Gates Taking Heat in Health Realm

     The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation plays by their own rules.  Philanthropists, in general, pretend they can do no harm, cannot be wrong, simply cannot - dare we say - fail.  Do not question the oligarchs: they sit on their gold-plated thrones high above the realm of criticism, critique, or accountability.  In a very real sense, they're above democracy.  

     Done with his duties at Microsoft, Gates primarily spends his days trying to reform the American education system and work on global health issues.  Billy Boy recently revealed that he and Melinda personally make all the important decisions at the Gates Foundation.  Gates relies on people like his Domestic Director of Education, former PPS superintendent Vicki Phillips, to help him decide how to leverage his billions of dollars to influence public policies.  His charitable giving has accelerated since 2000 and Gates promises to keep spending his personal wealth.  

     Mainstream criticism of Gates is difficult to find.  The LA Times printed a piece a few years back and various blogs critique his work in the charter school movement, small schools movement, and testing bonanza.  But a recent article criticized Gates for his work in health issues.  Notice the demand of accountability.  From the Puget Sound Business Journal:

    Friday, May 8, 2009
    Medical journal scolds Gates Foundation
    Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle) - by Clay Holtzman

    A leading medical journal has criticized the Seattle-based Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for lacking transparency, making too many grants to recipients in rich nations and not focusing its resources on the greatest health needs.

    The Lancet medical journal’s edition published Friday had an analysis of Gates Foundation grants from 1998 through 2007, along with commentary on the study’s findings. The analysis found that:

    • Much of the foundation’s research and development grants have gone to universities and institutions in high-income countries. The study even cites Seattle-based PATH, a global health organization that has received nearly $1 billion from Gates, and asks whether some organizations would be better characterized as agents of the foundation rather than independent grantees.

    • The foundation has focused too heavily on selected diseases, malaria, for example, while other diseases may exact a greater toll. Specifically, the Lancet commentary points toward a “poor correlation between the foundation’s funding and childhood disease priorities.”

    • A lack of transparency in decision making and planning has caused “serious anxiety” and questions about the Gates family’s “whimsical governance principle” in setting priorities. “What are the foundation’s plans for the future? It is hard to know for sure,” according to the Lancet’s editorial.  [Endquote]

But the philanthrocapitalists can do no wrong - they can only invest in failed business ventures.  The social consequences of Gates' forays into realms he does not understand (i.e. health and education) can only happen because of his vast financial wealth.  We may not live in a complete oligarchy, but money can surely sway public policy in ways that may not benefit the general public.

http://www.ourglobaleducation.com/2009/05/gates-taking-heat-in-health-realm.html