File this under "Things Enron affected that you didn't know they affected".
After [Enron]'s collapse, SNAP's budget fell from $3 million to $2.5 million.[...]
SNAP (www.snapus.org) has slowly recovered, and now has its largest annual budget ever, $5.5 million, after gaining a foothold in communities outside of Houston. It has contracts to provide free or low-cost spaying and neutering in poor areas of Los Angeles, Albuquerque, N.M., and Monterrey, Mexico.
So basically Enron was stealing from ratepayers in other states and defrauding investors around the world and with their ill-begotten gains they were donating a very tiny fraction of it to local charities in Houson.
Now the gravy train has ended and there is some disruptions and charities are cutting budgets? OK fine, but don't expect a lot of sympathy. The money didn't belong to them to begin with.
Posted by: kent on November 22, 2004 8:36 PMKent, that's one heckuva compassionate conservative attitude you've got there toward this particular charity. Am I concerned about your compassion toward animals? no, toward humans. Do you have any idea of the public health effects of animal populations out of control in a city?
There are three choices I see here: support SNAP-like programs through corporate donations, support SNAP-like programs through taxes, or watch humans suffer disease as a result of animal populations growing out of control. What's your choice?