Thoughts and Concerns on Katrina Charity

I just heard from Sean Hannity during a brief errand that organized charitable donations to Katrina relief since the storm hit are exponentially higher than the donations during a similar time period after the September 11 terrorist attacks and the tsunami that struck Indonesia and elsewhere in late December. I’ll go looking for numbers shortly, but want to get my points out while they are fresh on my mind.

UPDATE: “$500 million and rising,” per this link–”more than twice the $239 million donated in the 10 days after Sept. 11, and more than three times the $163 million raised in the nine days after the tsunami that hit countries along the Indian Ocean last Dec. 26″

The swell of donations is outstanding news, of course, and proves once again, as if we needed further proof, that the people of this country are the most generous on earth.

Given the level of generosity, though, I think it’s important to remind people of the some of the controversies surrounding donations in the two major relief efforts that preceded Katrina, especially if donations exceed what is needed (which is not at all clear at this moment).

Here are descriptions of the past problems:

1. The Red Cross most notably was heavily and justifiably criticized for attempting to divert funds intended for September 11 victims to general charity uses (the linked article points out that the organizations backtracked on that idea). Among other things, funds were used to buy computers for its headquarters. The US Director of the Red Cross stepped down in the wake of the controversy, and the organization’s reputation suffered. The Red Cross claims to have modified procedures and established controls to prevent recurrences. The Salvation Army, by contrast, engaged in no similar fund diversion and apparenlty never has. Perhaps more charities acted like the Red Cross initially did than we would care to admit.
2. Many recipients of post-September 11 relief funds from private charities and the government were less than deserving of victim status and related funds, or at a minimum stretched the definition of deserving recipient to nearly the breaking point.
3. Tsunami relief efforts have been and continue to be significantly hampered by corruption and incompetence in the affected countries that have gone relatively underreported and unreported in the Mainstream Media (exception here). Various officials required “payments” (read: “bribes,” or in this creative case, “new taxes”) for the necessary transportation equipment, supplies, and aid to get through. Charities appeared reluctant to complain too much for reasons I can only speculate about. Perhaps they felt that complaining would make it less likely that needed aid would go through, or they may have believed that if donors knew funds were going for payoffs they would be less likely to give in the future.

How does that relate to current Katrina recovery efforts? I donated, as probably most of the people reading this post have, but not without a little uneasiness. Here are some things I would liked to have seen in place as a result of lessons learned in the previous two major disasters (maybe some of these items are in place at some charitable organizations–if so, I’d like to hear about it):

• A visible pledge by the charities to devote all donated funds, or a very high percentage of donated funds (95% or more) to the relief effort. Any funds diverted to administration would have to be justified by the extra costs involved in administering Katrina-specific relief efforts.
• A visible pledge by the charities AND the government to limit the provision of relief only to those affected by the storm. For example, what do you do for an employed person who has been living high and dry in the French Quarter, doesn’t own a car, and as of today has to be evacuated? I believe existing unemployment compensation (perhaps tax-free, but definitely without a waiting period), food stamps if there are dependents (again without a waiting period), and a small supplemental allowance should suffice. Such a person certainly should not be a recipient of the $2,000 debit cards that are being distributed. I fail to see how limiting debit-card availability to those who really need it can be seen as lacking compassion.
• Although I expect less of the third problem with Katrina, I would not rule it out. The charities should visibly pledge to make every effort to avoid making illegal, unethical, or exorbitant payments. Recognizing that sometimes these payments have to be made (or, for example, food may spoil, or the recipients might die waiting for it), the charities should nevertheless pledge to work with law enforcement high enough in the food chain to prosecute those who opportunistically took the payments and recover the money.
• Finally, I expect the charities to pledge that any leftover funds will be placed into escrow accounts for future relief efforts and that they will be otherwise untouchable. If another disaster hits and the escrowed amounts are enough to cover the costs of that disaster’s relief efforts, I expect the charities to have the integrity to tell us they’re covered, and that we need not donate specifically for that effort.

In a future time that I hope is not that far off, I expect the charities to be able to estimate the costs of their relief efforts and to turn off the donation spigot when those funds have been received. Therefore, the need for a “rainy day fund” would not exist. The goodwill organizations following these procedures would earn would ensure that future donations would be readily forthcoming, and would far outweigh the “inconvenience” of not having a “rainy day” fund.

Marvin Olasky has pointed out that Americans have always expected charities to live frugally and hand to mouth, and that there is nothing uncompassionate, especially given the level of charity provided when it’s needed, about taking that stand. The outrage at the Red Cross’s attempt to get around that tradition proves that the expectation that Olasky commented on still holds.
________________

NOTE: Outside the Beltway Jammer.