So if I am understanding correctly what you said, if a person made a donation to their local Red Cross, thinking that the funds would stay in local area, that the funds were sent to Katrina collection automatically?
In my corner of Arkansas we had many Katrina evacuees, who stayed in shelters that were set up by the Red Cross. I was under the impression that our local Red Cross chapter funds were used to set up and run these shelters? Oh and my Arkansas example of the Red Cross being "very bureaucratic and unforgiving" during the influx of Katrina evacuees to our area, a group of ladies from a small local church got together and spent their money to buy and their time to make several large pans of lasagna and took it to the local Red Cross center where some evacuees where. These kind hearted church ladies were harshly told that their donation of prepared food could not be eaten by any of the evacuees "because if any took so much as one bite of their food, then they would not be eligible for any assistance from the Red Cross" this story made the rounds around town and really angered people who had been very generous in giving and collecting money for the Red Cross.
Would the Red Cross be more effective if each state sort of incorporated it's own Red Cross independent from the National organization? Money collected in the individual states would be guaranteed to stay in the states where the money was collected? National RC could only receive a max of say 10% of state money. Collection for national disasters by the National RC would have to be specifically labeled by the donor for the national disaster?
How can individual citizens influence National Red Cross policy? The news stated last night that the Red Cross was federally chartered and that Congress was questioning how they operated. Personally I don't want the Federal Government taking over the Red Cross.
Tom, thank you for being patient and reading this:)