Ok, not directly related to lobbying, but I just thought I'd like to say it publicly. Last year, when there were massive floods and mother nature's wrath in Indiana, I was fortunate enough to volunteer at disaster recovery sites throughout the state. I saw the good and the bad in people, but I wanted to take this platform to just say that if someone is considering a donation to either the Red Cross or the Salvation Army, my strong feelings are that the salvation army is the better of the two.
I'm not affiliated in any way, shape or form with either group, but I saw them in action. The reason I say the Salvation Army is the better of the two is simply that they were local residents volunteering their time, while the Red Cross workers were all flown in to work at the sites. Admittedly, both were doing positive things for the communities, but it just doesn't seem to make ANY financial sense for a charitable organization to fly people in from around the country, put them up in hotels, and give them stipends, when you have people locally who can do the same thing. Taking it even a step further, the Red Cross also did the same thing for college students to help unload their trucks, planes, etc. Rather than hiring local kids, the Red Cross spent funds on flying people in.
I know it's trivial and definitely not related to lobbying, but I just was reminded of the two groups and needed to put this out there for anyone that stumbles upon this article.