From The LA Times:
WITH HURRICANE RITA now making news, it’s time for Americans to take a more disciplined look at their tremendous generosity. As of last week, the American Red Cross reported that it had raised $826 million in private funds for Hurricane Katrina victims. The Chronicle of Philanthropy has the total figure at more than $1.2 billion for all relief groups reporting. So the Red Cross received about 70% of all giving.
This percentage was no doubt bloated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s mystifying release to the media of the names of 19 faith-based charities (plus the Red Cross, Humane Society and three lesser-known groups) to which the public should donate ” rather than the much wider group of established relief agencies.
This skewed giving to Red Cross would be justified if the organization had to pay the cost of the 300,000 people it has sheltered. But FEMA and the affected states are reimbursing the Red Cross under preexisting contracts for emergency shelter and other disaster services. The existence of these contracts is no secret to anyone but the American public. The Red Cross carefully says it functions only by the grace of the American people ” but “people” includes government, national and local. What we’ve now come to expect from a major disaster is a Red Cross media blitz.
The national Red Cross reports it spent $111 million last year on fundraising alone. And it’s hard to escape the organization’s warning of Armageddon if you don’t call in a credit card number or send a check or donate blood (which it resells to the tune of more than $1.5 billion annually, part of its $3 billion in income).
In Southern California, we have had the spectacle of “drive-by” drop-offs of bags of money at public places such as the Rose Bowl, massively promoted by local media. Hollywood studios and stars and corporate America compete to make huge donations.
The Red Cross brand is platinum. Its fundraising vastly outruns its programs because it does very little or nothing to rescue survivors, provide direct medical care or rebuild houses…
The article goes on a bit, and is very nicely done. It asks a lot of questions that really deserve to be asked, and not just of The Red Cross, but of many other charities and relief organizations. How The Red Cross remains the golden child of charities, I really don’t know. I’m not sure I’ll ever forget about one Vietnam veteran all but spitting whenever the Red Cross is mentioned so reverently after his experience of seeing the Red Cross coming into the field with news from home only to charge the soldiers for the message. Regardless of those feelings, I think Mr. Walden really hit the nail on the head when he wrapped up the article with
As Hurricane Rita dissipates, let me answer my unpopular question like this: Giving so high a percentage of all donations to one agency that defines itself only as a first-responder and not a rebuilder is not the wisest choice. Americans ought to give a much larger share of their generous charity to community foundations, grass-roots nonprofit groups based in the affected communities and a large number of international “brand name” relief agencies with decades of expertise in rebuilding communities after disasters.
I am not a fan of the Red Cross, but it is my understanding that they earn that blood money. They are responsible for all testing, storage, shipping and records. In addition to that, they are held accountable should bad blood be released to the public.
This is why my donations go to the Salvation Army.
Finally…someone is exposing these crooks.
What they did following 9-11 was DESPICABLE….buying laptops, cell phones, blackberrys, office furniture, etc.
what a joke.
Find a faith based charity and give to people who will actually help people, not themselves.
1. That’s why I only give them my blood, peejz. The whole clusterboink with them and the United Way left me a little sour on the idea of ever giving them money.
They deserve to recoup the money spent on blood drives and maintaining a safe supply.
I give to the Salvation Army. I know they help people when they need it. My dad had similar tales of the Red Cross charging soldiers for donuts and coffee during WWII. He would have nothing to do with the Red Cross.
My father was in the service, in Germany, in the 50′s. He spoke very harshly of the Red Cross. They were well known for being a bunch of phonies who spent lavishly on themselves. I heard recently that they have been shushing away private/church charity help in Louisiana so they can get their re-imbursement checks from the government. Actually bein detrimental to the cause because they are more worried about filling their pockets.
I have similiar stories about the United Way. Yet, they thrive because people are so naive.