Since the last election, we’ve all become familiar with the concept of red states and blue states. Those who sent their archaic electoral votes to Republicans George Bush and Dick Cheney, particularly states in the South and Midwest, were filled in red by the networks, whereas those siding with Democrats John Kerry and John Edwards, generally states along the West Coast, in the Rust Belt and the Northeast, were tinted blue to indicate their allegiance.

Yet the concept of red versus blue goes far deeper than the paint-by-region maps on CNN or Fox News. One of the biggest factors in turning crucial states a particular color was the money spent there by each campaign. That money came — in one form or another — from the pockets of everyday citizens, including every single student at Sacramento State. When a student makes a decision to buy books from Amazon.com or a comparable Web site, rather than at the bookstore on campus, some fraction of that purchase gets spent on a candidate’s campaign for public office. The political leanings of the party or candidates to whom that money is donated can be unsettling if the buyer is not aware.

With regard to textbooks, for example, money spent at Amazon.com likely ends up supporting a Republican, as 59 percent of the company’s political contributions were to the GOP, according to BuyBlue.com, a Web site devoted to encouraging consumers to shop at progressive-minded companies.

Conversely, if students wanted to spend their money at businesses supporting only Democrats with their political donations, BuyBlue would recommend Barnes & Noble or Powell’s.

These distinctions are not trivial ones. Every day — even outside the traditional campaign season — Americans vote with their shopping dollars by supporting companies that will eventually spend huge sums supporting and sponsoring political parties and candidates. Granted, the actual percentage of each sale being placed in the coffers of political causes is usually quite small, but the accumulation of sales does indeed make an impact. Thus, an organized group with an informed agenda can boycott a merchant known for extremely conservative political spending and shift the balance of its members’ spending toward blue companies.

Firmly blue and going out for dinner? Skip the fast food. Almost all of the major outlets are red. But if you can’t shake the hankering for a burger, then at least go with Burger King’s (65 percent red) over McDonald’s (94 percent red). Buying a new computer? Try a Gateway (84 percent blue) over a Dell (88 percent red), or better yet, a Mac (99 percent blue).

Using these examples, it’s easy to see that resources like BuyBlue can just as easily be used to fulfill conservative ends. A politically motivated red shopper can go online and find that while Target and Wal-Mart are both red, Target is redder and perhaps more deserving of a conservative shopper’s dollar-votes. Yet perhaps the most intriguing option with this database of political donations at-hand is not that of red versus blue; it’s to spend money at businesses that concern themselves with business rather than politics. Companies that steer clear of partisan politics earn a 50 percent white-dot rating at BuyBlue.

The influence that business contributors can wield in partisan politics with their dollars obscures so much of what’s really at stake, that “We the People” become pawns tossed back-and-forth between the competing wills of elites and the ultra-rich. Though I will buy from a blue company before I vote my dollars at a red one, a better route may be found by buying from those white-dotted companies first, as a way of thanking them for leaving politics to the people.

—————————————————-

Sean Catanese can be reached at [email protected]