Blog

Clinton Foundation programs in limbo as election looms

By Olivia Olander
GSS Correspondent

Should Hillary Clinton win the U.S. presidency on Tuesday, millennials around the world could pay a price, thanks to upcoming changes to the Clinton Foundation, a humanitarian charity organization established by the Clinton family in 1997.

The future of initiatives that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton launched — including programs aimed at creating more jobs for youth, more opportunities for girls’ education and help on becoming a better parent — could be uncertain, given new scrutiny over the Foundation’s plans for funding operations in the event of a Clinton victory on Tuesday.

Conflict of interest?

The Foundation has made headlines in recent weeks for possible conflicts of interest as Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton inches closer to a potential presidential victory. Her opponent, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, slammed the organization in the final presidential debate on Oct. 19., calling it a “criminal enterprise” and a “disgrace.”

The Clinton Foundation been praised by watchdog groups such as Charity Navigator, which gave it four stars — the highest possible ranking for a charity’s financial health, accountability, transparency and results reporting. However, it has received criticism for accepting foreign donations while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.

Some believe this policy resulted in a conflict of interest, because Clinton’s government position could have allowed her to afford foreigners special favors or meetings if they donated to her family’s organization.

In the debate, Trump also condemned Saudi Arabia and Qatar, countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, for their policies on women’s LGBTQ rights, implying that the Foundation should refuse donations from countries that don’t support equal rights.

In the past, Trump has called for Clinton to return donations to these countries, which amount to $10 million to $25 million from Saudi Arabia, and between $1 million and $5 million from Qatar, according to the Foundation website.

But Clinton defended the organization. “There is no evidence (of wrongdoing), but there is a lot of evidence of very good work,” she said at the debate.

Foundation programs endangered

Indeed, the Foundation and its affiliates, the Clinton Global Initiative and Clinton Health Access Initiative, fund youth programs across the world that have been in place for years.

The Health Access Initiative would become independent from its namesake family if Clinton is elected president, but would continue “the life-saving services upon which millions depend,” according to a Sept. 14 press release from the organization’s governing board.

The Global Initiative concluded its final annual meeting in September, and plans to disband.

The Foundation’s youth programs target a variety of issues important to young people, from a conflict resolution training program in Germany to women’s rights education in Central America. Each “commitment to action” undertaken by the Foundation has a corporate sponsor; for example, the German conflict resolution program is funded by the ARAG Group, an insurance company.

To allay concerns of a President Hillary Clinton giving special favors to foreign countries or corporations that support the Clinton Foundation, former president Bill Clinton announced in August that the Foundation would accept donations only from U.S. citizens if his wife is elected.

However, those changes may hurt the Foundation’s chances of survival.

“As I understand it, the foundation will cease operating,” said Eugene Tempel, the Founding Dean Emeritus and professor at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis School of Philanthropy.  

“Programs funded by foreign governments are being moved to other organizations or will cease,” he added. “I’m not on the inside of these discussions. But if there is no funding there can’t be any programs. If another organization picks up a program, it could receive donations from foreign governments.”

However, Beth Gazley, a professor at Indiana University at Bloomington, thinks the Clinton Foundation could continue without foreign funding if it has enough money reserved.

“We can only answer the question of whether programs will close down if we know how dependent they are on foreign funding,” she said. “However, the (Clinton Foundation) has over $350 million in assets, so it is sitting on a healthy cash reserve.

“I think that priorities might change, and program budgets might change, but the main work of the foundation will probably continue.”

Programs established by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state include Job One, an initiative to encourage youth employment; No Ceilings Conversations, a program to communicate with girls across the world; and Too Small to Fail, a project designed to help parents find time to interact with their young children in small ways.

Other work includes the 20/30 program, a project for guiding young professionals, and the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, which aims to reduce childhood obesity.

Student sentiments vary 

Some youth say they are more concerned with young people understanding the purpose of the Clinton Foundation than the controversies surrounding it.

Matt Benowitz, a 17-year-old senior at San Dieguito Academy in Encinitas, California, said he believes that the “intricacies” of the Clinton Foundation and its significance “will continue to go over the heads of many young voters.”

“The Clinton Foundation is one of several scandals that seem to blur together. Benghazi, email-gate and others all play into this overarching image of a crooked Hillary Clinton,” Benowitz said, adding that these subjects are being spread along with conspiracy theories across social media by “so-called alt-right accounts.”

“I don’t think a lot of young people fully understand what the Clinton Foundation does overall,” agreed Katie Wimsatt, 17, another senior at San Dieguito Academy.

“I think it has been a bit over-hyped,” she added. “Although it’s obviously not perfect, it has caused positive changes globally.”

Reser Hall, a 17-year-old junior at Shawnee Mission East High School in Kansas City, Kansas, doesn’t think most young people understand the role the Foundation plays in the election.

“The Clinton Foundation has done a lot of good things, I’m sure,” Hall said, “but those good things have been outweighed by things like taking money from foreign governments and foreign entities that should not have any business controlling over Hillary Clinton while she’s president.”

Trump plays defense

Meanwhile, Trump’s own charity, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, recently came under fire for its own controversies, including not registering to solicit donations in New York State and using donations for non-charitable purchases, such as settling lawsuits against the Trump brand.

“Donald Trump spent more than a quarter-million dollars from his charitable foundation to settle lawsuits that involved the billionaire’s for-profit businesses,” Washington Post reporter David Fahrenthold wrote in a Sept. 20 article.

Fahrenthold cited one case in which golf courses owned by the Trump businesses settled a lawsuit by making a donation to the Trump Foundation, and another in which Trump paid a check to his own organization to settle a dispute at his club in Palm Beach, Florida.

The Trump campaign called Fahrenthold “biased,” and said the publication had “gotten their facts wrong” in a response to the article, published on the Post’s website Sept. 21.

At the Oct. 19 debate, Clinton criticized the Trump Foundation for using donated funds to purchase a portrait of the Republican nominee, and lambasted Trump for not releasing his tax returns, which would show any charitable work.

Hall thinks the two foundations were “probably not” covered with fair and equal scrutiny in the media, but said the Clinton Foundation was “covered a lot more because it was bigger news (…) but the media is on Hillary’s side and it’s very obvious.”

But Wimsatt thinks “the highlighting of topics like the (Clinton) Foundation is based on politics and a need to find ways to make voters believe Secretary Clinton is unfit for the presidency.”

“Although the Trump Foundation has received some scrutiny, that hasn’t been as prevalent as it should be,” she said. “Additionally, there is much less focus on how Trump is planning to keep his personal interests from influencing his actions.”

Kellen Browning

Related Posts

Back To Top