Maybe I’m dumb, but what is the thesis? That a trade organization is only “about the money”? If that’s it… I mean, sure, that seems sort of obvious, but there are ways to be more specific, beyond the stuff that trickles down to consumers.
For instance, it seems pretty clear that the increase in donations in 2016 correlates to the increased likelihood that trade and immigration were going to be subject to political action, given the current heavy nativist bent of the Republican candidate and party. Some questions that follow from that are: How many H-1B visas are claimed by game studios and publishers every year? Does the ESA expect that unilateral trade deals will yield better IP protection than what was offered under TPP? Is a worker shortage the reason for the widespread industry practice of crunch? If not, what problem is an increase in labor supply intended to solve?
Instead, this piece has a bunch of threads that are failing to cohere, leading to a pretty bland “about the money” summary statement.