Charities should make help the only aim

Every year at this time it’s the same thing. The street corners and airwaves are deluged with pleas for donations for their worthy cause. A photo of an injured or starving child is alwas a grabber, as is a wide-eyed kitten. These photos sell. So does the sign held by a corner “indigent” who is a God-fearing veteran. A couple of times each week we have been reading about a scam involving some chairty and we find that only a very small percentage of what we give actually makes it to the group that actually needs the money. With public disclosure and all the watchdogs looking to get something on anybody, I am amazed that the Red Cross would even think about holding back “in reserve” a large sum of the money donated after Sept. 11.

I am reminded each Christmas of a time when I was working on flood duty on the Mississippi many years ago. The crews working through the night would return from the dikes to gather more materials to carry back out. Back on land, there were two relief shelters set up. The first, run by the Red Cross, had coffee and donuts which they would sell for store-bought prices. The second, run by the Salvation Army, had the same items but they were giving theirs away and they made sure you had more for your pockets when you went back down the dike. I feel that more charities would receive more if they simply gave more away, no questions asked, no paperwork to fill out. They should reduce or eliminate the exorbitant salaries of the executives and just say, “Here! This was donated by a well-meaning soul and was meant for you because you need it!”

That’s what I am reminded of each time I pass the bell-ringer and the red Salvation Army kettle outside some store and I seldom fail to put some paper money in it.

Personally, I would like to see some legislation which made it a criminal act to solicit anything for any specific cause when less than 60 percent of the proceeds actually go to the intended party.

Machias