Newsflash! Army Makes Soldiers Repay Loans!

Those bastards!

Thanks to Jeff Donn, AP reporter, we all know just how mean them ol' Army guys are. Actually, what we get is a hatchet job on AER - Army Emergency Relief.

Between 2003 and 2007 - as many military families dealt with long war deployments and increased numbers of home foreclosures - Army Emergency Relief grew into a $345 million behemoth. During those years, the charity packed away $117 million into its own reserves while spending just $64 million on direct aid, according to an AP analysis of its tax records.

First off, you have to know what AER does and does not do. It does help if, for reasons beyond your control, you can't make a house payment. "A" house payment. It does not prevent you from going into foreclosure.

Tax-exempt and legally separate from the military, AER projects a facade of independence but really operates under close Army control.

The Army has an interest in what Army Emergency Relief does? Inconceivable!

The massive nonprofit - funded predominantly by troops - allows superiors to squeeze soldiers for contributions; forces struggling soldiers to repay loans - sometimes delaying transfers and promotions; and too often violates its own rules by rewarding donors, such as giving free passes from physical training, the AP found.

By "squeeze" they mean saying things like "Donate to AER!". Granted, some leaders feel strongly and like to use the term "highly encouraged" to apply pressure, but a dollar an month isn't going to kill anyone.

By "forces" they mean "You agreed to terms, now live up to them." Granted, in this age of bailouts it may seem foreign to many of Jeff Donn's readers, but yes, Army folks are expected to pay back what they owe.

If giving someone a day off PT because they donated to charity is against the rules, then I'm guilty. So is every other First Sergeant who held the position. Waaaah.

Much more after the jump! (and thanks to MadRocketScientist for the pointer)

Instead of giving money away, though, the Army charity lent out 91 percent of its emergency aid during the period 2003-2007. For accounting purposes, the loans, dispensed interest-free, are counted as expenses only when they are not paid back.

Yep. Loaning instead of giving. That's how we develop character. You get pansies when you give instead of loan. No one wants a pansy in the military now, do they?

While independent on paper, Army Emergency Relief is housed, staffed and controlled by the U.S. Army.

That's not illegal per se. Eric Smith, a spokesman for the Internal Revenue Service, said the agency can't offer an opinion on a particular charity's activities. But Marcus Owens, former head of IRS charity oversight, said charities like AER can legally partner closely with a government agency.

Per se? It's either legal, or it's not. That's a cheap attempt at casting doubt, no doubt to set up this next nugget:

However, he said, problems sometimes arise when their missions diverge. "There's a bit of a tension when a government organization is operating closely with a charity," he said.

Missions diverge? How much divergence can there be? "Loan money to soldiers in trouble" is pretty easy to figure out. I would have loved to see an example of this divergence, but none is provided.

Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy, said that AER collects money "very efficiently. What the shame is, is they're not doing more with it."

Well, Danny boy, it's their money, they manage it as they see fit. You call it "hoarding", they call it "playing it safe". Not like the Market's all that stable these days.

National administrators say they've tried to loosen the purse strings. The most recent yearly figures do show a tilt by AER toward increased giving.

Still, Borochoff's organization, which grades charities, gives the Army charity an "F" because of the hoarding.

Still, if you're talking about giving vs loaning, AER will most likely never give as much as it loans. Because we don't want pansies, remember?

Now, to these AP findings:

- Superior officers come calling when AER loans aren't repaid on time. Soldiers can be fined or demoted for missing loan payments. They must clear their loans before transferring or leaving the service.

I've addressed this one a couple times already, no need to do it again. (pansies) I will, however, briefly visit the term "superior officers". We don't use that term, Jeff. It's not accurate. We use terms like "Senior officers" and "Junior enlisted", but "Superior" and "lower" are right out. Just so ya know.

- Promotions can be delayed or canceled if loans are not repaid.

Well no shit, Sherlock. Would you promote someone who wasn't holding up their end of an agreement?

- The Army sometimes offers rewards for contributions, though incentives are banned by program rules. It sometimes excuses contributors from physical training - another clear violation.

Yep, guilty as charged, except those are called "incentives" not "rewards". And, they weren't directly for contributing to AER as much as it was a case of "It's your platoon, if you feel they deserve a day off PT, go for it."

- AER screens every request for aid, peering into the personal finances of its troops, essentially making the Army a soldier's boss and loan officer.

You mean to tell me, after twenty-plus years, that the Army wasn't my boss? Damn. Life woulda been much easier if I had known that.

Now for the worst use of ellipsis today:

"If I ask a private for something ... chances are everyone's going to do it. "

Huh?

One last thing, and I'll leave the rest:

Neither the Army nor Sgt. Major of the Army Kenneth Preston, an AER board member, responded to repeated requests for comment on the military's relationship with AER.

That's because you're a douchenozzle, Jeff. Your hit piece on AER might read well with the latte sippers, but here, it's just so much crap.

You aren't fit to carry the soiled undergarments of a buck-private chapter baby, let alone a real soldier.