How Did We Know About Target Donation In The First Place? What do I mean? Well, did you ever wonder how we knew about Target’s donation to the far-right Political Action Committee MN Forward in the first place?
Well, since the U.S. Supreme Court’s January ruling, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaign contributions, corporations have jumped right into the fray by taking full advantage of their newfound freedom to help their candidates get elected.
To be fair, President Obama, who has not been the gay favorite lately for stalling on the DADT repeal, and for not ripping out DOMA at the roots, had this to say about the SCOTUS ruling, “I can’t think of anything more devastating to the public interest. The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcomes of elections.”
We agree with the president. He went on to say, “The Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”
So…back to my initial question: Did you ever wonder how we knew about Target’s donation in the first place? Because Minnesota has disclosure requirements for campaign spending. The problem is Minnesotan businesses are trying to overturn that disclosure requirement. Right now the future of that Minnesota law is in the hands of a federal judge, U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank, who will rule within the month on whether or not to suspend the disclosure requirement on the grounds of free speech.
On the grounds of free speech? For a corporation?
Who initiated the law suit to repeal Minnesota’s disclosure requirement law? Hold on to your hat: an abortion opponents group called Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, the anti-tax Taxpayers League of Minnesota and a travel agency.
I’m sorry…the anti-tax taxpayers league? What the holy hell?
The scariest thing of all is the proposition that not only will the disclosure laws be repealed in Minnesota and elsewhere, but that the corporations will now become smart rats and hide their donations in other, more devious ways.
Tara Malloy of the Campaign Legal Center of Washington DC says that the Target debacle believes it won’t slow down corporate political contributions in the least. When interviewed about the matter, she said, “the Target case may just be an example of a corporation doing it wrong.” Other donors may take pains to make their contributions anonymous. Oh goody. Now what?
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
This can’t be true?!! Companies will be able to hide political donations in the future?
I have been to your site several times now, and this time I am adding it to my bookmarks Your discussions are always relevant, unlike the same old photos of naked men and stuff on other gay sites (which are coming off my bookmarks!) Rock on!
Of course an abortion opponents group wants to hide where they get their funding; that whole world is a covert operation of inflicting shame and supposed “morality” upon people. Companies would never come out and say “we’re against the right of a woman to choose.”
“You can run but you can’t hide”?
Sounds like a death threat to me.
I have heard it said by those who should know that who want to kill homosexuals are afraid of their own homosexuality. They hope by killing others they will kill the gayness within themselves. Self-hate is at the core of this.
Watch out, lest you believe Target is alone in this. Intel is another company that donates a lot of money to right-wing candidates and causes.
The problem is this issue cuts both ways. Some people may start shopping at Target because of its contribution. All you can count on is that big corporations will make contributions that upset people.
This is just so wrong I don’t even know where to start!
Here’s where it even gets scarier: Most companies today are multinational. What is to prevent foreign, non-citizens and companies influencing our domestic policies and national political landscape?
What has happened with Target should make big corporations think twice when choosing to involve themselves in the political process. Just because they can now spend as much as they like, they do so at the risk of alienating large segments of their customer base, which, lets face it is bad for business.
Alienating large segments of their customer base, John? What about companies like Fox News, etc.?
Companies like Fox News market to a super-narrow demographic and as such, they can afford to take sides. Most corporations, on the other hand, want to appeal to the widest number of people as possible.
I’m a 50-year-old straight woman but I tell you, when I heard about the donation Target made, I promised myself I’d never go shopping there again and I intend to stick to that. I don’t care what the Supreme Court says about campaign spending from corporations: I believe that businesses should stay out of politics – period.
Heck yeah, I’m boycotting Target and Best Buy! Why should one dime of my hard-earned money go to support people or organizations I don’t believe in? I also boycott companies which contribute heavily to anti-choice groups.
I support both the Target and the Best Buy boycotts, not just due to the fact they are backing an anti-gay politician but mainly because I don’t think corporations should have the right to donate these large sums of money, which undoubtedly can influence the outcome of elections. Bad call, Supreme Court!
This is foolish economic terrorism! Do you know that?
Terms around like ‘economic terrorism’ are absurd. What you’re witnessing is the the freedom of the people to support or boycott companies that please or offend us, period.
No one will ever agree with every issue with every candidate. I want lower taxes, does that make me a Tea Party buffoon? No. Who is to say Tom Emmer is 100% bad. Same stands for all candidates, we may agree with some stands and disagree with others.
