An ACORN by Any Other Name
Posted by fahsheezy on June 28, 2009
Read my article also at Smart Girl Nation!
I think Michelle Malkin put it best: The story of the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now is tremendously convoluted because “of course, ACORN runs a vast network of affiliates across the country that facilitate its money-shuffling racket.” My guess is that this is also how it maintain its superficial “grassroots” street cred despite its access to resources from on high.
The recent chapter of the ACORN International name change is similarly confusing. To be clear, ACORN proper has not changed their title, only ACORN International, now, Community Organizations International. ACORN International was founded by disgraced ACORN founder, Wade Rathke who was ousted from the main organization after it was revealed that his brother, Dale Rathke, embezzled a small fortune and Wade conspired to conceal the transgression for nearly a decade. Since then, however, it has been an uphill battle for ACORN to sever affiliation with the Rathkes and it looks as though the recent name change of ACORN International is an outgrowth of that effort.
An internal memo from last year reveals that ACORN requested that Wade Rathke leave the organization and all affiliates, but because of the technical ambiguities of what constitutes affiliate status and the persistence of Rathke, this has proven to be no straightforward task. Seeking resolution to this controversy, the memo clearly shows that ACORN’s position is that if the parties settle to permit Rathke’s control or presence in any of these “corporations” (their term for affiliates) then the ACORN affiliation should be terminated and all association with the organization’s brand be dropped. Hence, the memo states, “[With respect to ACORN International, Wade Rathke] should probably start his own darn international org. If he wants this one, he has to use it without the ACORN name…ACORN ought to be able to force him to stop, and to change the corporate name.”
This appears to be the motivation behind the name change of ACORN International to Community Organizations International where Rathke remains Chief Organizer, and not, as was initially speculated, as a first effort to rebrand the stigmatized organization. ACORN alone has legal rights to the organization’s name and wants to prohibit Rathke from using it. They have used this same reasoning to threaten the whistleblower coterie of former insiders known as the “ACORN 8 ” with legal action for using the name in their title—an act they view as a retributive move to silence them.
ACORN is actively trying to extricate itself from the Rathke debacle, but the question remains whether they will successfully free themselves from their own, which has arisen quite independently of the Rathkes. Indeed, ACORN has arguably generated more controversy than it has ever enjoyed praise, historically speaking. ACORN’s website blames its corrupt reputation on the conservative “noise machine” when in reality, it would seem they have no one to blame but themselves. Currently, ACORN is under indictment for voter registration fraud in 14 states, furthering concerns over orchestrated illegality, in the very least, widespread indifference to the law. They stand accused of a host of crimes—39 felonies in Navada alone—including forgery, illegal compensation for collected voter registrations (illegal because they incentivize registration fraud such as paying per each registration obtained instead of per hour), and registering convicts.
But ACORN’s problems go much, much further. In fact, records of voter registration fraud by ACORN or it’s subsidiary Project Vote, are somewhat of an organizational tradition, with incidents spanning at least a decade. It’s difficult to see how they can still be explaining this as the unauthorized activity of rogue registerers, and if it is, then it’s about time they started actively doing something about it as it only seems to be getting worse—even, systemic. The Employment Policies Institute, a non-profit research organization which studies public policy and job growth, has catalogued ACORN’s bad behavior for years:
“In the late 1990s, ACORN’s Project Vote was involved in an $850,000 embezzling scheme, where union funds and kickbacks were used to illegally aid the 1996 re-election bid of then-Teamsters President Ron Carey. A New York federal jury found the Teamsters political director guilty of the conspiracy.”
“In 1996, the Inspector General of the AmeriCorps program stripped a $1 million grant from the ACORN Housing Corporation (AHC). When applying, AHC had denied any connections to ACORN, since the grant was not intended for political advocacy organizations. Evidence later uncovered by the Inspector General found that not only was AHC created by ACORN, engaged in numerous transactions with one another, and sharing staff and office space — but it utilized the AmeriCorps grant to increase ACORN membership, a violation of federal guidelines.”
They also don’t seem to like abiding by their own principles very much as EPI reports that they sued the state of California to exempt themselves from the state’s minimum wage requirement:
“ACORN argued that being forced to pay higher wages would mean that they would hire fewer employees –the very dilemma faced by businesses. Incredibly, ACORN stated that paying its employees a lower wage would allow them to be more sympathetic to the low-and moderate-income families they were attempting to help. ACORN argued that abiding by the state minimum wage would limit their ability to promote their agenda and would therefore be a violation of their First Amendment rights.”
The suit was dismissed on sheer absurdity. The comical irony is that ACORN aggressively campaigns for an increasingly higher “living wage,” as they call it. That they would so publicly petition exemption from their own burdensome employment standard is beyond jaw-dropping.
One could write a book making the case against ACORN, but in my opinion they are essentially a network of ready-made mobs which harass business, especially banks, at the behest of organizers. In its higher echelons sit radical left-wing sympathizers with unseemly histories. They possess heavy political clout and have received millions of tax-payer dollars in one form or another. One of their most prominent issues, which they unleash their angry throng upon, is housing—thus, the pursuit of banks. It’s a huge deal for them, requiring three separate campaigns listed on their website: “Affordable Housing,” and “Fair Housing,” or, what I would call “Setting Poor People Up for Financial Obligations They Cannot Pay.” Not coincidentally, the third campaign is fighting “Foreclosures,” or “Stopping Banks from Foreclosing on the Poor People Whom We Set Up in Houses They Could Not Pay For.” Housing bubble much?
