumer safety during the pandemic; and
- Adequate financial support in the form of grants, not loans, to retrofit and retool, to purchase safety equipment and PPE to ensure that small businesses can make necessary changes and improvements to meet those standards.
Main Street small businesses should not be forced into unfair competition with irresponsible businesses seeking immunity for their decisions to ignore health and safety standards for workers and consumers. By rewarding noncompliance, corporate immunity would shift the costs of responsible behavior onto responsible Main Street businesses while putting people at grave risk. With this perverse cost-shift, corporate immunity could result in only the most irresponsible corporations surviving the pandemic.
Instead of promoting a race-to-the-bottom with life or death consequences, lawmakers should support Main Street small businesses that invest in their communities. We urge Congress to reject this corporate immunity proposal and provide Main Street with the aid that businesses really need, particularly minority-owned and micro-businesses. That includes:
- Direct support for small businesses for the duration of the pandemic and that allows reopening at the pace and level businesses need to safeguard the health of owners, staff, and customers.
- Adequate testing, tracing, supported isolation, and clear, industry-specific workplace safety standards and support.
- Health care and economic protection for all workers and families -- without immigration-based discrimination -- to support both a healthy workforce and local spending.
- Establish sufficient care infrastructure (child care, schools, paid leave) so parents and caregivers can return to work knowing their families are safe and protected.
- Mechanisms to tackle systemic racial and economic inequities that are devastating businesses in communities of color and pushing people of color onto the frontlines of the disease.
Thank you very much for your attention to Main Street Alliance's concerns.
Sincerely,
Amanda Ballantyne
Executive Director
CC: The Honorable Lindsey Graham , Chairman U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
The Honorable Dianne Feinstein , Ranking Member U.S. Senate on the Judiciary
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Chair U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary
Download a PDF of the Letter.
The Main Street Alliance (MSA) is a national network of small business coalitions working to build a new voice for small businesses on important public policy issues. Main Street Alliance members are working throughout the country to build policies that work for business owners, their employees, and the communities they serve.
LATEST NEWS
'Blatant Act of Retaliation': Trump Denies Colorado Request for Fire, Flooding Disaster Relief
Coloradans' "courage, strength, and willingness to help one another is unmatched—values that President Trump seems to have forgotten," said Gov. Jared Polis.
Dec 22, 2025
Top Democratic officials in Colorado are among those condemning President Donald Trump's denial of two disaster relief requests from Gov. Jared Polis—his latest action in a state that critics say he is retaliating against for its prosecution of a former county clerk who was involved in election denial efforts in 2020.
After the White House denied the requests for Trump to declare major disasters in parts of Colorado that experienced the Lee and Elf fires in August and flooding in October—a move that would unlock Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding to help with recovery efforts—Polis joined other Democratic leaders in calling on Trump to reconsider and accusing him of playing "political games."
"One of the most amazing things to witness as governor has been the resilience of Coloradans following a natural disaster," said Polis. "Their courage, strength, and willingness to help one another is unmatched—values that President Trump seems to have forgotten. I call on the president’s better angels, and urge him to reconsider these requests. This is about the Coloradans who need this support, and we won’t stop fighting for them to get what they deserve. Colorado will be appealing this decision."
The governor was joined by Democratic Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper in speaking out against the denial.
Polis made the requests in late September and last month, noting in his first request that Rio Blanco County, which both fires ripped through, has an economy driven "largely by energy production" at the Piceance Basin.
"This local industry is powered by two local utility providers who have sustained over $24 million in damages to their infrastructure," his office said. "Without support to recover local utility infrastructure, stalled production risks the local economy, major rate increases on Coloradans, and local economic collapse."
In November, Polis noted that FEMA had confirmed $13.8 million in damages to public infrastructure from flooding in several western counties, with roads and bridges particularly affected.
Communities also have ongoing debris removal needs, sewer system failures, and damages to essential drinking water and wastewater infrastructure.
