Long-term concerns about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

It's about the potential power has to corrupt.

Dear Bob ...

In your recent Keep the Joint Running "Pearly Gates," (7/21/2008), the last bit about the B&MG Foundation (sounds straight off the Monopoly board, doesn't it?!) was interesting ... but, since the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a private organization, funded entirely by several individuals ... where is the Public's interest in oversight coming from?

Certainly it has benefited ... or rather B&M and Warren Buffett have benefited from our tax policy that allow the creation of such organizations but so does every other person who donates money to a 501c(3) organization.

I read over their website, certainly their goals and approach are laudable ... but, as you noted, hardly set in stone. And once B&M kick off...where will the foundation head? But I guess my point in writing is still: What is the Public interest in this foundation ... or any other?

For instance, should the foundation decide not to disappear in 50 years ... or to re-target their resources to some other goal than B&M's original vision ... I'm still not certain what Public interest there is in that ... a loss maybe, but as long as they continue to meet the criteria for a private foundation (they're a 501c(3) and 509(a)), then it would seem they're still meeting what we, the Public, have specified for a private charitable foundation.

- Unclear about the issue

Dear Unclear ...

Quite a few correspondents have asked me about this. Fair question.

I'm concerned because corporations are, strangely enough, held to a laxer legal standard than individual human beings: Even when a corporation is convicted of a felony (an extremely rare situation), including actions or negligence that results in fatalities, the penalties rarely include incarceration for any corporate officers and rarely involve enough money to dissuade the corporation from repeating the behavior.

Which is to say, in a generation we might find ourselves dealing with a very powerful self-directed organization that's subject to very little external control -- it's even tax-exempt. That strikes me as a dangerous situation.

Keep in mind that in the last century, United Fruit Corporation and AT&T each orchestrated the overthrow of a sovereign government with no consequence of any kind … and they are at least subject to the influence of shareholders.

Imagine what a corporation lacking even this constraint might, under more cynical leadership, choose to do.

- Bob