The recent events involving the Susan G. Komen for the Cure charity has been nothing short of a disaster on the part of the charity. The charity now faces a potential collapse in its donor base and a permanently tarnished name. This, however, is not surprising, considering that this particular charity has had a history of questionable practices and partnerships.
The most recognizable symbol of Komen for the Cure is the plethora of pink products that flood store shelves every October during Breast Cancer Awareness month.
Many of the producers of pink products promise to donate a portion of the income generated from these products towards various breast cancer charities, and most often it’s to Komen for the Cure.
In 2010, the fast-food restaurant Kentucky Fried Chicken partnered with Komen for the Cure to make “buckets for the cure” in which a portion of the proceeds from the buckets of KFC chicken sold was donated to Komen. The irony is astounding.
It doesn’t matter that KFC’s food is extremely unhealthy and that obesity is tied to an increased risk of cancer. What mattered was the $4.2 million that KFC donated. This sent the message to people that it’s OK now to go eat a bucket of fried chicken and clog some arteries as long as the proceeds go to a good cause.
As if that wasn’t the most hypocritical product the organization could promote, in 2009, Komen for the Cure was associated with a limited run of pink Smith and Wesson handguns. Over 30,000 people are killed a year in the U.S. by firearms and yet this seemed like a good product to promote.
It’s not just the questionable partnerships. There is also the aggressive image protection that Komen for the Cure employs and uses to intimidate smaller charities. If a charity so much as used the word “cure” in the name, they were immediately sued by the Komen foundation for trademark infringement. Over $1 million dollars a year is spent by the Komen foundation on legal fees associated with trademark disputes.
In 2010, the charity Uniting Against Lung Cancer faced legal challenges for an event titled “Kites for a Cure.” Instead of spending donor money on actual funding for research, it’s being spent on pointless legal battles that have hurt small charities. It is now, essentially, a crime to raise money for charity using any combination of the color pink and the word “cure.”
These aggressive tactics are the hallmarks of huge corporations trying to protect their brand, not private charities. Komen for the Cure has become a brand. It’s not enough to simply raise money for a good cause. It’s extremely repugnant that honest attempts to raise money for good causes are being shut down due to legal battles.
Unfortunately, the controversies do not end with these ridiculous product partnerships and corporate tactics. According to IRS filings, the CEO and founder, Nancy Brinker, received a salary of $417,171 from April 2010 to March 2011. That is an extremely large salary for running a non-profit charity. Komen for the Cure is a charity, not a for-profit corporation. Donor money should not be used to enrich those running the charity but rather to be put forth towards the charity’s mission.
That purpose is in the name, which is to find a cure for breast cancer. Komen for the Cure, however, only spends as little as 20 percent of all donations on funding actual research. While a large portion goes towards awareness campaigns, the Komen foundation has a tremendously high overhead. This is the hallmark of a poorly managed charity.
Despite all of these previous missteps and controversies, nothing paled in comparison to the tsunami that engulfed Komen for the Cure after they announced they would no longer give money to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screenings and mammograms.
Again, this was not surprising due to who was involved in the decision to restrict funding. The woman at the center of the controversy, Karen Handel, is a virulently anti-choice Republican who ran for governor in Georgia in 2010. She ran on the issue of abortion and restricting funds to Planned Parenthood. It’s no surprise that as senior vice president of public policy for the Komen charity, she fought to end funding to Planned Parenthood over the objections of the rest of the board.
The Komen Foundation has multiple ties to the Republican Party. Nancy Brinker, the founder and CEO, is a former President Bush appointee. During the media firestorm following the Planned Parenthood decision, the foundation was advised by former President Bush’s Press Secretary Ari Fleischer.
On its face, multiple ties to a political party are inconsequential but it is when ideology becomes more important than saving women’s lives, a line is crossed. The money that has been cut would have paid for 170,000 breast exams, and 6,400 mammograms.
Komen for the Cure would let 170,000 women go without breast exams because the board members are opposed to women’s reproductive rights.
“It’s unfortunate that some people, such as Karen Handle, put their political and religious ideologies above women’s basic health needs,” she said.
Karen Handel rightfully resigned on Feb. 7, after a huge blowback from longtime Komen supporters. Anyone who places ideology over saving lives has no place running a charity.
I, for one, will never donate to Komen for the Cure again.
The ridiculous product partnerships, harsh legal tactics, unnecessarily high overhead and a rigid ideology has made it unconscionable to donate to this charity in the future. There are so many other wonderful charities doing great work that are better arbiters of their donor’s money than Komen for the Cure has been.
Alex Caraballo can be reached at acaraballo21@gmail.com.