A perplexing situation that has been obvious for generations is how some of the largest foundations begun with money from compassionate American capitalists have morphed into some of the most virulent opposition against capitalism and America.
Fortunately, every so often, principles arise (Bravo Goldman Sachs) as this story from the Wall Street Journal reports.
An excerpt.
“Earlier this month, hundreds of New Yorkers received an unusual dinner invitation from the Lower East Side People's Federal Credit Union.
“The Credit Union, a small lender serving New York's poor, was holding a fund-raiser to celebrate its 25th anniversary. Among the chief sponsors listed on the invitation was Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
“Among the honorees: "Occupy Wall Street."
“They might as well have asked Marie Antoinette to dig into her purse to support Madame Defarge's knitting business.
“Shortly after the invitation was sent out, Goldman withdrew its name from the dinner. It also pulled the plug on its $5,000 funding pledge.
“The debate that ensued—between bankers and nonprofit chiefs, philanthropists and financiers—turned a modest fund-raising dinner into a heated battleground between Wall Street and the Occupy protestors, exposing contradictions on both sides.
“On one side was Goldman Sachs, which told the credit union it didn't want its name or money used to celebrate a protest movement known for placards like "Goldman Sachs is the work of the devil," dinner organizers said. The investment bank's giant glass-and-steel headquarters tower is just blocks away from the protest headquarters in Manhattan's Zuccotti Park.
“On the other side of the debate were several hosts and board members of the credit union, who said honoring the protesters is more important than the money from Goldman—even though the funds were slated to cover a quarter of the dinner's $20,000 cost.
"Their money was welcome, but not at the price of giving up what we believe in," said Pablo DeFilippi, one of the dinner hosts and associate director of member development at the National Federal of Community Development Credit Unions. "We lost their $5,000, but we have our principles."
Showing posts with label Public Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Public Policy. Show all posts
Monday, October 24, 2011
Friday, October 14, 2011
New Corporate Form
As the concepts of social enterprise and venture capitalism influenced business thinking over the past several years, the formation of new forms of doing business have emerged; witness the flexible-purpose corporation in California, as reported by the New York Times.
An excerpt.
“A new type of company intended to put social goals ahead of making profits is taking root around the country, as more states adopt laws to bridge the divide between nonprofits and businesses.
“California is the latest state to adopt a statute permitting what is called flexible-purpose corporations, new companies that are part social benefit and part low-profit entities. The companies are now allowed under laws in more than a dozen states and two Indian tribes.
“States like New York and Massachusetts are weighing comparable legislation — sometimes also known as low-profit limited liability or benefit corporations — and efforts are afoot to get federal legislation passed that would lower hurdles to the creation of such companies, including a quiet push to get preferential tax treatment for them.
“Many of the companies adopting the new structures provide services to nonprofits or are food purveyors that, for example, might employ the disabled. Perhaps the best known is MOO Milk of Vermont, a group of small dairy farmers.
“Unlike a straight nonprofit group, these businesses can tap into conventional capital markets as well as philanthropy.
“And unlike a for-profit corporation, the structure allows investors to emphasize the social mission over making money, and to be supported by money from foundations.
“Directors of many companies want to do the right thing, but they’re so busy looking at how not to get sued for failing to maximize profits that they don’t think more aspirationally about creating a great company that helps the planet and people and also makes money,” said R. Todd Johnson, a lawyer who is among the leaders of the movement to get states to create new legal structures.
“Not surprisingly, the trend concerns some executives in charge of charities, who fear increased competition for philanthropic dollars fueled by the enthusiasm for the new formats among foundations, many of which have been lobbying hard for new laws to foster this type of business.”
An excerpt.
“A new type of company intended to put social goals ahead of making profits is taking root around the country, as more states adopt laws to bridge the divide between nonprofits and businesses.
“California is the latest state to adopt a statute permitting what is called flexible-purpose corporations, new companies that are part social benefit and part low-profit entities. The companies are now allowed under laws in more than a dozen states and two Indian tribes.
“States like New York and Massachusetts are weighing comparable legislation — sometimes also known as low-profit limited liability or benefit corporations — and efforts are afoot to get federal legislation passed that would lower hurdles to the creation of such companies, including a quiet push to get preferential tax treatment for them.
“Many of the companies adopting the new structures provide services to nonprofits or are food purveyors that, for example, might employ the disabled. Perhaps the best known is MOO Milk of Vermont, a group of small dairy farmers.
“Unlike a straight nonprofit group, these businesses can tap into conventional capital markets as well as philanthropy.
“And unlike a for-profit corporation, the structure allows investors to emphasize the social mission over making money, and to be supported by money from foundations.
“Directors of many companies want to do the right thing, but they’re so busy looking at how not to get sued for failing to maximize profits that they don’t think more aspirationally about creating a great company that helps the planet and people and also makes money,” said R. Todd Johnson, a lawyer who is among the leaders of the movement to get states to create new legal structures.
“Not surprisingly, the trend concerns some executives in charge of charities, who fear increased competition for philanthropic dollars fueled by the enthusiasm for the new formats among foundations, many of which have been lobbying hard for new laws to foster this type of business.”
Monday, August 29, 2011
Yes, Tax Increases as a Default Solution
Which is the answer to the question the Sacramento Bee editorial poses “is anything sadder than padlocked pools”.
The other answer presented by the editorial, to give money to the government nonprofit, doesn’t work so well since people have became somewhat questioning with government’s ability to manage money and public services efficiently.
An excerpt from the editorial.
“Swim time is almost over at Sacramento's public pools.
“Only six of 13 city pools opened this summer, and they'll all be closed for the season by Labor Day. Next summer, only three pools are to open. In a city of 466,000, that's a disgrace even in these hard times.
“City Hall needs all the help it can get to keep pools open. But by not asking loudly enough and by not making donations easier, the city is missing out on a potential lifeline.
“Jonathan Rewers, chairman of the city's Parks and Recreation Commission, says the city needs to do a better job of telling the community that public pools are a "vital service." They are also smart policy: If kids aren't frolicking in pools, they could be getting in trouble on the street.
“This is a prime opportunity for a civic-minded corporation to make a sizable gift that would buy priceless good will. Some feelers have gone out, but with no success.
“The city also ought to have a formal matching donation program. If a neighborhood association raises a significant sum – say at least half the $100,000 it costs to run a city pool for a year – the city should come up with the rest.
“Rewers says the city needs to better publicize the donation programs that do exist.
“Gifts to Share, the city's 26-year-old nonprofit partner, is the conduit through which residents, businesses and community groups can support parks and recreation, cultural, education and neighborhood improvement projects. More than $1.2 million went through it last year….
“Rewers and other parks advocates are pushing for a citywide property tax assessment for parks maintenance, including pools, on the 2012 ballot. Residents would get to decide how important keeping up parks and keeping open pools is to them.”
The other answer presented by the editorial, to give money to the government nonprofit, doesn’t work so well since people have became somewhat questioning with government’s ability to manage money and public services efficiently.
An excerpt from the editorial.
“Swim time is almost over at Sacramento's public pools.
“Only six of 13 city pools opened this summer, and they'll all be closed for the season by Labor Day. Next summer, only three pools are to open. In a city of 466,000, that's a disgrace even in these hard times.
“City Hall needs all the help it can get to keep pools open. But by not asking loudly enough and by not making donations easier, the city is missing out on a potential lifeline.
