Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Starbucks CEO says 100+ businesses to withhold campaign donations over debt

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Starbucks CEO says 100+ businesses to withhold campaign donations over debt

    Heads of over 100 major companies have joined Starbucks Corp. CEO Howard Schultz in a pledge to boycott political donations until Congress and the president agree on a long-term debt and deficit plan, Schultz announced in a letter Wednesday.

    "Remarkably, the initiative triggered a national dialogue and a groundswell of support," Schultz wrote, adding that in the 10 days since releasing his pledge, he "heard directly from thousands of concerned citizens and was astounded by the volume of support we received through calls, emails, social media exchanges and various other public votes of confidence."

    That included over 100 business leaders who signed on to Schultz' initiative, including Myron Ullman of JC Penney, Duncan Niederauer of NYSE, and Walter Robb, co-chief executive of Whole Foods, Tim Armstrong of AOL, Mickey Drexler of J. Crew Group, and billionaire investor Pete Peterson.

    Schultz earlier this month issued an internal message at Starbucks reportedly expressing dismay over "the lack of cooperation and irresponsibility among elected officials as they have put partisan agendas before the people's agenda." The response to that message led him on Aug. 15 to issue the campaign donation boycott pledge to business leaders, casting it as a strike to force politicians to act swiftly on the debt crisis and clean up what he views as their dysfunction.

    Partisan gridlock in Washington was on full display this summer when Republicans in Congress and the White House sparred over raising the debt ceiling. They failed to reach an agreement until the day before the U.S. was expected to begin defaulting on its debt, causing panic and uncertainty. Ratings agencies have since downgraded the U.S. credit rating.

    Schultz' pledge also asks leaders to personally take action by accelerating job creation within their own companies.

    Schultz has long donated to Democrats, handing over around $100,000 over the past 15 years to Democratic candidates and committees, according to the Center for Responsive politics. The Center lists a single Republican donation by Schultz: $1,000 to Sen. John McCain in 1999.

    On Wednesday, website www.upwardspiral2011.org and an accompanying Facebook page were launched to connect citizens, businesses and organizations over Schultz' pledge.

  • #2
    I've never bought a Starbucks coffee, but I would now.

    Comment


    • #3
      Something that will finally get those stupid fucks attention, I bet. Nice. Even the corporations are turning on them.

      Comment


      • #4
        It should be illegal for companies to contribute to political campaigns in the first place. That has a lot to do with why this country is fucked up.
        Originally posted by BradM
        But, just like condoms and women's rights, I don't believe in them.
        Originally posted by Leah
        In other news: Brent's meat melts in your mouth.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Denny View Post
          I've never bought a Starbucks coffee, but I would now.
          Hellyeah. I like that guys ballsy move. Bravo to him. I will contribute to those who help to the contribution of society, and not the downfall.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by bcoop View Post
            It should be illegal for companies to contribute to political campaigns in the first place. That has a lot to do with why this country is fucked up.
            So do you think it should only be up to private donors or should every candidate be given an equal amount from the government till? Do you think the first amendment applies to private companies?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BP View Post
              So do you think it should only be up to private donors or should every candidate be given an equal amount from the government till? Do you think the first amendment applies to private companies?
              I can't tell if you're staging to argue with him or not, but you know his general statement is correct though....right?
              Originally posted by MR EDD
              U defend him who use's racial slurs like hes drinking water.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by BP View Post
                So do you think it should only be up to private donors or should every candidate be given an equal amount from the government till? Do you think the first amendment applies to private companies?


                According to the Supreme Court as of last year a company qualifies as a person and are therefore unlimited in what they can contribute. Worst decision in their entire history in my opinion.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ceyko View Post
                  I can't tell if you're staging to argue with him or not, but you know his general statement is correct though....right?
                  I don't think there should be any kind of organized effort by anyone to raise funds for a national election. Give each candidate an equal amount of airtime on the major networks, hold a debate and go to town.

                  I liked the supreme court's decision for one simple fact, it opens up the coffers for both sides. The democratic party has always had unlimited fund raising by big labor unions along with support from most of hollywood and several heavily biased reporters. Obama spent almost 3 times the money McCain did in the last election, how is that fair? He also had organized labor hitting the streets campaigning for him. There were literally people from the Obama camp that visited every house in my neighborhood on top of several phone calls. That doesn't even happen during local elections.

                  The system isn't perfect but at least it gives both sides equal access to money now.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BP View Post
                    I don't think there should be any kind of organized effort by anyone to raise funds for a national election. Give each candidate an equal amount of airtime on the major networks, hold a debate and go to town.

                    I liked the supreme court's decision for one simple fact, it opens up the coffers for both sides. The democratic party has always had unlimited fund raising by big labor unions along with support from most of hollywood and several heavily biased reporters. Obama spent almost 3 times the money McCain did in the last election, how is that fair? He also had organized labor hitting the streets campaigning for him. There were literally people from the Obama camp that visited every house in my neighborhood on top of several phone calls. That doesn't even happen during local elections.

                    The system isn't perfect but at least it gives both sides equal access to money now.
                    i wholeheartedly agree with this. Simple and cheap.
                    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."
                    -Gerald Ford/Thomas Jefferson

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bcoop View Post
                      It should be illegal for companies to contribute to political campaigns in the first place. That has a lot to do with why this country is fucked up.
                      this

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        i foresee lots of audits lol
                        pinto gt with wood trim

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Grape View Post
                          i foresee lots of audits lol
                          No doubt. They should have learned from S&P.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by bcoop View Post
                            It should be illegal for companies to contribute to political campaigns in the first place. That has a lot to do with why this country is fucked up.
                            I agree with you, you stupid jackoff. Does that make me a stupid jackoff too?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by StanleyTweedle View Post
                              I agree with you, you stupid jackoff. Does that make me a stupid jackoff too?
                              You were a stupid jackoff long before you agreed with him on that point.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X