“I don't know why he feels the need to embellish the record and not tell the truth,” Alexi Giannoulias recently said of his opponent Mark Kirk. But now it would be fitting for Giannoulias to ask himself the same question he posed to his opponent, both of whom are vying for the Illinois Senate seat now held by Roland Burris.
Giannoulias is currently the state treasurer of Illinois. And, according to his official website, “He founded and chairs the AG Foundation, a not-for-profit charity that donates money to treat child-related illnesses, curb poverty and assist disaster relief organizations.”
The problem is, the charity no longer exists. According to the AG Foundation’s tax return, “The organization was in existence only for the two-year period from 2005 to 2006.”
In the same “statement concerning liquidation,” the tax form says:
Due to the relatively small size of the organization and the limited resources at hand, there was no formally drafted liquidation plan. Instead, the officers and directors of the organization, all members of the same family, mutually agreed to cease operations. Consequently, this return will be the final return filed by the organization.
The return was received by the Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service on June 22, 2007.
It is now June 3, 2010, and Giannoulias still states that he “chairs” the AG Foundation.
So, why is Giannoulias still claiming to be the “chair” of this defunct organization?
According to the same tax return, Giannoulias’s formal position with the foundation was “president.” In this capacity, the “average hours per week devoted to position” was 0.15, which amounts to 9 minutes per week and an average of 39 minutes per month.
During the foundation’s existence, “The organization received a total of $18,800 in contributions and grants, $18,500 (98.40%) of which was paid directly to other charitable organizations. The remaining $300 was paid for expenses incurred by the organization in pursuit of its charitable purpose.”
This past weekend, Giannoulias’s campaign assisted the Washington Post with an article on inconsistencies between Kirk’s actual record and what the Republican candidate claimed he had accomplished. Will the Washington Post scrutinize the Democrat in the same manner?