“Jonathan Rewers, chairman of the city's Parks and Recreation Commission, says the city needs to do a better job of telling the community that public pools are a "vital service." They are also smart policy: If kids aren't frolicking in pools, they could be getting in trouble on the street.
“This is a prime opportunity for a civic-minded corporation to make a sizable gift that would buy priceless good will. Some feelers have gone out, but with no success.
“The city also ought to have a formal matching donation program. If a neighborhood association raises a significant sum – say at least half the $100,000 it costs to run a city pool for a year – the city should come up with the rest.
“Rewers says the city needs to better publicize the donation programs that do exist.
“Gifts to Share, the city's 26-year-old nonprofit partner, is the conduit through which residents, businesses and community groups can support parks and recreation, cultural, education and neighborhood improvement projects. More than $1.2 million went through it last year….
“Rewers and other parks advocates are pushing for a citywide property tax assessment for parks maintenance, including pools, on the 2012 ballot. Residents would get to decide how important keeping up parks and keeping open pools is to them.”
Monday, July 18, 2011
Poverty in America
It is not what most Americans think it is, based on what the vast social industry—of nonprofits and government—portrays, according to this report from The Heritage Foundation.
An excerpt, with links at the jump.
“Abstract: For decades, the U.S. Census Bureau has reported that over 30 million Americans were living in “poverty,” but the bureau’s definition of poverty differs widely from that held by most Americans. In fact, other government surveys show that most of the persons whom the government defines as “in poverty” are not poor in any ordinary sense of the term. The overwhelming majority of the poor have air conditioning, cable TV, and a host of other modern amenities. They are well housed, have an adequate and reasonably steady supply of food, and have met their other basic needs, including medical care. Some poor Americans do experience significant hardships, including temporary food shortages or inadequate housing, but these individuals are a minority within the overall poverty population. Poverty remains an issue of serious social concern, but accurate information about that problem is essential in crafting wise public policy. Exaggeration and misinformation about poverty obscure the nature, extent, and causes of real material deprivation, thereby hampering the development of well-targeted, effective programs to reduce the problem.
“Each year for the past two decades, the U.S. Census Bureau has reported that over 30 million Americans were living in “poverty.” In recent years, the Census has reported that one in seven Americans are poor. But what does it mean to be “poor” in America? How poor are America’s poor?
“For most Americans, the word “poverty” suggests destitution: an inability to provide a family with nutritious food, clothing, and reasonable shelter. For example, the Poverty Pulse poll taken by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development asked the general public: “How would you describe being poor in the U.S.?” The overwhelming majority of responses focused on homelessness, hunger or not being able to eat properly, and not being able to meet basic needs.[1] That perception is bolstered by news stories about poverty that routinely feature homelessness and hunger.
“Yet if poverty means lacking nutritious food, adequate warm housing, and clothing for a family, relatively few of the more than 30 million people identified as being “in poverty” by the Census Bureau could be characterized as poor.[2] While material hardship definitely exists in the United States, it is restricted in scope and severity. The average poor person, as defined by the government, has a living standard far higher than the public imagines.
“As scholar James Q. Wilson has stated, “The poorest Americans today live a better life than all but the richest persons a hundred years ago.”[3] In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or a PlayStation.[4]“In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.
“The home of the typical poor family was not overcrowded and was in good repair. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. The typical poor American family was also able to obtain medical care when needed. By its own report, the typical family was not hungry and had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.
“Poor families certainly struggle to make ends meet, but in most cases, they are struggling to pay for air conditioning and the cable TV bill as well as to put food on the table. Their living standards are far different from the images of dire deprivation promoted by activists and the mainstream media.
“Regrettably, annual Census reports not only exaggerate current poverty, but also suggest that the number of poor persons [5] and their living conditions have remained virtually unchanged for four decades or more. In reality, the living conditions of poor Americans have shown significant improvement over time.
“Consumer items that were luxuries or significant purchases for the middle class a few decades ago have become commonplace in poor households. In part, this is caused by a normal downward trend in price following the introduction of a new product. Initially, new products tend to be expensive and available only to the affluent. Over time, prices fall sharply, and the product saturates the entire population, including poor households.”
An excerpt, with links at the jump.
“Abstract: For decades, the U.S. Census Bureau has reported that over 30 million Americans were living in “poverty,” but the bureau’s definition of poverty differs widely from that held by most Americans. In fact, other government surveys show that most of the persons whom the government defines as “in poverty” are not poor in any ordinary sense of the term. The overwhelming majority of the poor have air conditioning, cable TV, and a host of other modern amenities. They are well housed, have an adequate and reasonably steady supply of food, and have met their other basic needs, including medical care. Some poor Americans do experience significant hardships, including temporary food shortages or inadequate housing, but these individuals are a minority within the overall poverty population. Poverty remains an issue of serious social concern, but accurate information about that problem is essential in crafting wise public policy. Exaggeration and misinformation about poverty obscure the nature, extent, and causes of real material deprivation, thereby hampering the development of well-targeted, effective programs to reduce the problem.
“Each year for the past two decades, the U.S. Census Bureau has reported that over 30 million Americans were living in “poverty.” In recent years, the Census has reported that one in seven Americans are poor. But what does it mean to be “poor” in America? How poor are America’s poor?
“For most Americans, the word “poverty” suggests destitution: an inability to provide a family with nutritious food, clothing, and reasonable shelter. For example, the Poverty Pulse poll taken by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development asked the general public: “How would you describe being poor in the U.S.?” The overwhelming majority of responses focused on homelessness, hunger or not being able to eat properly, and not being able to meet basic needs.[1] That perception is bolstered by news stories about poverty that routinely feature homelessness and hunger.
“Yet if poverty means lacking nutritious food, adequate warm housing, and clothing for a family, relatively few of the more than 30 million people identified as being “in poverty” by the Census Bureau could be characterized as poor.[2] While material hardship definitely exists in the United States, it is restricted in scope and severity. The average poor person, as defined by the government, has a living standard far higher than the public imagines.
“As scholar James Q. Wilson has stated, “The poorest Americans today live a better life than all but the richest persons a hundred years ago.”[3] In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or a PlayStation.[4]“In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.
“The home of the typical poor family was not overcrowded and was in good repair. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. The typical poor American family was also able to obtain medical care when needed. By its own report, the typical family was not hungry and had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.
“Poor families certainly struggle to make ends meet, but in most cases, they are struggling to pay for air conditioning and the cable TV bill as well as to put food on the table. Their living standards are far different from the images of dire deprivation promoted by activists and the mainstream media.
“Regrettably, annual Census reports not only exaggerate current poverty, but also suggest that the number of poor persons [5] and their living conditions have remained virtually unchanged for four decades or more. In reality, the living conditions of poor Americans have shown significant improvement over time.
“Consumer items that were luxuries or significant purchases for the middle class a few decades ago have become commonplace in poor households. In part, this is caused by a normal downward trend in price following the introduction of a new product. Initially, new products tend to be expensive and available only to the affluent. Over time, prices fall sharply, and the product saturates the entire population, including poor households.”
Friday, May 13, 2011
Nonprofit Works to Merge Towns
A great reminder of how an innovative nonprofit organization can impact public policy comes to us from New Jersey, as reported by the Daily Record.
An excerpt.
“MENDHAM — Forces are converging to unite both Mendhams, both Chesters and Washington Township under one municipal government and one school system.
