Grassley kicking some Red Cross ASS!

I've been telling people to avoid donating to the Red Cross  since 9-11.  Examples like this are why. They may do good but they can be bad. Here is how much money organizations like the Red Cross can raise in a short period of time.

Investigations into the Red Cross' donation vs. payout are nothing new.  After 9-11 the Red Cross faced inquires as to their fundraising and accounting practices.  The Bay area quake in 1989 sparked this story.  While it cannot be stressed enough how much good work the Red Cross does be very careful when donating to them as your money may go to buying a Red Cross lt. a new laptop and not to the people you think you are aiding.  If you must donate make sure you designate whether your donation is to go to a specific fund or into the general relief fund.  In cases like Katrina I would suggest bypassing the Red Cross in favor of a local charity who has less bureaucracy and money funneling going on within its organization.

Now onto the Doctor owned and mother approved Chuck Grassley.

The NY Times, in a piece written by Stephanie Strom, has this to say:  

The American Red Cross, the largest recipient of donations after Hurricane Katrina, is investigating wide ranging accusations of impropriety among volunteers after the disaster.

John F. McGuire, the interim president and chief executive of the Red Cross, and Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who is chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said some of the actions might have been criminal.

How bad is it?  No one seems to be sure.

There are no known official estimates of the cash or the value of supplies that might have been misappropriated, but volunteers who have come forward with accusations said the amount was in the millions of dollars. The Red Cross received roughly 60 percent of the $3.6 billion that Americans donated for hurricane relief. Mr. McGuire said the investigation started "a number of weeks ago" and was continuing.

Grassley:  

Senator Grassley has threatened to rewrite or revoke the organization's charter if it does not thoroughly overhaul its operations. This is the second time Mr. Grassley has prodded the Red Cross to get its house in order. He first made demands after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, but his effort sputtered as a result of other pressing matters, like the war in Iraq.

"The allegations from Red Cross volunteers are wide-ranging and include possible criminal misconduct," said Mr. Grassley, who in February demanded to know what the Red Cross was doing to address complaints from volunteers. "The Red Cross needs to change its mind-set so it addresses volunteers' concerns swiftly and appropriately, regardless of whether a Senate committee chairman is asking questions."

Red Cross spinning the whistlebloweres:  

"The vast majority are misconceptions or cases of 'I don't like somebody, so I'm going to say something,' " he said. "The key for us is to know whether we've got a problem in the Red Cross system and procedures, whether we've got well-intentioned people who just wasted stuff or whether we have a criminal problem."

I would suggest following the links and coming to your own conclusions.  

As far as Grassley is concerned?  He has his faults and is a conservative but he does seem to work for the common man more often than the far right idealogues.  Honestly, at this point, like any Republican I have a modicum of respect for he is still just one bad soundbite or one bad vote from being added to my shitlist.  But compared Allen or Frist or Roberts or (insert name) Grassley, like Hagel and that other guy whose name escapes me, are downright bearable. (felt guilty so I looked up Lugar)

Full NY Times story here.

Grassley's voting record for those who care.