PDA

View Full Version : Hurricane Donation Benefited Bush Son




IJ Reilly
Mar 25, 2006, 11:33 AM
More of those Bush family values...

Barbara Bush required that some of her gift be spent on software from Neil Bush's Texas firm.

HOUSTON — In a city housing thousands of Katrina evacuees, Barbara Bush's donation to a local hurricane relief fund normally would not seem controversial.

But more than a few eyebrows were raised when the former first lady stipulated that part of her contribution was to be spent on educational software purchased from her son Neil's company, Ignite Learning of Austin, Texas.

"I would think if she wants to do something beneficial for Katrina victims, she shouldn't be making the decision that the vendor is her son," said Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a charity watchdog group. "Other education experts need to be making that decision, not somebody who has a family interest in the success of her son's business."

Barbara Bush's donation to the Bush-Clinton Houston Hurricane Relief Fund was made a few weeks ago, said Steve Maislin, president of the Greater Houston Community Foundation, which administers the fund. That fund, which supports Houston-area relief efforts, is not connected to the national Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund, he said.

The Houston fund forwarded Bush's donation to another nonprofit organization, which bought the software.

"There are a lot of students who went through Katrina and Rita in the Houston area, and she wanted to do something very specific to help them," Jean Becker, chief of staff for former President George H.W. Bush, said of Barbara Bush.

"She is a huge fan of her son's software program — it has gotten great reviews from teachers and students — and she wanted to make sure it was available to the students."

Maislin would not disclose the amount of the donation, but he said it was not unusual for a contributor to specify how his or her money should be spent.

"It's common for someone to say: 'I want to give money, but I want it to go to a certain organization,' " he said.

But Borochoff said donors who direct that their money be used to buy products from a family business set a bad precedent.

"If everybody started doing that, it would ruin our whole system for tax-exempt organizations, because people would be using them to benefit their business rather than for the public benefit. That's not why our government gives tax deductions for donations," he said. "I hope other donors across the country don't start dictating that their contributions go to their family business. That would be a rip-off of our tax system."

Bush contributed to the relief fund instead of directly to her son's company to help publicize the nonprofit, Maislin said. "It helps us when someone with her visibility contributes. We could advertise the fact … and help build momentum" for donations.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-donation25mar25,1,5007518.story



Desertrat
Mar 25, 2006, 02:50 PM
This is one of those good-and-bad deals. Yeah, no doubt about the precedent issue being bad. The good part is the publicity for the charity, and that good software is available.

'Rat

zimv20
Mar 25, 2006, 02:56 PM
and that good software is available.
how do we know it's good?

IJ Reilly
Mar 25, 2006, 03:14 PM
I've served on the board of several non-profit charitable organizations. No way do any of them accept a restricted donation that amounts to a pass-through to anyone, let alone, a family member of the donor. The IRS should look into this, as it appears to be an effort to disguise a gift to a family member as a charitable donation. Were I a member of an organization that did agree to such an arrangement, I'd certainly be tempted to ask the board of directors how they justified it within their fiduciary responsibilities.

zimv20
Mar 25, 2006, 03:24 PM
mrs bush has succeeded in getting some press for neil's software company. until this story broke, i wasn't aware of what he was doing these days.

i suspect part of the plan was also to, after getting the computers in the schools, use that as a basis for further sales.

this stinks all over the place.

mactastic
Mar 26, 2006, 11:55 AM
I'm also hearing that Mrs. Bush will not only get a tax donation for that donation to a family member's pet charity, she will also reap rewards as a shareholder in the company.

But hey, Greenpeace was just audited, as were some left-leaning religious groups, basically on heresay evidence, so with standards like that you'd think an investigation into this charity would be no problem. :rolleyes:

IJ Reilly
Mar 26, 2006, 12:08 PM
In another article on this story, I read that Neil Bush has previously made a "charitable" donation that ended up coming full circle back to his company. I'll try to find a link.

pseudobrit
Mar 26, 2006, 12:20 PM
But hey, Greenpeace was just audited, as were some left-leaning religious groups, basically on heresay evidence, so with standards like that you'd think an investigation into this charity would be no problem. :rolleyes:

With damning evidence in plain sight, is much of an investigation necessary?

At this point, all an official would need to do issue a few subpoenas so as to dot his Ts and cross his Is.

IJ Reilly
Mar 26, 2006, 12:27 PM
Here it is:

In February 2004, the Houston school board unanimously agreed to accept $115,000 in charitable donations from businesses and individuals who insisted the money be spent on Ignite. The money covered half the bill for the software, which cost $10,000 per school.

The deal raised conflict of interest concerns because Neil Bush and company officials helped solicit the donations for the HISD Foundation, a philanthropic group that raises money for the district.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/3742329.html

mactastic
Mar 26, 2006, 12:37 PM
With damning evidence in plain sight, is much of an investigation necessary?

At this point, all an official would need to do issue a few subpoenas so as to dot his Ts and cross his Is.
Ah but first they would have to get permission from Dear Leader or one of his appointed lackeys (and by lackey I mean not only a lickspittle, but someone who is 'lackey' in independence from the administration of Dear Leader.) Preferable one who does 'a heck of a job'.

XNine
Mar 26, 2006, 02:42 PM
I wonder what kind of subliminal messages this guy puts in his software?

"ALL YOUR BASE BELONGS TO BUSH!"

tristan
Mar 26, 2006, 03:08 PM
This sounds like tax evasion and earnings manipulation, actually. Why didn't the software vendor just donate the software? Because this way:

1. Barbara Bush gets to take a deduction
2. The software company gets to book the revenue (from the "sale")
3. The software company pays taxes on the profit (but I bet they don't have any profits)
4. The software company looks like its more valuable (higher earnings + higher profits = valuation and IPO/stock price)

I don't know if this is legal or not - it probably is, but it shouldn't be. At they very least, the software company should disclose to investors that some of their revenues and profits actually come from a donation from somebody's freakin' mom.

Actually, i'm starting to think it's definitely not legal. This is a loophole that any wealthy person who owns a connected business could drive a truck through.

skunk
Mar 26, 2006, 04:47 PM
This is a loophole that any wealthy person who owns a connected business could drive a truck through.How d'you think they could afford the truck in the first place?

bousozoku
Mar 26, 2006, 05:27 PM
how do we know it's good?

It could be software that only a mother could love.

Isn't this the same Bush brother that was part of the savings & loan scandal?