Queen-486x60



Red Cross relief donations only relieve Red Cross

Author:   the lambchop herself  
Posted: 8/17/04; 2:33:52 AM
Topic: Red Cross relief donations only relieve Red Cross
Msg #: 105 (top msg in thread)
Prev/Next: 104/106
Reads: 4755

Each time a natural disaster strikes, I feel terrible for the people whose lives are disrupted or ended, and I feel the urge to help, as I'm sure many of you do.

I never feel the urge to help by donating to the American Red Cross.

My disgust with the Red Cross comes from several encounters, personal and anecdotal, over a period of thirty years. As a child, a dear friend of my family told us of the American charities overseas in World War II. I've always remembered what he told me about coffee in Belgium, as he was one of the infantry soldiers who fought in the Battle of the Bulge. Virdin said that the Salvation Army gave away coffee and cigarettes to any soldier. The Red Cross sold coffee for a nickel a cup.

Second, when I was growing up my father was the chairman of the Board of Trustees for our local hospital, and was involved with negotiating contracts between the hospital and the blood banks. We're fortunate in Oklahoma to have two choices, the Red Cross or the most excellent Oklahoma Blood Institute. Any hospital that has a choice will go with OBI, because the ARC blood bank forces hospitals to purchase a minimum, holds them to that minimum, and penalizes them severely if they exceed their contract. Think of them as a cell phone company for hospitals, only they're ruder and they cost more.

On top of that, ARC holds blood drives in communities under the guise of 'helping your neighbor in need,' when the blood they collect isn't going anywhere near your neighbor - unless the neighbor is in New York, or possibly in Europe. In effect, they're swiping the blood from my community, while leading people to believe the blood will stay to work for their town, and selling it to other hospitals thousands of miles away. It's no less than sanctioned theft. But you're thinking to yourself, "They'll give it to us in an emergency - right?" Wrong. They only care about making money. Witness September 11.

ARC Blood Services wasted thousands of units of blood after September 11, because they encouraged people to keep donating even when it was clear massive blood supplies weren't needed. They further erred by not giving or offering to sell that blood to competing blood banks, and they refused to tell people to come back in eight weeks, when all that blood expired. The result was that exactly 57 days after September 11, the blood banks were in just as bad a condition as they were on September 10, because the stuff doesn't keep forever. The Red Cross managed to use up all the blood nationwide, but the worst part was that they didn't convert those one-time donors into regular donors, either. It's all about the Benjamins for the Red Cross, people. If they can make $1000 today, they don't give a rat's ass about the $10,000 they'll lose in six months, or that it could cost some ER patient at a hospital that doesn't use ARC blood. That's not their problem - it's yours.

Third, and most importantly for this particular issue, you may recall that ARC faced a scandal in the months after September 11, accused of using monies donated for New York and Washington relief for other purposes, including a new multimillion dollar telephone system. These revelations surprised me not one bit; they've done that for decades, and I even warned some folks at the time that it was happening under their noses.

You'll note that even today, ARC calls only for donations to its 'Disaster Relief Fund.' But all they say about that fund is (as of today, at least) is that Florida is the scene now. ARC uses donations to that fund in whatever manner they see fit unless you specifically state you want your money to be spent in Florida, or for the benefit of a specific group of people. On their online donation site, you'll see that you can't designate your money for a specific site - just to the fund. Your dollars could very well be paying for an executive retreat instead of shelter for a homeless family, and the Red Cross will sleep just fine while they take it.

The September 11 scandal was not unique. Earlier that same year in San Diego, ARC spent only $7000 of over $400,000 donated for relief in the Alpine wildfires. Then in October, 2001, while collecting millions across the country for WTC relief, ARC spent less than 10 percent of earmarked money for wildfire relief as it should have been spent (and that may be generous, because there was almost no accounting done). ARC spent $3.9 million for wildfire relief efforts in 2003, and their accounting was better. But as late as October of last year, ARC refused to designate monies donated for wildfire relief to help the very people the money was supposed to help. It begs the question: How much money was actually donated for this relief in 2001, if so much more was accounted for in 2003? What kind of charity has administrative expenses of 33 percent?

Am I a cruel, heartless woman because I say these things about a cultural icon as beloved as the Red Cross. No. I think I've established my humanity in these virtual pages. I am, however, a girl on a budget, even if they (and the President of the United States) are not. I have to decide where to spend my charitable dollars, and I have to be an informed consumer. In this regard, in matters to do with this 'charity,' I am extremely well informed. I have not exaggerated or lied here. I offer the facts to you, so you can read for yourself. I do this so you can be an informed consumer also.

There are dozens of charities that have open accounting practices, that have lower administrative expenses, and that use donated funds more prudently. Unfortunately, the Red Cross is not one of those charities. I am convinced that the American Red Cross is a bloated bureaucratic monster, subsisting on the generosity of the American people, to which they return little while crying for more.

Please don't feed the monster.

[ Print This Page ]   [ Email This Page ]