By Thomas Lifson at American Thinker
There’s no danger that the tax subsidy granted to donors to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation will be used to benefit conservatives. Not if the new president of the 2-billion-dollar
slush fund foundation has anything to say about it. The Daily Caller reports:
The outgoing University of Miami president tapped to head the Clinton Foundation once tried to block a conservative group founded by four female students from organizing on campus.
Donna Shalala, who also served as former President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, was recently hand-picked to take over as CEO of the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, a non-profit dedicated to global health and to improving health and wellness for women and girls.
It was the 2002-2003 school year when Shalala and her university administration rejected an upstart group, Advocates for Conservative Thought, on the grounds that it would be redundant since the school already had a College Republicans chapter. (snip)
Shalala’s administration rejected the group three times — in November and December of 2002 and in January 2003. ACT pushed back against the school’s argument that it would be redundant, pointing out that College Republicans endorse a specific party and specific candidates. Some of ACT’s founders were registered Democrats who advocated for conservative values, they argued.
Shalala’s reasoning was a pretty thin excuse, and it did not survive scrutiny:
[The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education – FIRE] pointed out that the University of Miami hosted a number of organizations with shared values. The school had multiple Muslim groups, a number of groups for black students, multiple groups for Asian and Hispanic students and a couple for environmentalists.
FIRE sent a letter to Shalala on April 7, 2003, and received response that a policy change was “under consideration.” But COSO followed up with its decision weeks later, informing the group that it would not be approved but could apply again the following semester. No guarantees were provided.
That response generated outrage and national media coverage.
Under growing pressure, Shalala finally caved and called for a reversal of the policy.
I think it is fair to suppose that in her new job, Shalala will push the limits, Clinton style, in rationalizing political activities as worthy of tax subsidy. Her bias is obvious, and her willingness to serve as a tool of the Clintons is unquestioned. A perfect fit, you might say.