HEINZ endowments

[c1986goose]

In the ebb and flow of special interest groups, Peaceful Tomorrows is a child of the Tides Center which, in turn, is a spin-off of the Tides Foundation. As explained in one analysis, “The Tides Foundation and its off-spring, the Tides Center, effectively ‘launder’ donor dollars when they give to other nonprofits...” Tides is "...the epicenter of a large financial operation that collects and disperses millions of dollars to left-wing activist groups...." In 2001, the Tides Foundation and the Pennsylvania-based Heinz private foundations launched the Tides Center of Western Pennsylvania.

The Heinz foundations consist of the Howard Heinz Endowment and the Vera I. Heinz Endowment. Teresa Heinz Kerry is Chairperson of the Howard Heinz Endowment and a director of the Vera I. Heinz Endowment. Collectively, the Heinz Endowments, under Teresa’s stewardship, have donated in excess of $5 million to the Tides’ operations. Who says that Senator Kerry is special interest averse!

The Tides Foundation is the brainchild of 1970’s anti-war activist Drummond Pike. Somehow, he overcame his capitalist phobias to create a spider web of non-profit and for-profit entities which approach the $100 million per year mark. The allure of the Tides’ non-profits is their ability to opaquely funnel money from private donors to activist causes.

Private foundations, such as the Heinz endowments, must publicly report their donations. Both the Tides Foundation and the Tides Center are 501 (c)(3) non-profit corporations considered by the I.R.S. to be public charities. As such, they are not required to disclose their donors.

Therefore, the millions of dollars that Tides receives from Heinz, Pew Charitable Trusts, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and others is, in turn, redistributed to organizations like The Ruckus Society, Greenpeace, Peaceful Tomorrows and others. Thus, using Tides as an intermediary, there is no direct reporting connection between the private foundations and the activist groups they support. And you thought Swiss banking was secretive.

[Carla]

Just in case anyone was curious....because I was.
Here is a link to every endowment and grant the Heinz Corporation made in 2001 and 2002. I would have included 2000 also but for some reason the link on the site is dead. 2003 isn't available yet.
If you want to save a bit of time, the pages the grants and endowments are on are pages 35-51 of each report.
These report is their end of year report for 2001 and 2002 which includes all grants and endowments made by all of the Heinz Endowments. Instead of picking one piece of the puzzle, it's best to look at the entire thing.


http://www.heinz.org/files/Report2002.pdf

http://www.heinz.org/files/Report2001.pdf

[larry]

Just in case anyone was curious....because I was.
Here is a link to every endowment and grant the Heinz Corporation made in 2001 and 2002. I would have included 2000 also but for some reason the link on the site is dead. 2003 isn't available yet.
If you want to save a bit of time, the pages the grants and endowments are on are pages 35-51 of each report.
These report is their end of year report for 2001 and 2002 which includes all grants and endowments made by all of the Heinz Endowments. Instead of picking one piece of the puzzle, it's best to look at the entire thing.


http://www.heinz.org/files/Report2002.pdf

http://www.heinz.org/files/Report2001.pdf


i would agree..it's important to look at the whole.

but... there is a tremendous amount of money to be made in every election so political contributions of any kind are significant...especially when they come from a 503c organization that claims to be neutral




just a thought.... learn to decern

[Rapunzel676]

The NRA also has tax-exempt status, as does the AARP, PETA, the AFL-CIO, and the ultra-conservative, tobacco-funded Cato Institute. These groups don't try to influence public policy, do they? Oh wait, they do!

For anyone who's interested, here's what "tax-exempt" actually means: http://change.monster.com/articles/whatisnonprofit/

My discernment skills are quite up to par, thanks. ;)

[advantage2000]

The NRA also has tax-exempt status, as does the AARP, PETA, the AFL-CIO, and the ultra-conservative, tobacco-funded Cato Institute. These groups don't try to influence public policy, do they? Oh wait, they do!