The Stafford Act authorizes the president to declare a major disaster in order to unlock additional federal funding to respond to floods and other emergencies.
Trump has sought to reduce federal funding that goes to states for emergency management—denying at least 12 requests from states between January-October, with Democratic-led states facing many of the denials.
He has overtly politicized disaster relief, announcing in August that any state or city that boycotts Israeli products in protest of its attacks on and policies in Palestinian territories would not receive funding they requested.
Despite this, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told The Hill on Monday that "there is no politicization to the president’s decisions on disaster relief"—but Polis and other Democrats suggested the flooding and fire relief request denial was part of Trump's larger efforts to retaliate against the state of Colorado.
Last week, the president's top budget adviser, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, announced the administration was dismantling the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), a major climate research and meteorological facility in Boulder.
A number of critics said that move appeared to be in retaliation for the conviction in a state court of Tina Peters, a former county clerk who was found guilty of allowing someone access to secure voting system data as part of an effort to prove the baseless claim that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.
Despite uncertainty about Trump's authority to pardon Peters, the president claimed recently that he will do so. He has directly attacked Polis for Peters' treatment by the state.
"When the people of Western Colorado need assistance the most—as recovery from the Elk and Lee fires continues—President Trump abandons them in a blatant act of retaliation against our state," said Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) on Sunday night of Trump's latest action toward Colorado. "Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Corruption, Pure and Simple': Probe Identifies Rich Donors Benefiting From Trump Presidency
“These people are not getting coerced. They are making business decisions,” said one former official who left the Trump White House to become a lobbyist.
Dec 22, 2025
A detailed investigation published Monday shows that many wealthy and powerful contributors to US President Donald Trump's staggering post-election fundraising haul—now at roughly $2 billion—have seen a return on their money in the form of pardons, corporate-friendly regulatory changes, government contracts, and dropped enforcement cases.
Drawing on campaign finance filings and previously unreported documents, the New York Times found that more than half of the 346 big donors it identified "have benefited, or are involved in an industry that has benefited, from the actions or statements of Mr. Trump, the White House, or federal agencies," including Palantir CEO Alex Karp, ExxonMobil, Amazon, Uber chief executive Dara Khosrowshahi, Dow Chemical, and Goldman Sachs.
“So many of you have been really, really generous,” Trump told ballroom donors at a recent dinner.
The Times investigation focused on corporations and individuals who have donated at least $250,000 through various channels, including Trump's inaugural committee, which raised nearly four times as much as former President Joe Biden's; his White House ballroom project; and pro-Trump political action committees and nonprofits.
"The astounding haul hints at a level of transactionalism for which it is difficult to find obvious comparisons in modern American history," the newspaper reported. "The identities of the donors behind much of the cash are not legally required to be, and have not been, publicly disclosed. In some cases, Mr. Trump’s team has offered donors anonymity."
Corruption, pure and simple. Trump is selling the presidency and our country. www.nytimes.com/interactive/... Hundreds of Big Post-Election Donors Have Benefited From Trump’s Return to Office
[image or embed]
— Zak Williams (@zakwilliamswzw.bsky.social) Dec 22, 2025 at 9:47 AM
Since winning a second White House term, Trump's political apparatus has reportedly raised more money than it did for the 2024 election campaign—an indication that corporations, their executives, and their armies of lobbyists saw in Trump's return to the Oval Office an enticing investment opportunity.
Harrison Fields, a former Trump administration official who left the White House earlier this year to become a lobbyist, told the Times that post-election donors to the president "are not getting coerced."
"They are making business decisions," Fields added.
The Times investigation outlines numerous ways in which Trump donors have benefited directly or indirectly from the administration's actions this year, while working-class Americans suffer the impacts of rising unemployment, tariff chaos, and a worsening cost-of-living crisis.
