Thursday, December 24, 2009

Editorial: Charities Will Suffer

Whoa! Whoa! People, we need to put things in perspective — right now. While the Sun Sentinel newspaper and others have been informing us in excruciating and mind-numbing detail about the disgusting horrors of Scott Rothstein's actions, on Nov. 26, we read articles that the Miami-Dade County senior judge directed that charities return monies that Rothstein donated to them within 10 days or face lawsuits.

After the charities scramble to return the money, we all know that it will sit in someone's bank account — for years — as the litigation process lumbers through the courts. To me, this information is like a call to action for us who merely read about this to stand up and make our feelings known.

There is absolutely no doubt that the money must be returned, but who are we hurting most in the rush to satisfaction? We are hurting the most vulnerable in our community. The evidence presented seems to show that Scott Rothstein got money via illegal means. At the same time, is there not someone out there who can inject some legal and charitable sanity into this almost rabid "clawback" demand? Stop with the maltreatment of our most vulnerable.

There should be dialogue with the charities to find less devastating ways to refund every penny. The charities, which always undergo fiscal scrutiny, should be given more breathing room to repay. The analogy is perfect for this situation: If they do not breathe, they die. So, by extension, who are "the suits" and "robes" hurting but those who can least afford it — especially at this time?

Full Editorial and Source:
Charities Will Suffer From Scott Rothstein's Antics

See Also:
Scott Rothstein Sued by Car Dealer


timlahrman said...

ya know I agree .... all the high-paid administrators in these charites should pay back the money from "their cut" of the ill-gotten gains.

So sorry if it hurts .... but your clients will understand and feel for you .....

StandUp said...

I remember in the Ruth Lilly case, a fatal mistake of her guardian was in cutting back the charities piece of the pie. They were absolutely outraged and a big scandal followed.

Nobody cared about Ruth Lilly, you understand. It was the charities - they were all worried about themselves.

Anonymous said...

Returned to who? Those who Rothstein bilked? Or who?

Max said...

Is the author implying that Robin Hood is alive and well -- and that's OK?

David Arthur Walters said...

Since when are donations to charities "fictitious profits" subject to clawback?