For anyone who's interested, here's what "tax-exempt" actually means: http://change.monster.com/articles/whatisnonprofit/

My discernment skills are quite up to par, thanks. ;)

Thanks for jumping in on this one... I couldn't think of all the Acronyms! Although the AFL-CIO continues to slam Dubya for the record trade gap.

(Read another article... the trade gap has actually gone up every year Dubya has been in office.) Wow, what do you think about that?

[larry]

My discernment skills are quite up to par, thanks.


well...maybe.


1) a non profit organization complaining about television ads being run by a candidate.

2) the wife of the challenger is funding the organization complaining.


there is nothing wrong with her giving her money or funding the ads as far as I am concerned...the problem..from my persepective, is the attempt by ANY organziation to pretend to be nuetral when they clearly are not.

this happens on both sides of the fence....


so rapunzel, keeping OT, which of the non-profits you posted above are pretending to be neutral - all the groups you listed are clearly on one side of the fence or the other, they make no apoligies for their position, nor do they attempt to hide.

the message can only be considered pure if the messenger is practicing full disclosure of their relationship (read agenda).

Discernment isn't pointing out that which is obvious..it's outing the "obfuscators"...regardless of which party they belong to.





edited to add: rapunzel...not clear on why you italicized the word decern with the spelling discern..did I miss something?

[Rapunzel676]

Every organization has an agenda, some are just more obvious about it than others. Do you think that certain organizations that play at being neutral aren't funding the Bush campaign? Tax-exempt means an organization doesn't pay taxes. That's all it means. Is it disingenuous for the Heinz corporation's non-profit arm to covertly fund anti-Bush ads? Possibly. However, it's public knowledge that Theresa Heinz is married to John Kerry. Who did you expect them to support--Ralph Nader? :faces:

[larry]

Every organization has an agenda, some are just more obvious about it than others. Do you think that certain organizations that play at being neutral aren't funding the Bush campaign? Tax-exempt means an organization doesn't pay taxes. That's all it means. Is it disingenuous for the Heinz corporation's non-profit arm to covertly fund anti-Bush ads? Possibly. However, it's public knowledge that Theresa Heinz is married to John Kerry. Who did you expect them to support--Ralph Nader? :faces:


But not every organization has a "covert" political agenda which is what we are discussing.


That was, in part, the question...WHICH organizations are funding ads for either campaign under the cover of a neutral organization? For you to suggest that it is happening is easy...the question is..can you show that it is or are you just having conversation.


The tax exempt status is only an issue if the goal is to get around recent campaign finance reform laws.


not sure why you think the information about the relationship is germain to this conversation.

[pechuna]

Don't worry, Larry. The Kerry Ketchup Kisser will be exposed as the phony, wishy-washy leftist limo liberal he is. His Looney Toon wife should provide some laughs along the way.

[larry]

hi pechuna,

i'm not left or right..dem or repub..and i have no axes to grind.

i'm after issues and clarity on the issues.

i participate in the political threads hoping that others can rise above the name calling and silly partisan garbage long enough to share factual information that would help people make a good decision..either for themselves or the country.

politics in general have become so personal that it's getting harder to get outside the noise.

larry

[Carla]

i would agree..it's important to look at the whole.
but... there is a tremendous amount of money to be made in every election so political contributions of any kind are significant...especially when they come from a 503c organization that claims to be neutral
just a thought.... learn to decern

politics in general have become so personal that it's getting harder to get outside the noise.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. It's difficult to find the big picture. The reason I posted those reports is simply because it irks me when either side (or the media that leans one way or another) picks one thing and reports only that one thing without any context or background. I just like to look at the information, rather than opinions, available and form my own decision. I wish more people on both sides would do that.

[gcomstock]

Stop the insanity...overhaul our national political campaign system!

This is somewhat a tangent from c1986goose's original post about laundered / covert donations...but it would move towards solving the most insidious aspects of influence peddling. Sorry, I haven't researched the details of Senator McCain's proposed (and defeated) election reforms from several years ago...but it's painfully obvious why the political pigs have stifled efforts to empty their trough...