“It is a plan Gina Genovese, co-founder of Courage to Connect NJ, encouraged Wednesday at a Mendham Borough Library forum that drew two dozen homeowners.
“The nonprofit, which has given some 30 presentations statewide since it formed last year, is pushing the idea that true savings occur when five to 10 municipalities connect by sharing a government and keeping their individual identities as neighborhoods.
“A band of 15 residents from the Chesters and Mendhams, now emerging publicly as the Mendham Chester Alliance, said at the forum that they have calculated that uniting their four municipalities under one government and one school system would save $32 million a year.
“If you adjust the tax formula and make it the same for each town, that’s about a 30 percent savings on everybody’s taxes,” said Bruce Flitcroft of Mendham Township, the chief executive officer of Alliant Technologies and an alliance member. “That’s huge. How do you argue with it?”
An excerpt.
“MENDHAM — Forces are converging to unite both Mendhams, both Chesters and Washington Township under one municipal government and one school system.
“It is a plan Gina Genovese, co-founder of Courage to Connect NJ, encouraged Wednesday at a Mendham Borough Library forum that drew two dozen homeowners.
“The nonprofit, which has given some 30 presentations statewide since it formed last year, is pushing the idea that true savings occur when five to 10 municipalities connect by sharing a government and keeping their individual identities as neighborhoods.
“A band of 15 residents from the Chesters and Mendhams, now emerging publicly as the Mendham Chester Alliance, said at the forum that they have calculated that uniting their four municipalities under one government and one school system would save $32 million a year.
“If you adjust the tax formula and make it the same for each town, that’s about a 30 percent savings on everybody’s taxes,” said Bruce Flitcroft of Mendham Township, the chief executive officer of Alliant Technologies and an alliance member. “That’s huge. How do you argue with it?”
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Nonprofit Innovation
This nonprofit project in Richmond, Virginia, reported by the Richmond Times Dispatch, is founded on a very creative idea, exactly the kind of help a certain downtown street in Sacramento needs.
An excerpt.
“Adam Lovelady found a place to get help with a modest overhaul of his front yard on Richmond's North Side.
“With little money to spend, he became the first client of the nonprofit Storefront for Community Design, which opened in February as an affordable resource for design and building projects throughout the city.
“Lovelady was paired with a volunteer trained in landscape architecture and ended up with a sketched plan for his yard. Following the suggestions of Juliellen Sarver, Lovelady got to work, digging up and replanting about 15 shrubs, spreading mulch and clearing a path to recognize his 2½-year-old son Carter's route to the side yard.
"The sod will have to wait for another year and another budget," Lovelady said.
“The Storefront, which is being funded by the city along with individuals, companies and organizations, operates on the notion that the quality of a neighborhood is determined in part by its design.
“The center tries to help by matching prospective projects with professionals who can help navigate the city's bureaucracy and shed light on possibilities.
"The average person is not exposed to design professionals. This provides a forum for that," said Andrew Moore, a member of the Storefront's advisory committee and a senior associate with Glavé & Holmes Architecture.
"It's about quality and inclusion," added board member Mary Harding Sadler, a historical architect with Sadler & Whitehead Architects and chairwoman of the city's Commission of Architectural Review. "It's about the whole city, raising the bar and making high-quality design possible."
“The Storefront's first hour of service is free. After that, rates are charged on a sliding schedule.”
An excerpt.
“Adam Lovelady found a place to get help with a modest overhaul of his front yard on Richmond's North Side.
“With little money to spend, he became the first client of the nonprofit Storefront for Community Design, which opened in February as an affordable resource for design and building projects throughout the city.
“Lovelady was paired with a volunteer trained in landscape architecture and ended up with a sketched plan for his yard. Following the suggestions of Juliellen Sarver, Lovelady got to work, digging up and replanting about 15 shrubs, spreading mulch and clearing a path to recognize his 2½-year-old son Carter's route to the side yard.
"The sod will have to wait for another year and another budget," Lovelady said.
“The Storefront, which is being funded by the city along with individuals, companies and organizations, operates on the notion that the quality of a neighborhood is determined in part by its design.
“The center tries to help by matching prospective projects with professionals who can help navigate the city's bureaucracy and shed light on possibilities.
"The average person is not exposed to design professionals. This provides a forum for that," said Andrew Moore, a member of the Storefront's advisory committee and a senior associate with Glavé & Holmes Architecture.
"It's about quality and inclusion," added board member Mary Harding Sadler, a historical architect with Sadler & Whitehead Architects and chairwoman of the city's Commission of Architectural Review. "It's about the whole city, raising the bar and making high-quality design possible."
“The Storefront's first hour of service is free. After that, rates are charged on a sliding schedule.”
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
The Ancient Exploitation
It is surely that directed towards women—and the prevalence of nonprofits working to help women, even in the advanced culture of the United States, testifies to that—and thankfully, in the regions where the exploitation of women is still pronounced, it continues to be challenged, as reported by Harvard Business Weekly.
An excerpt.
“India is a country where many women struggle for survival from the day they are born. Girls in India are less likely to be breastfed than boys, for instance, and less likely to be immunized.
“But India also has the highest number of elected female representatives in the world. A 1993 constitutional amendment meant to broaden the scope and accessibility of democracy called for the creation of directly elected local councils at the district, intermediate, and village levels, and mandated that one-third of all council seats be filled by women. The amendment is an ongoing policy experiment of sorts, on an epic scale.
“As Harvard Business School professor Lakshmi Iyer and her colleagues discovered, it's been producing encouraging results. Their research suggests that disadvantaged or minority groups in India whose members are elected to local governments have not only more of a "political voice" but also more access to and better results from the justice system.
“In the working paper The Power of Political Voice: Women's Political Representation and Crime in India, Iyer, Anandi Mani (University of Warwick), and Prachi Mishra and Petia Topalova (International Monetary Fund) examine the effect that mandated political representation for women has had on crimes against women.”
An excerpt.
“India is a country where many women struggle for survival from the day they are born. Girls in India are less likely to be breastfed than boys, for instance, and less likely to be immunized.
“But India also has the highest number of elected female representatives in the world. A 1993 constitutional amendment meant to broaden the scope and accessibility of democracy called for the creation of directly elected local councils at the district, intermediate, and village levels, and mandated that one-third of all council seats be filled by women. The amendment is an ongoing policy experiment of sorts, on an epic scale.
“As Harvard Business School professor Lakshmi Iyer and her colleagues discovered, it's been producing encouraging results. Their research suggests that disadvantaged or minority groups in India whose members are elected to local governments have not only more of a "political voice" but also more access to and better results from the justice system.
“In the working paper The Power of Political Voice: Women's Political Representation and Crime in India, Iyer, Anandi Mani (University of Warwick), and Prachi Mishra and Petia Topalova (International Monetary Fund) examine the effect that mandated political representation for women has had on crimes against women.”
Monday, May 2, 2011
Poverty News
This story from the San Francisco Chronicle reports on the coverage of poverty issues.
An excerpt.
“Considering the unparalleled wealth of this nation, we live in awful times for far too many people, and they show little sign of getting better soon. As a journalist, I feel there has never been a more critical time for reporting on poverty and its byproducts of homelessness and despair.
“Middle-class people are getting crushed into the working class, and the working class is getting crushed into the working poor. They’re all putting in more hours for diminishing pay, and the outlook for the future is for more of the same.
