 |
A congressional investigation has uncovered new allegations of questionable spending practices at two veterans charities, including one that paid retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks $100,000 to appear in its solicitation letters using money the nonprofit raised to help soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
At a raucous, three-hour hearing, House members questioned California entrepreneur Roger Chapin about his management of two charities. One charity, Help Hospitalized Veterans, spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations that were to help wounded soldiers on personal expenses for Chapin, executive director Mike Lynch and Richard A. Viguerie, to whom the charity has awarded millions of dollars in fundraising-consulting contracts, the hearing found.
The expenses included at least $340,000 in meals, hotels and entertainment; a $135,000 loan to Lynch for a divorce settlement with his former wife; a $17,000 country club membership; three airplane tickets to Hawaii; and a $1 million loan to Viguerie for a start-up initiative at his firm, several members of the committee said.
The second charity, the Coalition to Support America’s Heroes, used Franks in its solicitation letters, the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform found…
“Most of the millions they receive never reach veterans or their families,” representative Henry Waxman said. “Instead, the groups waste those contributions on bloated overhead costs and self-enrichment.”
You have to love Chapin’s response to questions about the salaries for himself and his wife: “Throughout my life I have endeavored to do well for my family while I try to do good for the world,” said Chapin.
I think you will find this true with a majority of charities.
Doesn’t it always sound like there is major entitlement going on with these people that are managing monies (heads of charities, heads of the mega-churches, etc.)?
Do you think that Gen Franks took the $100,000 because he “needed the money” or he just wanted to “do his part” for veterans?
Makes you proud of the man, doesn’t it?
Isn’t everyone out to get what they can before it’s too late?
[edited – entirely off topic]
Well–pick a number==any number. When money donated to the charity’s purpose falls below that number suspect fraud or incompetence. If further analysis shows money spent goes to the pocket of the organizers, prosecute for fraud. If just bad management shut them down.
Salvation Army is largest well run charity I know==beats the Red Cross which is often outrageous as are most of the majors.
#1, gq,
Actually, many charities do have a very low overhead and are quite efficient. Unfortunately, there are many that fall into your general assessment.
I highly recommend you check out Charity Navigator and maybe bookmark them. They give the lowdown on virtually every charity including total receipts, administration costs, money used for charity work, executive salaries, and mission statements. They also tell you what they do with your name and if they have any privacy policies.
I would not feel much if he was hanged. Slowly.
Yeah and take a look at money for Katrina in the following article. They say it will take until 2030 TO TOTALLY REBUILD? And this is America????
http://www.thereporter.com/letters/ci_8027473
“Roger Chapin” in charge of some charity? He makes Scrooge, Soros, and the Grinch look like Santa Claus!
Oh, well.
Charity fraud is easy and profitable. Good advertising, get a bunch of gullible college students to work for less than minimum wage (NFPs are exempt from minimum wage laws because they are the same sort of organization as churches), get some Jimmy Baker type for a front man and a bunch of lack witted blonds with big boobs for eye candy, and let the money roll in.
That’s why you should only donate money to religious organizations. Since they are doing the work in the name of god, they would not dare to use the money improperly (under fear of eternal damnation). Religious leaders and those around them are well known to live at the most frugal level possible, and reassure us regularly that the money is being well spent helping those in need and under the WWJD example.
In the only senile old men the Republicans want to spend money is on themselves.
#5 – Mr. Catshit
Interesting info! Compensation to the leaders:
Charities… Larry needs a new car… 😀
This is why I ONLY donate to non profit organizations
#12 – The Answer
I hope that you are being ironic. Non-Profits are some of the biggest scams out there.
Non-profit does not mean that the people that work in them can’t make a handsome sum of money, it just means that they don’t have to pay taxes since they are setup as non-profit organizations.
Salaries for the leadership of non-profits is in the $275,000 range, many of them higher than that.
I hope this scum sucker dies a slow painful death.
You’d think that Gen. Franks could just donate his name for the cause. Certainly he could right it off on his taxes, if he pays any. But no, he has to be paid to endorse a charity to army veterns. What a champ! “Screw them wounded boys, I’m gettin some dough out of this.” Congress ought to nail his hide for selling his official name and rank. But you know they’ll never touch that one. It’a all part of that “revolving door” career plan for generals, that’s protected from any inquiries. Just to protect those golden parachutes for the big boys.
Looking at Roger Chapin’s picture:
C. Montgomery Burns is alive and well (and real!).
I’d love to see next season’s Simpsons (if the writers quit striking) embroil Burns in a charity scandal.
Why should Vets get money from charities? Don’t they make enough from neutering dogs and cats? 😉
Cheers