OpEdNews Op Eds 5/1/2015 at 10:42:45 Are the Clintons More Transparent Than the Bushes? By David Corn (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages) Related Topic(s): Clinton Foundation; Donors; Sources, View Ratings | Rate It opednews.com Headlined to H3 5/1/15

Become a Fan   (3 fans)

When it comes to their foundations' donors, Bill and Hillary are more open than George W. Bush or his father.

Election 2016: former Florida Governor Jeb Bush tries to distance himself from the legacies of his father George H.W. Bush, and brother George ...
(image by YouTube)   DMCA

When the recent controversy about the Clinton family foundation first emerged -- thanks to Clinton Cash, the book by conservative author Peter Schweizer -- all-but-announced Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush declared that Hillary Clinton is "going to be held accountable like all of us...That's part of the process." But Bush declined to slam Clinton or comment on Schweizer's admittedly unproven allegations that she took official action as secretary of state to benefit foreign donors to the foundation. He said, "I don't 'go off' on Hillary Clinton." And he explained that there would be time later to get into partisan sniping. But there was perhaps another reason for his reticence: The Bush family foundations are less transparent about their donors than the Clinton Foundation.
Nonprofits are not compelled to reveal their funders, and most treat their financial sources as top-secret information. But the Clinton Foundation does release the names of all its donors and the general amount of each donation (though it has acknowledged screwing up on occasion). It first made public its contributors in late 2008 after then president-elect Barack Obama tapped Hillary Clinton to be his secretary of state. The need for openness was obvious: A foreign government, a corporation, or wealthy individuals donating to the foundation could have an interest in a decision or action made by a secretary of state. And the public had a right to know if any potential conflicts of interest were at hand. (The overlap between the foundation's funding, the Clintons' personal finances, Bill's global hobnobbing with foreign leaders and CEOs, and Hillary's official actions as secretary of state certainly deserved scrutiny.) But the foundation's nearly 3,000-page list of contributors was not searchable, and the foundation only supplied the names of the donors, not addresses or any other identifying information. The specific amounts of contributions were not provided, only the range (say, $5 to $10 million, or more than $25 million). Still, this was much more transparency than what is practiced by most foundations. As Tom Watson recently wrote at Forbes.com, "In truth, the Clinton Foundation is among the most forthcoming of major charities and nonprofit foundations -- especially those headed by public figures."
Go to Mother Jones to read the rest of this article.


 http://www.opednews.com/articles/Are-the-Clintons-More-Tran-by-David-Corn-Clinton-Foundation_Donors_Sources-150501-601.html