“Unless, of course, you are rich. For multi-millionaires, these are boom times—the culmination of 30-plus years of Reaganomics and its descendants pushing income to top earners while raising taxes and fees on the lower end of the economic scale.
“The average CEO made about 40 times more than the average worker when I became a professional reporter three decades ago. Today that ratio is about 350 to one. Today, the wealthiest one percent of Americans gets a quarter of the nation’s income. When I became a reporter, they got a tenth.
“That kind of split between the wealthy and the middle and poor hasn’t been seen in America since the late 1920s—just before the Great Depression.
“Other times have critically needed poverty reporting of course, such as the 1950s and ’60s when the War on Poverty and civil rights movement were being crafted. But none more so than now. Between America’s growing have-and-have-not split and our rapidly declining international economic prowess eroding the ability to bounce back, we face a turning point that demands intensive and immediate ground-level attention to the struggling middle and under classes.
“But that is more easily hoped for than done. The trouble with reporting about poverty for most news outlets is that it is messy. It always has been.
“Poverty reporting comes automatically freighted with left-and-right wing arguments that paint the economic landscape in black and white terms and sling contrasting statistics and anecdote-driven contentions to prove their points. You have to give them all attention, sorting through the mountains of official and unofficial accounts to get to some bedrock facts.”
An excerpt.
“Considering the unparalleled wealth of this nation, we live in awful times for far too many people, and they show little sign of getting better soon. As a journalist, I feel there has never been a more critical time for reporting on poverty and its byproducts of homelessness and despair.
“Middle-class people are getting crushed into the working class, and the working class is getting crushed into the working poor. They’re all putting in more hours for diminishing pay, and the outlook for the future is for more of the same.
“Unless, of course, you are rich. For multi-millionaires, these are boom times—the culmination of 30-plus years of Reaganomics and its descendants pushing income to top earners while raising taxes and fees on the lower end of the economic scale.
“The average CEO made about 40 times more than the average worker when I became a professional reporter three decades ago. Today that ratio is about 350 to one. Today, the wealthiest one percent of Americans gets a quarter of the nation’s income. When I became a reporter, they got a tenth.
“That kind of split between the wealthy and the middle and poor hasn’t been seen in America since the late 1920s—just before the Great Depression.
“Other times have critically needed poverty reporting of course, such as the 1950s and ’60s when the War on Poverty and civil rights movement were being crafted. But none more so than now. Between America’s growing have-and-have-not split and our rapidly declining international economic prowess eroding the ability to bounce back, we face a turning point that demands intensive and immediate ground-level attention to the struggling middle and under classes.
“But that is more easily hoped for than done. The trouble with reporting about poverty for most news outlets is that it is messy. It always has been.
“Poverty reporting comes automatically freighted with left-and-right wing arguments that paint the economic landscape in black and white terms and sling contrasting statistics and anecdote-driven contentions to prove their points. You have to give them all attention, sorting through the mountains of official and unofficial accounts to get to some bedrock facts.”
Monday, April 25, 2011
Criminal Justice Program Funding
For programs who work to help prisoners reentering society, a major source of federal funding for those efforts appears to be on track to receive almost as much funding as last year, as reported by the National Reentry Resource Center.
An excerpt.
“On Thursday the House passed the continuing resolution (CR) for the rest of the fiscal year by a 260-167 vote. The Senate followed quickly with a 81-19 vote, avoiding a government shutdown.
“All Department of Justice (DOJ) programs were cut by 17 percent. Several programs were exempt from this cut, including the Office of Violence Against Women, National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Regional Information Sharing Systems, Justice for All, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s programs.
“Council of State Government Justice Center priority programs—the Second Chance Act program, the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (MIOTCRA) program, and the Justice Reinvestment program—fall under state and local law enforcement assistance programs, which were cut by $434 million from the FY10 levels."
An excerpt.
“On Thursday the House passed the continuing resolution (CR) for the rest of the fiscal year by a 260-167 vote. The Senate followed quickly with a 81-19 vote, avoiding a government shutdown.
“All Department of Justice (DOJ) programs were cut by 17 percent. Several programs were exempt from this cut, including the Office of Violence Against Women, National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Regional Information Sharing Systems, Justice for All, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children’s programs.
“Council of State Government Justice Center priority programs—the Second Chance Act program, the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (MIOTCRA) program, and the Justice Reinvestment program—fall under state and local law enforcement assistance programs, which were cut by $434 million from the FY10 levels."
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Light on Nonprofits
Paul Light is one of the more astute observers of the nonprofit sector and his recent article in the Washington Post examines the current winnowing of the sector—especially among small grassroots organizations—resulting from the tightening of government funding which all too many of the small groups are dependent on.
An excerpt.
“The nation's nonprofit sector is a leading indicator of economic collapse and recovery. It tightens first as anxious donors hold onto their dollars, and rebounds last as anxieties finally fade.
“In between the starts and stops, the sector bears the brunt of increasing demand, budget cuts and delayed payments. Reserves begin to disappear, credit lines evaporate and volunteers become clients. Asked to do much more with far less, many nonprofits end up trying to do almost everything with nothing.
“The nonprofit sector is not about to disappear, of course. It's a major industry in its own right with 11 million employees, 63 million volunteers and $1.5 trillion in annual income.
“Nevertheless, there is growing evidence that many nonprofits closed their doors over the past three years, while others are about to do so. In 2008, I estimated that 100,000 of the nation's 1 million tax-exempt nonprofits could go under during the recession. Those exits may or may not be offset by the creation of new nonprofits, but there seems to be little doubt that much of the deforestation is now occurring in low-income communities where service deserts are swallowing up thousands of relatively small community-based organizations. If we could map decimation by census tracks, we'd see the deserts popping up in all the familiar neighborhoods--the ones where the most vulnerable Americans live.”
An excerpt.
“The nation's nonprofit sector is a leading indicator of economic collapse and recovery. It tightens first as anxious donors hold onto their dollars, and rebounds last as anxieties finally fade.
“In between the starts and stops, the sector bears the brunt of increasing demand, budget cuts and delayed payments. Reserves begin to disappear, credit lines evaporate and volunteers become clients. Asked to do much more with far less, many nonprofits end up trying to do almost everything with nothing.
“The nonprofit sector is not about to disappear, of course. It's a major industry in its own right with 11 million employees, 63 million volunteers and $1.5 trillion in annual income.
“Nevertheless, there is growing evidence that many nonprofits closed their doors over the past three years, while others are about to do so. In 2008, I estimated that 100,000 of the nation's 1 million tax-exempt nonprofits could go under during the recession. Those exits may or may not be offset by the creation of new nonprofits, but there seems to be little doubt that much of the deforestation is now occurring in low-income communities where service deserts are swallowing up thousands of relatively small community-based organizations. If we could map decimation by census tracks, we'd see the deserts popping up in all the familiar neighborhoods--the ones where the most vulnerable Americans live.”
Monday, March 14, 2011
Donor Privacy
Bemoaning donor privacy during the process of acquiring nonprofit status, as this article from the Washington Post does, does not mention the American tradition of protecting donor privacy as part of the overall right to privacy Americans come to expect in much of their daily life, and that omission somewhat negates their argument.
An excerpt.
“American Crossroads GPS, an advocacy group that reported spending about $17 million on advertising before the midterm elections, generated controversy by using its nonprofit status to shield donors' identities.
“As it turns out, the Internal Revenue Service hasn't even approved the group's nonprofit status. Crossroads filed an application in September but the agency has not acted on it.
