• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Red Cross urged to share money (1 Viewer)


DP Veteran
Jul 31, 2005
Reaction score
Political Leaning
NEW YORK - As its hurricane relief donations near the $1 billion mark, more than double all other charities combined, the
American Red Cross is encountering sharp criticism of its efforts and mounting pressure to share funds with smaller groups.

The complaints — that Red Cross operations were chaotic in some places, inequitable in others — have stung deeply within an organization that is proud of its overall response to Hurricane Katrina, by far the most devastating natural disaster it has confronted on U.S. soil.

The frustration stems partly from the fact that the Red Cross has worked to avoid a recurrence of the humbling fundraising controversy that flared after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Back then, the Red Cross raised about $1.1 billion — its record so far for a single disaster — but the organization was assailed when donors belatedly learned that $200 million of their gifts were being earmarked to prepare for future crises rather than to help victims. Red Cross president Bernadine Healy resigned, the money was shifted back to the Sept. 11 Liberty Fund, and the organization promised greater accountability in future fundraising campaigns.

The Red Cross estimates it will need $2 billion to finance Katrina-related emergency services. Even if the goal is reached, Goldburg said, any policy change that would allow support of recovery programs would have to be authorized by the Red Cross board of governors.

Paul Light, a professor of public service at New York University, said he has been impressed with the Red Cross' adjustments after Sept. 11 and its emergency response to Katrina.

But he is among numerous experts and activists who believe Katrina's impact is so severe that the Red Cross should depart from tradition and help finance the long-term recovery. "A lot of small non-profits in the Gulf Coast are staring at deficits and will be hoping for partnerships," he said. "The Red Cross would be wise to invest in them."

"This work is so immense — it's dangerous any time you have a single organization monopolizing relief services," said coalition leader LaTosha Brown. "The Red Cross needs to recognize its limitations and reach out by partnering with local agencies who have people on the ground."

Yet the executive director of the watchdog group Charity Navigator said such pleas to the Red Cross are unrealistic, and many reflect envy of its fund-raising prowess.

Some black activists have contended that the Red Cross response, notably in the first few days after Katrina, provided better services in mostly white areas than mostly black areas. "For the first 72 hours, they did not do an equitable job of responding to all communities," said Joe Leonard of the Washington-based Black Leadership Forum.

Red Cross chief diversity officer Rick Pogue said this perception arose because the organization, though committed to serving all in need, had more trouble getting teams into some impoverished black areas early in the crisis than into more affluent areas. "The need was so great, we'd go first to the areas we could get to the easiest," Pogue said

I would have to look it up again but I believe red cross gave only 20% money
collected to 9/11 victims

When asked about the rest they said it was going against the war on terror
The Red Cross, under the Liberty Fund, collected $564 million in donations after 9/11. Months after the event, the Red Cross had distributed only $154 million. The Red Cross' explanation for keeping the majority of the money was that it would be used to help 'fight the war on terror'. To the victims, this meant that the money was going towards bombing broken backed third world countries like Afghanistan and setting up surveillance cameras and expanding the police state in US cities, and not towards helping them rebuild their lives.

here it is

I went and checked the numbers and indeed they are the same

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom