When You Give To A Charity, Know Where Your Money Is Going

Yesterday BizPac Review posted an article about the Association of Black and Puerto Rican Legislators, Inc., a group of black New York State legislators who run a charity to provide scholarships for black and Latino youth.

The article reports:

The caucus of black New York state lawmakers run a charity whose stated mission is to empower “African American and Latino youth through education and leadership initiatives” by “providing opportunity to higher education” — but it hasn’t given a single scholarship to needy youth in years, according to a New York Post investigation.

The group collects money from companies like AT&T, the Real Estate Board of New York, Time Warner Cable, and CableVision, telling them in promotional materials that they are “changing lives, one scholarship at a time.”

The group — called the Association of Black and Puerto Rican Legislators, Inc.  — instead spent $500,000 on items like food, limousines, and rap music, the Post found.

The politicians refused to divulge the charity’s 2017 tax filing to the Post despite federal requirements that charities do so upon request.

The article provides some insight as to where the money collected goes:

State. Sen. Leroy Comrie of Queens, the group’s number two, refused to come out when Post reporter Isabel Vincent stopped by his office. All of the politicians mentioned are Democrats.

“The real purpose (of the charity) is to bring people to get over their apathy and out to Albany and get motivated,” the charity’s former chairman, Assemblyman Nick Perry of Brooklyn, previously said.

There has been no money used for scholarships in that past two years, the Post reported, citing sources. That’s even after the Albany Times-Union called outthe charity in January 2017 for meager spending in prior years.

The charity gave $36,000 of its $565,000 in revenue to scholarships in 2015. That year, it spent $85,000 on a concert with Eric Benet and Regina Belle, and $157,000 on food, according to the Times-Union’s analysis of its tax filings.

The group said that year it planned to double the amount of scholarships it gave, but it didn’t happen.

In 2017, its annual event featured the rap artist Big Daddy Kane.

Hopefully the Attorney General of the State of New York will decide that the spending habits of this charity are inappropriate and require this group to actually fund some scholarships. However, it’s New York, so I am not optimistic.

In What Universe Does This Make Sense?

I will admit that I think beauty contests are dumb. I will also admit that one of my daughters participated in one as a teenager. One was enough. However, I don’t think ill of anyone who does participate in them. Beauty contests have provided a way for many young ladies to get scholarships to get an education they could not otherwise afford. Great. However, the politically correct people who want everyone to be the same and everyone to have a trophy have now ventured into the realm of beauty pageants (and ruined an American tradition in the process).

The Chicago Sun Times posted an article today stating:

The Miss America Organization is dropping the swimsuit competition, saying it will no longer judge contestants on their appearance.

…“We’re not going to judge you on your appearance because we are interested in what makes you you,” Gretchen Carlson, a former Miss America who is head of the organization’s board of trustees, said while making the announcement Tuesday on “Good Morning America.”

I guess I don’t understand how a beauty contest can be judged on anything other than beauty. How do you judge someone on “what makes you you?” Are some “what makes you you’s” better than others?

This is the dumbest idea I have heard in a long time.

The Consequences Of Stacking The National Labor Relations Board

Yesterday Hot Air posted an article about the National Labor Relations Board‘s (NLRB) decision to allow Northwestern University football players to unionize.

The article reports:

NLRB regional director Peter Sung Ohr cited the players’ time commitment to their sport and the fact their scholarships were tied directly to their performance as reasons for granting them union rights…

CAPA attorneys argued that college football is, for all practical purposes, a commercial enterprise that relies on players’ labor to generate billions of dollars in profits. That, they contend, makes the relationship of schools to players one of employers to employees.

In its endeavor to have college football players be recognized as essential workers, CAPA likened scholarships to employment pay — too little pay from its point of view. Northwestern balked at that claim, describing scholarship as grants.

    Giving college athletes employee status and allowing them to unionize, critics have argued, could hurt college sports in numerous ways — including by raising the prospects of strikes by disgruntled players or lockouts by athletic departments.

This raises some interesting questions. Are their scholarships income? Does that mean that all scholarships are income? Does everyone who has a scholarship of any kind get a 1099 at the end of the year? If they form a union, can they go on strike? Can they demand lower academic standards or less practice time?

This is one of the dumbest decisions the NLRB has made. It will add confusion to college sports rather than solve any current problems. The only thing it will actually accomplish will to collect unions dues from the players. This is turn would help the unions shore up their underfunded pension programs. This is a really bad idea.

Enhanced by Zemanta