We need to decide that ALL national political office seekers may NOT accept donations, period. This is obviously a very complicated change...with political action committees and so many other somewhat covert pipelines. But a good start would be the public funding of candidacies...every dollar used for commercials, campaign speechs, funding local campaign offices (phone bills, office supplies, rental etc.).

Look, I don't know enough to list all the obstacles to changes like this, but it's obvious that politicians and lobbyists are going to fight it. However there are tens of millions of voters like me who are sick of the waste (the hundreds of millions of dollars spent trying to influence us to vote for one candidate or another). Limit the presidential and senate / congress campaigns to "x" dollars, and prohibit those campaigns from receiving ANY private money. I don't need HOURS of candidate's face time, whistle-stop tours, soundbites and payola funded press releases to make my decision. We could put a significant dent in (at least the potential for) corruption by removing the umbilicus between elected officials and all donations.

So...without hijacking c1986goose's original insights (that non-profit organizations can obscure the path by which donations are funneled to other "causes" ) I'm less concerned (for now) about controversial cultural influence peddling. If we can start breaking the link between our elected officials and ALL special interests, the worst aspects will be addressed imho.

[Kym]

I agree. I'm thinking of voting for George for president in 2004.

[larry]

Sorry, I haven't researched the details of Senator McCain's proposed (and defeated) election reforms from several years ago...but it's painfully obvious why the political pigs have stifled efforts to empty their trough...


Campaign finance reform otherwise known as the mccain-feingold bill (soft money, outside ads, etc) was passed and signed into law march of 2003

all major provisions of the bill were upheld by the supreme court in december 2003

[larry]

kym - i'm sure mr bush appreciates your support :smile9:

[gcomstock]

Uh, turns out that the McCain-Feingold election reform legislation *was* passed. I've got some studying to do...it's so much easier to shoot off mouth first...and research after.

This snippet http://www.commoncause.org/news/default.cfm?ArtID=258 suggests that the Supreme Court's 12/03 upholding of that legislation's major provisions means it had been strongly opposed.

Anyway, I've seen the enemy...he was looking at me in the mirror this morning with a hang-dog, much worse for wear expression. He (by which I mean YOU left/right/centerist/know-nothing/NIMBY/"as long as it doesn't come out of my pocket" types) just wants a cuppa coffee and a small slice of cake...but he also wants some for later. There are many chores to do, and typing this message is merely one of the hundreds of more pleasant alternatives. In other words, as long as it's MY causes, I tend to be tolerant; I can forgive the ACLU's myriad distasteful actions because I feel passionately about its umbrella intent. But the guys who think gun shows are "free speech" or getting prayer back into public schools is worth serving jail time...they are equally entitled to their selfish opinions.

Let's just clean up the links between "Us whackos," with our many partisan preferences, and those guys we hired in Washington DC. Let the ACLU and NRA (for example) issue a press release in favor of a candidate...but prohibit their giving a single cent to any of them. There's an influence/arms race that hurts us all, and diverts resources and attention from legitimate political solutions.

[LastLaugh]

Where does the Heinz money go? -
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04067/281739.stm

[LastLaugh]

Both political parties reward their supporters for large campaign contributions . It's the ugly reality of politics. But the Bush machine has raised payback to an art form.
http://www.whitehouseforsale.org/contributorsandpaybacks/
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12155
http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/aplayers.asp
http://www.onlinejournal.com/archive/04-01-02_Whitlow.pdf

[bulldglit]

Don't worry, Larry. The Kerry Ketchup Kisser will be exposed as the phony, wishy-washy leftist limo liberal he is. His Looney Toon wife should provide some laughs along the way.

Just how did you refer to his Looney Toon wife when she was married to a prominent conservative republican senator and the republicans begged her to run for his seat upon his death?

[larry]

Just how did you refer to his Looney Toon wife when she was married to a prominent conservative republican senator and the republicans begged her to run for his seat upon his death?


Yes they did. And why not? In my book, she may well be more qualifed than half the people in congress now (although the social causes she supports are not necessarily my flavor). And, she certainly married well..no?


But, mr heinz was not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. Labeling him moderate (fiscal) to liberal (social) would be fair... and better represent his voting record.