America Suffers No 'Crisis in Philanthropy'
By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
The cap and trade national energy tax bill is not the only solution to a manufactured problem drawing attention in the nation's capital. The Washington Examiner ' s generally excellent David Freddoso explains Friday that efforts are under way to make policymakers believe America is suffering from a "crisis in philanthropy."
Freddoso writes that the National Council for Responsible Philanthropy and its directors "have been both subtly and overtly threatening new federal regulations that would force foundations to give half their money to a narrow set of causes, and with few strings attached."
America's foundations give only 33.2 percent of their grant money to nonprofits serving those "most in need," a factoid the group has come up with that is being used to pressure Congress to act. But, Freddoso says, that figure measures the contributions made in the interests of serving "most vulnerable populations," as the liberal NCRP defines them. This includes the poor, racial minorities and girls and AIDS patients but not, he points out, people with cancer, drug addicts, or boys.
"Even accepting all of NCRP's assertions about who needs the money most, they mislead when they claim that 'approximately $1 out of every $3 granted ... was intended to benefit communities with the least wealth, opportunity or power,' " he writes.
Combined with the Obama administration's effort to cap the deductibility of charitable contributions for high-income individuals and families, the NCRP's effort could be seen as an effort to give the federal government a controlling voice in America's private philanthropic institutions. And, if successful, to destroy deTocquevillian America.
What makes it all worse is that, as Freddoso says in the Examiner, the numbers the NCRP cites are just wrong. According to Georgetown University economist Phillip Swagel, who looked at the issue in a study for the Philanthropic Collaborative, "more than 68 percent of the grant money he surveyed went to underserved populations." To put it another way, more than half, instead of one out of every three dollars, as the NCRP claims.
Check out our political cartoons.
Become a political insider: Subscribe to U.S. News Weekly, our new digital magazine.
Follow Thomas Jefferson Street blog on Twitter.
Tags: philanthropy
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (3) | Print
Reader Comments
Philanthropy keeps missing the ones who need it
Before families end up in homeless shelters, or getting in line at the Salvation Army soup kitchen, most families just need a single step up. Families, like mine, have exhausted charitable avenues and do not qualify for welfare. Of course, with welfare the family would also become homeless because the monthly grant money is less than rent.
Once the traditional avenues are exhausted, many people turn to avenues begging for cash. There are so many families just looking to bridge the gap between the results of not having enough for too long, and reaching a place of self-sufficiency. Unfortunately, when people turn to this last resort, the only ones tuning in are scam lenders offering needed funds and then stealing the last of what these families have. Somehow these scammers can find a use for ID, social security, and bank information of people with no remaining credit and nothing in the bank. It would be nice if the people in need were able to get the same mileage from their information.
Places like INeedFinancialHelp.com offer free ads for desperate people to plead to those in a position to help. Where are the people with money? Where are the real philanthropists, and why do they make sure no one can reach them? If you are looking to make a difference, don't you want to know who most needs your help?
For anyone with an interest, you can visit http://www.ineedfinancialhelp.net/viewlisting.php?view=16510 to find people ready to sink. Everyone on this site has been approached by scammers, yet none are getting the help they are begging to receive. One corporation could wipe out the totality of these requests in a single month...perhaps one should try.
Well, we have never answered this question
Why should "contributions" to the country club atmosphere of say, Harvard and Yale, be equally deductible as contributions to such as The Salvation Army, the homeless shelter, the community college and the food bank.
I "get it" that people should be able to give to whatever they wish. The question is where and how much the public ought to be participating with deductions from income and estate taxes. Isn't it?
More Government
With the very visible on-going debates regarding government's expanding role in health care, auto manufacturing, and financial services, this kind of power play can slide by unnoticed. Thanks for letting us know. Where else are we going to wake up and find the government with a new, and possibly undebated, role in our lives?
advertisement
