SEATTLE - A special request is being made of Starbucks - and it isn't for an extra-hot, no-whip latte.

To Starbucks shareholders, the way the company spends its money is just as important as that morning cup of coffee, and today in Seattle, advocates for socially-responsible investing are asking the coffee giant to adopt a policy of not making political donations.

Starbucks' CEO Howard Schultz urged fellow top executives across the country not to throw around big bucks in the last election. Now, according to Lisa Gilbert of the watchdog group Public Citizen, they're asking his company to take the same stand.

"They haven't given huge amounts, and much of it if they have given is undisclosed - and that's the problem of political spending," said Gilbert. "But in terms of what we can track, it's nothing in particular. It's just that generally, we think that political spending by companies is a risk to shareholders."

She added Starbucks is the first company the group is petitioning, and that it seemed a likely choice to want to be a leader on this issue. The petition and a letter to investors coincide with the company's shareholder meeting on Wednesday.

The League of Women Voters of Washington isn't affiliated with the petition drive, but board member Kathy Sakehara said it has strong views about keeping corporate money out of politics.

"Any method of financing a political campaign should, first of all, ensure the public's right to know where the money's coming from," she said, citing a few of the League's guidelines for campaign spending. "It has to combat corruption, and also enable candidates to compete more equitably for public office."

In a nationwide poll taken just before the Nov. 2012 election by the Corporate Reform Coalition, eight out of ten Americans said they believe corporations' political spending has made Congress more corrupt and politics more negative.




get more stories like this via email

In Ohio, the upcoming elections could have a significant effect on public education.

Educators are urging voters to consider how the candidates' policies could shape the future of schools, including everything from how schools are funded to ensuring access to a well-rounded education for all students.

Scott DiMauro, president of the Ohio Education Association, emphasized the importance of participation in this election.

"Virtually every aspect of educators' lives is affected, one way or another, by decisions that either elected politicians or people that they appoint to public office make over our school system," DiMauro pointed out.

The union is stressing the need for elected officials who support public education and show respect for those who make it a career. Critics of the current system point to growing support for school choice initiatives and voucher programs, which divert funds from public schools to allow some parents to pay private-school tuition. The debate continues to shape the discourse around Ohio's education policies.

With 90% of Ohio students in public schools, DiMauro argued elected leaders should be advocates for fair funding for schools and resist efforts to limit curriculum content. He added another key topic is accountability and respect for educators. DiMauro believes supporting teachers is critical for student success.

"We have to make sure that we are attracting and we're retaining good people as educators in the classroom," DiMauro urged. "So that kids really get the kind of individual attention that they need."

He predicted the election will decide not only funding and policies but the future direction of Ohio's education system as a whole.

Nonprofit leaders from around the country gathered on Capitol Hill Tuesday, pushing for what they are calling "sweeping democracy reforms," in Georgia and nationwide.

Their focus is on advancing key legislation to secure voting rights and ballot access for all Americans. The measures include the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act, which would set national voting standards, including automatic voter registration and two weeks of early voting.

Christine Wood, co-director of a coalition called the Declaration for American Democracy, sees the need as urgent. She said voting barriers have only accelerated since the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder Supreme Court ruling.

"Every year, bills are introduced and passed in state legislatures that we know have a disproportionate impact specifically on communities of color," Wood pointed out. "Especially when you look at things like closing of polling places, putting restrictions on early voting or vote-by-mail."

Georgia has been at the forefront of voting access issues, with laws like 2021's Senate Bill 202, which restricts early voting and ballot drop boxes and criminalizes providing water and food to people waiting in line at polling places.

David Walrod, president of the Fairfax County Federation of Teachers, also took to Capitol Hill to advocate for accessible and efficient voting processes. He said safeguarding voting rights should be a bipartisan priority. As an educator, Walrod believes being able to vote without barriers is crucial and reflects the core democratic values taught in schools.

"We recognize that one of the roles of public schools is educating students on the role of the government, and educating students about what it means to live in a democracy," Walrod explained. "Most states have some sort of a civics requirement, some sort of a government participation requirement."

The groups also are advocating for the Native American Voting Rights Act to improve voting access for tribal communities, and the Washington, D.C. Admission Act, seeking full congressional representation for the nearly 700,000 residents of Washington, D.C.


get more stories like this via email

The highly anticipated debate between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is tonight, and as Election Day inches closer, more attention is being placed on the role tossup states like Nevada will play.

Harris has launched an "issues" page on her campaign website, outlining a number of her policy decisions and how they differ from Project 2025, the controversial policy playbook issued by a right-wing think tank called the Heritage Foundation. While Trump has tried to distance himself from Project 2025, it has proved to be quite a challenge since many influential Trump loyalists and allies are behind it.

Julie Millican, vice president of Media Matters for America, said the Heritage Foundation has a proven "track record of success."

"They have consistently gotten the majority of their mandates from leadership proposals implemented by incoming Republican administrations, again going back to Reagan," Millican pointed out.

Millican noted in the first year of the Trump administration, the Heritage Foundation touted more than two-thirds of their mandates were enacted under Trump. She emphasized it speaks to why Project 2025 has to be taken seriously, which would revamp or completely eliminate certain federal agencies such as the Department of Education and the National Weather Service.

The debate will be hosted by ABC and will start at 6 p.m. PT.

Millican considers Project 2025 to be what she calls "expansive and extreme," which she said can lead voters to feel overwhelmed. In her perspective, Project 2025 boils down to an agenda of wanting control over many aspects of everyday life.

"There are strict definitions of who it is that can be married," Millican outlined. "There are strict definitions about what women's role is, which is primarily just to have children and raise children, and outside of that they don't have a lot of other worth."

Millican encouraged voters to contrast Project 2025's proposals with their own personal values as it can be an easier and more effective way to determine the impact the playbook could have on the things that matter most to them.


get more stories like this via email