“That's not a problem as far as the law is concerned - the tax code allows an organization to operate as a nonprofit before it receives such status. Many groups do not file the paperwork until it is time to send in their first tax return.
“The issue is more than a matter of paperwork, however. Watchdog groups say that Crossroads and other groups active in campaigns are taking advantage of lax IRS enforcement to offer political donors anonymity.”
An excerpt.
“American Crossroads GPS, an advocacy group that reported spending about $17 million on advertising before the midterm elections, generated controversy by using its nonprofit status to shield donors' identities.
“As it turns out, the Internal Revenue Service hasn't even approved the group's nonprofit status. Crossroads filed an application in September but the agency has not acted on it.
“That's not a problem as far as the law is concerned - the tax code allows an organization to operate as a nonprofit before it receives such status. Many groups do not file the paperwork until it is time to send in their first tax return.
“The issue is more than a matter of paperwork, however. Watchdog groups say that Crossroads and other groups active in campaigns are taking advantage of lax IRS enforcement to offer political donors anonymity.”
Monday, March 7, 2011
Working with the Homeless
Thoreau is often claimed by those who are homeless by choice, as their patron saint, though his perspective is congruent with that of Saint-Exupery—who would never be claimed as a patron saint by the homeless.
Here is Thoreau on the poor.
“Be sure that you give the poor the aid they most need, though it be your example which leaves them far behind. If you give money, spend yourself with it, and do not merely abandon it to them. We make curious mistakes sometimes. Often the poor man is not so cold and hungry as he is dirty and ragged and gross. It is partly his taste, and not merely his misfortune. If you give him money, he will perhaps buy more rags with it. I was wont to pity the clumsy Irish laborers who cut ice on the pond, in such mean and ragged clothes, while I shivered in my more tidy and somewhat more fashionable garments, till, one bitter cold day, one who had slipped into the water came to my house to warm him, and I saw him strip off three pairs of pants and two pairs of stockings ere he got down to the skin, though they were dirty and ragged enough, it is true, and that he could afford to refuse the extra garments which I offered him, he had so many intra ones. This ducking was the very thing he needed. Then I began to pity myself, and I saw that it would be a greater charity to bestow on me a flannel shirt than a whole slop-shop on him. There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root, and it may be that he who bestows the largest amount of time and money on the needy is doing the most by his mode of life to produce that misery which he strives in vain to relieve.
(Thoreau, H. D. (1854). Walden. New York: Book-of-the-Month Club, (1996) pp. 97-98)
Here is Saint-Exupery.
“All too often have I seen pity led astray. But we who govern men have learnt to plumb their hearts, and we bestow compassion only on what is worthy of our concern. No pity waste I on the shrilly voiced afflictions that fret women’s hearts. As I withhold it from the dying and from the dead. And I know wherefore.
“A time there was, in my young days, when I pitied beggars and their sores. I hired physicians and procured balsams for them. Caravans from a far-off island brought me those rare unguents laced with gold that mend the torn skin above the flesh. Thus did I until the day when I discovered that beggars cling to their stench as to something rare and precious. For I had caught them scratching away their scabs and smearing their bodies with dung, like the husbandman who spreads manure over his garden plot, so as to wean from it the crimson flower. Vying with each other, they flaunted their corruption, and bragged of the alms they wrung from the tender-hearted. He who wheedled most likened himself to a high priest bringing forth from the shrine his goodliest idol for all to gape at and heap with offerings. When they deigned to consult my physicians, it was in the hope that the hugeness and virulence of their cankers would astound him. And how nimbly they shuffled their stumps to have room made for them in the market places! Thus they took the kindness done them for a homage, proffering their limbs to unctions that flattered their self-esteem.
“But no sooner were they healed than they found themselves of no account, like barren soil that feeds nothing; and they made haste to revive the ulcers that formerly had battened on their flesh. Then, clad once more in a motley of scabs and sores, they strutted it, begging-bowl in hand, and squatted beside the caravan road where, crying up their noisome gods, they levied tribute of the wayfarers.”
(Saint-Exupery, A. (1950). The Wisdom of the Sands. New York: Harcourt, Brace and company. pp. 3-4)
Here is Thoreau on the poor.
“Be sure that you give the poor the aid they most need, though it be your example which leaves them far behind. If you give money, spend yourself with it, and do not merely abandon it to them. We make curious mistakes sometimes. Often the poor man is not so cold and hungry as he is dirty and ragged and gross. It is partly his taste, and not merely his misfortune. If you give him money, he will perhaps buy more rags with it. I was wont to pity the clumsy Irish laborers who cut ice on the pond, in such mean and ragged clothes, while I shivered in my more tidy and somewhat more fashionable garments, till, one bitter cold day, one who had slipped into the water came to my house to warm him, and I saw him strip off three pairs of pants and two pairs of stockings ere he got down to the skin, though they were dirty and ragged enough, it is true, and that he could afford to refuse the extra garments which I offered him, he had so many intra ones. This ducking was the very thing he needed. Then I began to pity myself, and I saw that it would be a greater charity to bestow on me a flannel shirt than a whole slop-shop on him. There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root, and it may be that he who bestows the largest amount of time and money on the needy is doing the most by his mode of life to produce that misery which he strives in vain to relieve.
(Thoreau, H. D. (1854). Walden. New York: Book-of-the-Month Club, (1996) pp. 97-98)
Here is Saint-Exupery.
“All too often have I seen pity led astray. But we who govern men have learnt to plumb their hearts, and we bestow compassion only on what is worthy of our concern. No pity waste I on the shrilly voiced afflictions that fret women’s hearts. As I withhold it from the dying and from the dead. And I know wherefore.
“A time there was, in my young days, when I pitied beggars and their sores. I hired physicians and procured balsams for them. Caravans from a far-off island brought me those rare unguents laced with gold that mend the torn skin above the flesh. Thus did I until the day when I discovered that beggars cling to their stench as to something rare and precious. For I had caught them scratching away their scabs and smearing their bodies with dung, like the husbandman who spreads manure over his garden plot, so as to wean from it the crimson flower. Vying with each other, they flaunted their corruption, and bragged of the alms they wrung from the tender-hearted. He who wheedled most likened himself to a high priest bringing forth from the shrine his goodliest idol for all to gape at and heap with offerings. When they deigned to consult my physicians, it was in the hope that the hugeness and virulence of their cankers would astound him. And how nimbly they shuffled their stumps to have room made for them in the market places! Thus they took the kindness done them for a homage, proffering their limbs to unctions that flattered their self-esteem.
“But no sooner were they healed than they found themselves of no account, like barren soil that feeds nothing; and they made haste to revive the ulcers that formerly had battened on their flesh. Then, clad once more in a motley of scabs and sores, they strutted it, begging-bowl in hand, and squatted beside the caravan road where, crying up their noisome gods, they levied tribute of the wayfarers.”
(Saint-Exupery, A. (1950). The Wisdom of the Sands. New York: Harcourt, Brace and company. pp. 3-4)
Friday, March 4, 2011
Public Pensions
An article from the California Chamber of Commerce, reporting on a Little Hoover Commission report, that if followed, would impact public pensions substantially, might also impact those from the nonprofit sector.
An excerpt.
“(March 4, 2011) With the debate over public sector pension costs roiling the nation, a bipartisan, independent state commission released a report charting a bold path for pension reforms that would create both short- and long-term budget savings.