Target blundered themselves into the middle of the heated passions of a dedicated and vocal community: the LGBTQA community. In so doing, they’ve alienated a massive chunk of their customer base. Let this be a lesson to all CEOs, corporations, and shareholders: wake up and smell the gays! (that sounded better in my head, let me tell you!)
You know what I love most about this whole affair? American industries lobbied diligently for the ability to contribute unfettered funds to the political causes of their choosing. Fine. So now they have that right. The thing is, now they must accept the ramifications of that right! Guess what, Big Business? Public opinion may be your downfall!
So Target sponsors a gay pride event here or there and thinks they’ve got us in their pocket. It seems to me, Target used the relationship with our community that they bought through that sponsorship as a marketing tool, and now they’ve revealed their true colors. Problem is, their “true colors” are NOT a rainbow flag…
But Target provides benefits to GLBT employees and their partners! What do you say about that?
Joe, here’s what I think of THAT (the fact that Target provides benefits to GLBT employees and their partners.) First of all, Target is required by law to provide benefits to their employees. Next, the fact that they provide benefits to their LGBT employees’ partners is great, and the right thing to do, but it does not erase or compensate for the fact that they’re using the sweat of those same employees to earn the money which they give to far-right political candidates who want to deny equal rights to those same employees.
In other words, what i think of that is SO WHAT?!
First there were no womens rights, then no rights for blacks, now no rights for gays.
PLEASE! Don’t compare being black to being gay! Not the same thing!
Gee, Enrique, touchy much! How about if we compared it to being Hispanic, hermano? Calma te.
Despite what the SCOTUS says, I disagree! No one should be able to contribute unlimited amounts to any candidate or PAC! I don’t think corporations should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns in an unlimited, unchecked manner. Corporation should be held to the same standards and spending limits as individual citizens.
Isn’t the ultimate question here whether or not corporations should be allowed to so heavily influence the political process with their money? I firmly say they should not. This is the USA, where our political process deems that each citizen may vote once and once only and that only US citizens have the right to vote in elections. By that same reasoning then, only citizens should be allowed to spend their money on elections. My two cents for what it’s worth.
This whole thing will blow over in a couple days. Target execs will not even notice, despite all of our pleas and actions to the contrary.
Sure, Ross, whatever you say. It must be hard being you.
Target intentionally recruits hires and promotes LGBT people and promotes safe internal work environment. They also sponsor gay pride events.
Yo. Dale. Is it too much to ask that you actually READ the other comments before you comment? Your sh*t has already been covered and covered to death!
Call it “economic terrorism” if you must; big business has been running the country for too long and we need to take it back. Boycotting is one way to have some influence.
Economic terrorism…I like the ring of that!
The question becomes what if the Tom Emmer (or any other candidate) gets elected because of enormous corporate contributions from Target and others. Is it what is best for our country? Surely the Supreme Court should have taken that into account, but I can’t see how they could have! This new law seems so unjust!
Target supports gays. They just unintentionally had their money funneled to a conservative candidate when they chose to contribute to MN Forward. As gays, let’s be smart and boycott only the companies that intentionally try to hurt us.
Avi, I’d like some of whatever you’re smoking.
I don’t know what is more offensive, Avi, your statement that Target” unintentionally had their money funneled to a conservative candidate when they chose to contribute to MN Forward,” which portrays Target as an unwitting victim in the matter of the ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS THEY WILLINGLY GAVE TO A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE OF THEIR CHOICE, KNOWING FULL WELL WHICH GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE THAT PAC SUPPORTED, or the implication that we’re misguided in our actions as a community to boycott those who would legally remove our rights as human beings. Either way, we’re not buying it.
Let’s not let Avi’s ridiculous statements divide us. You never know who joins on to a forum like this with that precise intention.
What the heck is LGBTQA anyway?
Yeah, Fletch. Whatever happened to just plain gay?
I’m just plain gay. But nothing’s plain about me
The government is wrong about this new law. You can’t allow coporations to donate the same as people. Wrong, wrong, wrong!
LGBTQA means:
Lesbian
Gay
Bisexual
Transgendered
Questioning
Allies
Thanks, Dave. Always wondered what the “A” was for.
I’m one of the “Allies!”
I still can’t get over Avi’s comment about Target unintentionally having their money funneled to a conservative candidate. Poor old Target!