EDITORIAL: VFW's election betrayal--Veterans' PAC gives aid and comfort to enemy politicians

The Washington Times ^ | October 19, 2010 | Editorial

[jazusamo]

The names Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer don't immediately convey the message "Support our troops." Yet somehow these leftist Democrats and other questionable characters made it onto the Veterans of Foreign Wars Political Action Committee's (VFW-PAC) 2010 list of election endorsements. In response to the scandal, VFW national Commander Richard L. Eubank sacked the entire PAC board.

In a letter to VFW members issued Monday, Mr. Eubank, a former Marine and decorated Vietnam veteran, said, "It is now evident to most of the VFW leadership, both National and especially the departments, that the VFW has been subjected to extreme negative publicity throughout the nation, and the recent endorsement decisions have, in fact, harmed the VFW's reputation and future ability to fulfill our mission." He asked for the PAC to be dissolved and for the VFW's national council to vote "no confidence" in the PAC's actions.

Jim Hanson, a Special Forces veteran whose Blackfive blog has been following the issue closely, says the problem was a "lack of oversight." The PAC is a quasi-independent entity nominally separate from the VFW but nevertheless purportedly bound to act in the interests of the membership. When the controversial endorsement list came to the attention of the leadership, "They did what they were supposed to do, they shut it down." The VFW-PAC board stood by its recommendations as somehow being in the best interests of veterans, but "that was just farcical," Mr. Hanson told The Washington Times.

[ballplayer]

Well there is the American Legion

[O6ret]

Having been a member of my corporate PAC I can attest to the fact that PAC decisions are independent.

But...we never forgot who appointed us and our goal to support the organization’s vision and goals. Importantly, we always kept leadership in the loop.

Still seems to be an oversight problem.