“The Little Hoover Commission unanimously adopted Public Pensions for Retirement Security, calling for legislative action to establish the legal authority to allow state and local governments to freeze pension benefits for current workers, and allowing those workers to accrue future benefits under more sustainable pension plans.
“Reform for Current Workforce
“After 10 months of public hearings and background research, commissioners concluded that California’s pension crisis cannot be solved without addressing the obligations of current employees, many of whom have accrued generous benefits augmented during the go-go years of the dot.com and real estate bubbles.
“Without doubt, the proposal will face significant political and legal hurdles. But ignoring the burden that the current obligations place on government budgets and on taxpayers is like pretending the underwater earthquake won’t create a tsunami. The disaster will happen; the only question is how soon. In the words of the commission’s report, “Pension costs will crush government.”
“The commission included a number of forward-looking reforms, too. It recommended a “hybrid” pension model that combines a lower defined-benefit pension formula with an employer-matched and risk-managed defined-contribution plan.
“The commission also suggested that the state explore extending Social Security old-age benefits to uncovered state and local employees, as is the case with the federal workforce.”
An excerpt.
“(March 4, 2011) With the debate over public sector pension costs roiling the nation, a bipartisan, independent state commission released a report charting a bold path for pension reforms that would create both short- and long-term budget savings.
“The Little Hoover Commission unanimously adopted Public Pensions for Retirement Security, calling for legislative action to establish the legal authority to allow state and local governments to freeze pension benefits for current workers, and allowing those workers to accrue future benefits under more sustainable pension plans.
“Reform for Current Workforce
“After 10 months of public hearings and background research, commissioners concluded that California’s pension crisis cannot be solved without addressing the obligations of current employees, many of whom have accrued generous benefits augmented during the go-go years of the dot.com and real estate bubbles.
“Without doubt, the proposal will face significant political and legal hurdles. But ignoring the burden that the current obligations place on government budgets and on taxpayers is like pretending the underwater earthquake won’t create a tsunami. The disaster will happen; the only question is how soon. In the words of the commission’s report, “Pension costs will crush government.”
“The commission included a number of forward-looking reforms, too. It recommended a “hybrid” pension model that combines a lower defined-benefit pension formula with an employer-matched and risk-managed defined-contribution plan.
“The commission also suggested that the state explore extending Social Security old-age benefits to uncovered state and local employees, as is the case with the federal workforce.”
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Good Men
The nonprofit sector has traditionally been the place in the American working world where women have taken the lead, and that lead has now extended into other areas of life, leaving many to ask the question which is the title of this article in the Wall Street Journal, Where Have The Good Men Gone?
An excerpt.
“Not so long ago, the average American man in his 20s had achieved most of the milestones of adulthood: a high-school diploma, financial independence, marriage and children. Today, most men in their 20s hang out in a novel sort of limbo, a hybrid state of semi-hormonal adolescence and responsible self-reliance. This "pre-adulthood" has much to recommend it, especially for the college-educated. But it's time to state what has become obvious to legions of frustrated young women: It doesn't bring out the best in men.
"We are sick of hooking up with guys," writes the comedian Julie Klausner, author of a touchingly funny 2010 book, "I Don't Care About Your Band: What I Learned from Indie Rockers, Trust Funders, Pornographers, Felons, Faux-Sensitive Hipsters and Other Guys I've Dated." What Ms. Klausner means by "guys" is males who are not boys or men but something in between. "Guys talk about 'Star Wars' like it's not a movie made for people half their age; a guy's idea of a perfect night is a hang around the PlayStation with his bandmates, or a trip to Vegas with his college friends.... They are more like the kids we babysat than the dads who drove us home." One female reviewer of Ms. Kausner's book wrote, "I had to stop several times while reading and think: Wait, did I date this same guy?"
“For most of us, the cultural habitat of pre-adulthood no longer seems noteworthy. After all, popular culture has been crowded with pre-adults for almost two decades. Hollywood started the affair in the early 1990s with movies like "Singles," "Reality Bites," "Single White Female" and "Swingers." Television soon deepened the relationship, giving us the agreeable company of Monica, Joey, Rachel and Ross; Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer; Carrie, Miranda, et al.
“But for all its familiarity, pre-adulthood represents a momentous sociological development. It's no exaggeration to say that having large numbers of single young men and women living independently, while also having enough disposable income to avoid ever messing up their kitchens, is something entirely new in human experience. Yes, at other points in Western history young people have waited well into their 20s to marry, and yes, office girls and bachelor lawyers have been working and finding amusement in cities for more than a century. But their numbers and their money supply were always relatively small. Today's pre-adults are a different matter. They are a major demographic event.
“What also makes pre-adulthood something new is its radical reversal of the sexual hierarchy. Among pre-adults, women are the first sex. They graduate from college in greater numbers (among Americans ages 25 to 34, 34% of women now have a bachelor's degree but just 27% of men), and they have higher GPAs. As most professors tell it, they also have more confidence and drive. These strengths carry women through their 20s, when they are more likely than men to be in grad school and making strides in the workplace. In a number of cities, they are even out-earning their brothers and boyfriends.
“Still, for these women, one key question won't go away: Where have the good men gone? Their male peers often come across as aging frat boys, maladroit geeks or grubby slackers—a gender gap neatly crystallized by the director Judd Apatow in his hit 2007 movie "Knocked Up." The story's hero is 23-year-old Ben Stone (Seth Rogen), who has a drunken fling with Allison Scott (Katherine Heigl) and gets her pregnant. Ben lives in a Los Angeles crash pad with a group of grubby friends who spend their days playing videogames, smoking pot and unsuccessfully planning to launch a porn website. Allison, by contrast, is on her way up as a television reporter and lives in a neatly kept apartment with what appear to be clean sheets and towels. Once she decides to have the baby, she figures out what needs to be done and does it. Ben can only stumble his way toward being a responsible grownup.”
An excerpt.
“Not so long ago, the average American man in his 20s had achieved most of the milestones of adulthood: a high-school diploma, financial independence, marriage and children. Today, most men in their 20s hang out in a novel sort of limbo, a hybrid state of semi-hormonal adolescence and responsible self-reliance. This "pre-adulthood" has much to recommend it, especially for the college-educated. But it's time to state what has become obvious to legions of frustrated young women: It doesn't bring out the best in men.
"We are sick of hooking up with guys," writes the comedian Julie Klausner, author of a touchingly funny 2010 book, "I Don't Care About Your Band: What I Learned from Indie Rockers, Trust Funders, Pornographers, Felons, Faux-Sensitive Hipsters and Other Guys I've Dated." What Ms. Klausner means by "guys" is males who are not boys or men but something in between. "Guys talk about 'Star Wars' like it's not a movie made for people half their age; a guy's idea of a perfect night is a hang around the PlayStation with his bandmates, or a trip to Vegas with his college friends.... They are more like the kids we babysat than the dads who drove us home." One female reviewer of Ms. Kausner's book wrote, "I had to stop several times while reading and think: Wait, did I date this same guy?"
“For most of us, the cultural habitat of pre-adulthood no longer seems noteworthy. After all, popular culture has been crowded with pre-adults for almost two decades. Hollywood started the affair in the early 1990s with movies like "Singles," "Reality Bites," "Single White Female" and "Swingers." Television soon deepened the relationship, giving us the agreeable company of Monica, Joey, Rachel and Ross; Jerry, Elaine, George and Kramer; Carrie, Miranda, et al.
