Ok, here is my first dip into a longer diary format. This is important, so I hope you'll give it a read.
I think we need a better discussion about how the progressive community can better use its consumer spending to effect political change. At present, there is an amazing disconnect between the consumer choices of progressives/Blue Staters and the businesses that fund the extreme right. I don't have empirical data about this, but it cannot help but be true.
Here are three examples from my own life to get a discussion going.
I was recently planning a trip with friends. I agreed to make hotel reservations and one friend suggested staying at a Marriott since it was close to our destination. Choosetheblue.com told me that Marriott gives 76% of its political donations to Republicans, so I said forget it. Are 76% of the people who stay at Marriott Republicans? No way. And even if they are, why should I support that. This is one easy way to help make a difference.
I spent a half hour online and found an independent historic hotel, just as convenient, and a little cheaper. True, I don't know for sure their politics, but they advertise that they purchase renewable energy, so I am betting I'm doing better than Marriott.
And I can say to Marriott, I won't be staying at your hotels until there is some balance in your donations. Of course, I doubt this will mean much unless they hear it a thousand times. But why can't they hear it a thousand times? Why can't publicly supporting Republicans become a liability for a company looking to expand sales?
Here's another example, Listen to Air America for half an hour and you'll hear an advertisement for TurboTax, the tax software from Intuit. Visit choosetheblue.com and you'll see that Intuit gives 57% of its political donations to Republicans. While we could be pleased that Intuit is buying air time on Air America, we should also ask, how could the purchasing power of the Blue Staters (for short) leverage better behavior on the part of this company?
I actually use TurboTax, and once you start using the product, it is a little daunting to change because of the convenience of importing last year's data. But I'd like to switch, as I see no reason to support a company that favors Republicans. (Perhaps someone has information on TaxACT by Second Story Software out of Iowa?)
Another example, go into a mall in Portland, Oregon, and you'll see a kiosk selling Dell computers. They appear to do a brisk business. Portland is so Democratic its sick, yet Dell gives 77% of its political donations to Republicans.
I'll confess I bought a Dell long before I worried about such things, but I wouldn't make that mistake again. And I wonder, if the Portlanders visiting that kiosk knew about Dell's affinity for the rightwing, would they choose to support that company? How hard would it be to provide a little education?
Those are three little examples. Examples of choices we each could easily make in the way we spend money to better support the political reality we hope for.
I'll end with a tougher example though, Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens funded the Swift Boat Veterans' ads (http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/102704/multimillionaires.html). One of his business investments is Clean Energy, where he is on the board (http://www.cleanenergyfuels.com/corporate.html). Clean Energy makes its money by selling natural gas in California, Washington, and New York among other places (http://www.cleanenergyfuels.com/stations/stations.html).
I'm not sure where to go with this example. I think most of us want clean energy and certainly natural gas is cleaner than oil. But how ironic that Blue States support Pickens who funds the liars. Are there competitors to Clean Energy? Or perhaps consumer spending politics simply has its limitations?
Perhaps this diary is a good place to discuss both the easy little things we can do and the tough nuts to crack as well.