Even in the insane economic climate, many are still digging deep in their pockets to make contributions to the many organizations that provide a number of services for our military.  These organizations stand ready to provide money to active and retired military personnel for any number of reasons, including educational purposes, living expenses, emergency cash for family members in the States and any number of other

.

purposes.  We’ve long since known the financial struggles of those who leave well-paying careers to serve their country in times of war or unrest.  We trust these organizations to ensure money is distributed when needed.  Unfortunately, one of the country’s largest organizations has fell way short in both its purpose and its promises.

An Associated Press investigation revealed Army Emergency Relief has not only hoarded millions of dollars, but has shown that 90% of the monies that are released are done so as loans.  This means this charity makes a profit on donations made by you and me.  Actually, when you think about it, they’re making money from both ends.  By keeping the money in the bank, they’re earning interest on it and then, when it’s released in the form of a loan to military personnel, they’re making money on the interest the soldiers must repay.  Sounds a bit illegal, yes?  At the very least, it’s improper, tacky and will make it difficult for the rest of the credible organizations to continue their efforts.

What’s more, this “charity” is actually defending its practice by saying its guidelines ensure the strength of the organization as a whole.  I guess $117 million in reserves would ensure the strength of many organizations, especially when only $64 million was released, with the vast majority being released only when promised to be paid back - with interest!  Colonel Ed Manning defends the charity and says he’s surprised anyone is questioning the guidelines.

As if this isn’t insulting enough, the same military personnel this group is supposed to be serving are the very ones who are “strongly encouraged” to contribute.  This is one cycle that ends at the same place and from all directions.

Right now, there aren’t any legal ramifications in the making, or at least, none that are being publicized.  The group is busy being incredulous and is insisting they’ve done nothing wrong.  Other organizations have stepped forward with their own media releases and insist AER has made it difficult them to convince contributors that not all charities follow these same questionable guidelines.

Links to Business Law Lawyer and Lawyers

What does a convicted cop killer, several sheriffs and district attorneys have in common?  They’re all endorsing a Jefferson County, WI judge as he pursues a position on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  Judge Randy Koschnick served fourteen years as a public defender and during that time, was assigned a case that meant having to defend an accused cop killer.  Part of his defense of Ted Oswald, who was convicted in

Judge Randy Koschnick

1995 for murder, was that his father brainwashed him and forced him to play a role in a bank robbery that led to the killing of a police captain who pulled the pair over immediately following the bank heist.

Traditionally, law enforcement won’t endorse a former public defender due to the belief they undermine the efforts of the police and the work they do when collecting evidence in a crime.  This hasn’t necessarily been the case with Judge Koschnick.  He’s received support from both area police departments as well as the district attorney’s office.  What the judge hadn’t anticipated, however, is the support from a former client.  He’s not exactly pleased with it, either.  In a statement, he says, “He is free to say whatever he wants, but his endorsement is no honor to me.”

Oswald sent a letter to the Associated Press and said Koschnick was both productive and that he provided “good work” on his case.  He’s now in his mid-thirties and besides his conviction for murder, he was also convicted of kidnapping and the injury of two other police officers and of course, the bank robbery.  He’s serving a life sentence.

So is it possible for a former public defender who was elected as a county judge to switch gears and remain objective?  Some say no; however, the argument could be made that those with such backgrounds are excellent candidates.  After all, they know the problems and challenges from both sides in a courtroom.  Their unique position could be advantageous in a country that built its legal system based on fairness and a level playing field. 

The April 7 election will tell the tale on whether a convicted killer has any political pull from behind bars.

.

I’ve only been catching the highlights of the hearings this week from the “Big 3″ automakers, mostly because I can’t seem to get my mind around the justifications. I understand the importance of remaining in business. Regardless of the layoffs they’ve already incorporated, closing their doors only ensures those remaining would be unemployed. But what I can’t understand is how to plan to remain in business six months from now. The new unemployment numbers come out later today and with last month’s numbers above 6% coupled with words like, “frightful”, “skyrocketed” and other adjectives used to tease us from those who’ve already seen these numbers, I’m doubtful any of us will be shopping for new cars. In fact, my own personal list of priorities go something like this:

· Keeping myself with a roof and four walls

· Ensuring Christmas happies for my family

· Keeping groceries in the cabinets and diet Coke in the fridge

· Keeping the utilities going

I’m sure my priorities are no different than any other Americans’ own lists. If you’ll notice, there’s no mention of any contributions via the purchase of a new car to any of these troubled auto manufacturers. Again, I tend to believe that’s applicable to other Americans too. My question is, even if we bail these companies out, and we’re currently not buying new cars, what makes Congress and these CEOs believe this is their “cure-all”? If folks aren’t running to their local dealerships now, they certainly won’t be doing so six months from now either. In fact, here are the major headlines this morning:

· Viacom to slash 850 jobs in response to the economic downturn (Yahoo News)

· Employers shedding jobs as recession deepens (Drudge Report)

· Employers cut 533k jobs in November, most in 34 years (Associated Press)

I’m just incredulous this is even being entertained. In fact, I’m amazed it’s even a priority at all. Even with their claims of keeping employees with jobs, it simply doesn’t ring true. And for them to threaten us with bankruptcy is a joke. It’s as though they’re saying, “Well, if you don’t help us, we’ll just file bankruptcy” and deliver this statement with an undercurrent of “do it or else”.

My favorite late night jab, courtesy of Jon Stewart, asks if these executives were schooled in how negotiations work. He said (and I’m paraphrasing) if they didn’t receive the 25 billion last month, what made them think they could come back this month and request 34 billion and were they under the impression Congress declined their earlier request because it was too low a number? I think many of us are wondering that very thing.

So as the vast majority of Americans are preparing to head off to their jobs and have redefined a “productive day at the office” as the absence of a pink slip, the head honchos of the automakers prepare to face Congress yet again so they can resume their martyred presences with declarations of “I carpooled here and we split the costs about fifty-fifty”. Welcome to the real world, gentlemen. Carpooling has been an acceptable cost-cutting measure for years.