“But for all its familiarity, pre-adulthood represents a momentous sociological development. It's no exaggeration to say that having large numbers of single young men and women living independently, while also having enough disposable income to avoid ever messing up their kitchens, is something entirely new in human experience. Yes, at other points in Western history young people have waited well into their 20s to marry, and yes, office girls and bachelor lawyers have been working and finding amusement in cities for more than a century. But their numbers and their money supply were always relatively small. Today's pre-adults are a different matter. They are a major demographic event.
“What also makes pre-adulthood something new is its radical reversal of the sexual hierarchy. Among pre-adults, women are the first sex. They graduate from college in greater numbers (among Americans ages 25 to 34, 34% of women now have a bachelor's degree but just 27% of men), and they have higher GPAs. As most professors tell it, they also have more confidence and drive. These strengths carry women through their 20s, when they are more likely than men to be in grad school and making strides in the workplace. In a number of cities, they are even out-earning their brothers and boyfriends.
“Still, for these women, one key question won't go away: Where have the good men gone? Their male peers often come across as aging frat boys, maladroit geeks or grubby slackers—a gender gap neatly crystallized by the director Judd Apatow in his hit 2007 movie "Knocked Up." The story's hero is 23-year-old Ben Stone (Seth Rogen), who has a drunken fling with Allison Scott (Katherine Heigl) and gets her pregnant. Ben lives in a Los Angeles crash pad with a group of grubby friends who spend their days playing videogames, smoking pot and unsuccessfully planning to launch a porn website. Allison, by contrast, is on her way up as a television reporter and lives in a neatly kept apartment with what appear to be clean sheets and towels. Once she decides to have the baby, she figures out what needs to be done and does it. Ben can only stumble his way toward being a responsible grownup.”
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Nonprofit News Site in LA?
As reported by the Los Angeles Times, this new resource could come online in the future.
An excerpt.
“I've been wondering for a couple of years whether someone would bring Los Angeles the kind of not-for-profit news website that has popped up in cities like San Diego, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Austin and Chicago.
“That day may be drawing closer, as venture capitalist and former newspaper executive Tom Unterman has been quietly exploring the formation of such an organization to focus on public policy issues.
“Unterman has been quietly discussing the idea with a handful of community leaders around Los Angeles on and off for at least a year, with his deliberations picking up momentum of late. He still doesn't have a formal plan or the partners he would seek to launch the site, but told me he expects to decide this spring whether to go ahead.
"A good, smart, nonprofit journalism effort could be a very nice complementary piece to the media picture here in L.A.," said Unterman, former chief financial officer for Times Mirror Co., which published the Los Angeles Times before it was bought by the Tribune Co. in 2000. "Particularly if it focused on investigative work and filled a gap in the kind of stories that for-profit media can't persistently fill now because of changes in the economics of the news business."
“While "very hopeful" about making the site a reality, the founder of the Santa Monica-based investment firm Rustic Canyon Partners said the key would be coming up with a plan to sustain such a venture beyond the startup phase — which he estimated would last three years and cost $10 million.
“While reserving judgment on the many particulars that remain unclear, I can't think of any substantial reason not to root for the opening of another news outlet in our region. Yes, it would bring more competition for stories and perhaps for journalists. But there are plenty of good unemployed scribes raring to get back at it, and more being minted every day.
“Journalists should operate from the assumption that more information — as long as it's thoughtfully collected and delivered — is better. Most of the cities that have been home to nonprofit news ventures over the last half-dozen years have seen a nice flowering of stories and competition. In most of those cities, the operators will concede they don't have the size to do a lot of the daily coverage established news outlets still provide.”
An excerpt.
“I've been wondering for a couple of years whether someone would bring Los Angeles the kind of not-for-profit news website that has popped up in cities like San Diego, San Francisco, Minneapolis, Austin and Chicago.
“That day may be drawing closer, as venture capitalist and former newspaper executive Tom Unterman has been quietly exploring the formation of such an organization to focus on public policy issues.
“Unterman has been quietly discussing the idea with a handful of community leaders around Los Angeles on and off for at least a year, with his deliberations picking up momentum of late. He still doesn't have a formal plan or the partners he would seek to launch the site, but told me he expects to decide this spring whether to go ahead.
"A good, smart, nonprofit journalism effort could be a very nice complementary piece to the media picture here in L.A.," said Unterman, former chief financial officer for Times Mirror Co., which published the Los Angeles Times before it was bought by the Tribune Co. in 2000. "Particularly if it focused on investigative work and filled a gap in the kind of stories that for-profit media can't persistently fill now because of changes in the economics of the news business."
“While "very hopeful" about making the site a reality, the founder of the Santa Monica-based investment firm Rustic Canyon Partners said the key would be coming up with a plan to sustain such a venture beyond the startup phase — which he estimated would last three years and cost $10 million.
“While reserving judgment on the many particulars that remain unclear, I can't think of any substantial reason not to root for the opening of another news outlet in our region. Yes, it would bring more competition for stories and perhaps for journalists. But there are plenty of good unemployed scribes raring to get back at it, and more being minted every day.
“Journalists should operate from the assumption that more information — as long as it's thoughtfully collected and delivered — is better. Most of the cities that have been home to nonprofit news ventures over the last half-dozen years have seen a nice flowering of stories and competition. In most of those cities, the operators will concede they don't have the size to do a lot of the daily coverage established news outlets still provide.”
Monday, February 14, 2011
New Journal on Nonprofit Policy
It is being produced by the Berkeley Electronic Press from the University of California, Berkeley, and the first issue was in December of 2010.
About the Journal
“Nonprofit Policy Forum (NPF) provides academics, policy-makers, and nonprofit leaders access to the information they require in a form relevant to their scholarly, professional, and organizational needs. NPF responds to the direct concerns of nonprofit policy-makers and policy advocates. Through the thinking, experience, and the advice of its editorial and policy board members, NPF (1) identifies and frames nonprofit policy issues in a concise and responsive way, (2) provides essential information to public and private organizations, and (3) is particularly pertinent to the fast growing nonprofit sector. No other public policy or nonprofit-related journal focuses on the nexus of public policy and the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Policy Forum is an international journal that seeks to contribute to the development of the field of nonprofit related policy research, more clearly define the role of the sector in the policy and advocacy process, and build a stronger research base on public policy and nonprofit organizations. Our goal is to develop a critical mass of research that examines the role of nonprofits in shaping public policy and the impact of public policies on the nonprofit sector.”
About the Journal
“Nonprofit Policy Forum (NPF) provides academics, policy-makers, and nonprofit leaders access to the information they require in a form relevant to their scholarly, professional, and organizational needs. NPF responds to the direct concerns of nonprofit policy-makers and policy advocates. Through the thinking, experience, and the advice of its editorial and policy board members, NPF (1) identifies and frames nonprofit policy issues in a concise and responsive way, (2) provides essential information to public and private organizations, and (3) is particularly pertinent to the fast growing nonprofit sector. No other public policy or nonprofit-related journal focuses on the nexus of public policy and the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Policy Forum is an international journal that seeks to contribute to the development of the field of nonprofit related policy research, more clearly define the role of the sector in the policy and advocacy process, and build a stronger research base on public policy and nonprofit organizations. Our goal is to develop a critical mass of research that examines the role of nonprofits in shaping public policy and the impact of public policies on the nonprofit sector.”