"While the donations far exceed most Americans’ means, the sums pale in comparison to the contracts being sought from the Trump administration," the outlet noted. "Take Mr. Trump’s 'Golden Dome' missile defense project, which could yield lucrative work for a number of contractors. Palantir has already held discussions about being involved. Firms including Lockheed Martin and Boeing also are expected to compete for pieces of the work; each company donated $1 million to Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee."
The technology firm Palantir has, according to the Times, "secured federal contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, including to develop software to help Immigration and Customs Enforcement deport people." The company donated $10 million to the White House ballroom project.
Trump's post-election donors have also received ambassadorships, pardons for white-collar crimes, and industry-friendly policies.
"The crypto industry writ large has benefited from Mr. Trump’s cheerleading, as well as his championing and signing into law a bill creating the first federal rules for stablecoins," the Times reported. "Mr. Trump has also favored the fossil fuel industry, directing tens of billions of dollars in incentives to companies, allowing drilling in the Alaska wilderness, and repealing environmental regulations. About two dozen companies with interests in oil, gas, and coal donated at least $41 million."
While the Times emphasized that it is "not possible to prove that any of the donations directly led to favorable treatment from the Trump administration," the newspaper added that "many of the deep-pocketed individuals and corporations who have given large sums have a lot riding on the administration’s actions, raising questions about conflicts of interest."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Americans Face Affordability Crisis, Two-Thirds Say Trump Policies Mainly Favor the Rich
Sen. Tammy Baldwin said that when Trump gives his economy high marks, "it is so clear that he's talking about the economy for him, his billionaire friends, his billionaire Cabinet members."
Dec 22, 2025
As Americans increasingly struggle with the cost of living, nearly two-thirds now say President Donald Trump's policies favor the wealthy over everyone else, according to poll results published Sunday.
When respondents were asked by a CBS News/YouGov poll back in March who they felt the president's policies were most geared toward, already a majority, 55%, said the wealthy were benefiting the most, while 33% said his policies benefited everyone equally. Just 1% said his policies would most benefit the poor.
Since then, Trump has imposed a series of regressive tariffs that have driven inflation up, costing the average family an extra $1,200 this year, according to an estimate by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee in Congress.
He also passed what has often been described as the largest upward transfer of wealth in US history. After July's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the top 1% of earners are poised to pay over $1 trillion less in taxes over the next decade.
Meanwhile, its cuts to Medicaid and Affordable Care Act health insurance subsidies are expected to result in around 15 million people losing health insurance, while roughly 4 million—including 1 million children—will see cuts to their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.
When CBS/YouGov asked the same question nine months later, the number who said Trump's policies favored the wealthy had shot up by 10 points to 65%. The number who said they'd benefit everyone equally has dropped by about the same amount, and Trump convinced no one that he was primarily looking out for the poor.
Trump's approval ratings have hit record lows in 2025, with the economy—once the area where Americans had the greatest faith in him—now serving as one of the biggest sources of backlash.
Last week, after months of delay, a Labor Department report showed that unemployment had climbed to 4.6% in November, the highest rate since 2021—nearly 50,000 manufacturing jobs, which Trump's tariffs are supposedly meant to protect, were shed between February and September. At the same time, wage growth has decelerated to 3.5% year-over-year, the department said.
Just 18% told CBS News/YouGov they felt as if they were financially better off since Trump took office, while 50% said they were worse off. Thirty-two percent said they were about the same.
When not simply pretending that the economy has improved under his watch—as he did in his primetime address last week—Trump and his allies have blamed economic sluggishness on his predecessor, former President Joe Biden.
But Americans largely do not buy this framing: 47% say Trump's policies are more responsible for the state of the US economy today, while just 22% still predominantly blame Biden, and another 22% say both are equally to blame.
Last week, Trump said his economic performance deserves an "A++++." But just 5% of voters gave him an A. Instead, 24% gave him an F, another 25% gave him a D, and 26% gave him a C.
In a post on social media, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) said that when Trump gives his economy high marks, "it is so clear that he's talking about the economy for him, his billionaire friends, his billionaire Cabinet members."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