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Our America & Valentines Day in Iran
As Tocqueville noted almost 2 centuries ago:
“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools….Thus the most democratic country on earth is found to be, above all, the one where men in our day have most perfected the art of pursuing the object of their common desires in common and have applied this new science to the most objects. Does this result from an accident or could it be that there in fact exists a necessary relation between associations and equality?”
(Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 2000 translation by H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop. pp. 489-490)
With that as a backdrop, consider this article in the Wall Street Journal discussing Iran’s attempt to ban Valentines Day.
An excerpt.
“In another sign of its ever more improvisational approach to governance, the Iranian regime has outlawed Valentine's Day. "Symbols of hearts, half-hearts, red roses, and any activities promoting this day are banned," announced state media last month. "Authorities will take legal action against those who ignore the ban."
“Some 70% of Iran's population is said to be under the age of 30, so it seems natural that Valentine's Day has caught on in a country where the young keep trying to find non-state-mandated rituals to call their own. The state, for its part, continues to respond with a Whack-a-Mole approach to any social ripple not dreamt of in its philosophy.
“Theocratic regimes invariably suffer from the same besetting sin: As the world evolves, they must either revise their antiquated doctrines or try to hold the world rigidly in stasis. Iran's ruling mullahs keep choosing the latter option. And with mosque and state firmly conjoined, there's no stray detail of daily life so arcane that the scriptures can't be mobilized to rein it in.
“The Iranian state has pronounced against unauthorized mingling of the sexes, rap music, rock music, Western music, women playing in bands, too-bright nail polish, laughter in hospital corridors, ancient Persian rites-of-spring celebrations (Nowrooz), and even the mention of foreign food recipes in state media. This last may sound comically implausible, but it was officially announced by a state-run website on Feb. 6. So now the true nature of pasta as an instrument of Western subversion has been revealed.
“The regime's posture turns the smallest garden-variety gestures into thrilling acts of subversion. Slipping a Valentine card to a girlfriend takes on the significance of samizdat. Every firecracker set off during Nowrooz diminishes the police state's claims to omniscience. The mullahs have appointed themselves the enemy of fun; as a result, wherever fun herniates into view, it is a politicized irruption of defiance….
“In the end, Iran's rulers face an impossible task. Their genesis myth of a society based on a codified schema of sacred laws looks neither codified nor sacred. It convinces no one. Instead, the regime seems dedicated above all to stamping out joy wherever it may accidentally arise—a sour, paranoid struggle against irrepressible forces of nature, change, the seasons, music, romance and laughter. The Iranian people can take comfort: No earthly authority has won that particular contest for long.”
“Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds constantly unite. Not only do they have commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but they also have a thousand other kinds: religious, moral, grave, futile, very general and very particular, immense and very small; Americans use associations to give fetes, to found seminaries, to build inns, to raise churches, to distribute books, to send missionaries to the antipodes; in this manner they create hospitals, prisons, schools….Thus the most democratic country on earth is found to be, above all, the one where men in our day have most perfected the art of pursuing the object of their common desires in common and have applied this new science to the most objects. Does this result from an accident or could it be that there in fact exists a necessary relation between associations and equality?”
(Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 2000 translation by H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop. pp. 489-490)
With that as a backdrop, consider this article in the Wall Street Journal discussing Iran’s attempt to ban Valentines Day.
An excerpt.
“In another sign of its ever more improvisational approach to governance, the Iranian regime has outlawed Valentine's Day. "Symbols of hearts, half-hearts, red roses, and any activities promoting this day are banned," announced state media last month. "Authorities will take legal action against those who ignore the ban."
“Some 70% of Iran's population is said to be under the age of 30, so it seems natural that Valentine's Day has caught on in a country where the young keep trying to find non-state-mandated rituals to call their own. The state, for its part, continues to respond with a Whack-a-Mole approach to any social ripple not dreamt of in its philosophy.
“Theocratic regimes invariably suffer from the same besetting sin: As the world evolves, they must either revise their antiquated doctrines or try to hold the world rigidly in stasis. Iran's ruling mullahs keep choosing the latter option. And with mosque and state firmly conjoined, there's no stray detail of daily life so arcane that the scriptures can't be mobilized to rein it in.
“The Iranian state has pronounced against unauthorized mingling of the sexes, rap music, rock music, Western music, women playing in bands, too-bright nail polish, laughter in hospital corridors, ancient Persian rites-of-spring celebrations (Nowrooz), and even the mention of foreign food recipes in state media. This last may sound comically implausible, but it was officially announced by a state-run website on Feb. 6. So now the true nature of pasta as an instrument of Western subversion has been revealed.
“The regime's posture turns the smallest garden-variety gestures into thrilling acts of subversion. Slipping a Valentine card to a girlfriend takes on the significance of samizdat. Every firecracker set off during Nowrooz diminishes the police state's claims to omniscience. The mullahs have appointed themselves the enemy of fun; as a result, wherever fun herniates into view, it is a politicized irruption of defiance….
“In the end, Iran's rulers face an impossible task. Their genesis myth of a society based on a codified schema of sacred laws looks neither codified nor sacred. It convinces no one. Instead, the regime seems dedicated above all to stamping out joy wherever it may accidentally arise—a sour, paranoid struggle against irrepressible forces of nature, change, the seasons, music, romance and laughter. The Iranian people can take comfort: No earthly authority has won that particular contest for long.”
Thursday, February 10, 2011
American Philanthropy
As a result of working on yesterday’s post I came across an excellent article by Heather Mac Donald in City Journal focusing on the efforts to infuse American Philanthropy with identity politics.
An excerpt.
“American philanthropy is the envy of the world. Since colonial times, when Benjamin Franklin’s Junto Society, a proto–think tank of public-minded Philadelphia citizens, developed volunteer fire departments and a lending library, Americans have evolved a unique civic culture of giving and entrepreneurial problem solving. From 1995 to 2002, charitable donations as a percentage of GDP were nearly six times higher in the United States than in France and 14 times higher than in Germany. In 2007, America’s charitable giving amounted to $306 billion. No wonder that European universities and arts organizations look first to their American alumni and patrons for support when their government funding dries up.
“Yet American generosity is under fire. A growing number of activists and politicians argue that foundations should meet diversity targets in their giving and on their staffs. If foundations fail to diversify “voluntarily,” threaten the race, ethnicity, and gender enforcers, they risk legislation requiring them to do so. In other words, the diversity police, having helped bring on the subprime meltdown through mortgage-lending quotas, now want to fix philanthropy. And instead of rebuffing this power grab, the leaders in the field have rolled over and played dead.
“The idea that foundations should view the world through the trivializing lens of identity politics dates back to the 1980s, when some liberal foundations, including the Ford Foundation, started asking groups seeking grants to report the race and sex of their staff and board members. But today, politicians are getting into the act. This latest diversity push began in 2005, when the Greenlining Institute, a “multiethnic advocacy group” in Berkeley, started pumping out studies claiming that foundations were ignoring “communities of color.” (This despite the fact that in California, 39 percent of large foundations’ grants primarily benefit minorities, according to the Foundation Center, a respected research body.) Greenlining’s definition of helping a community of color: bestowing foundation grants on a nonprofit whose staff and board are at least 50 percent minority. In other words, the Greenlining effort is purely a jobs racket. The racial composition of a nonprofit’s staff and board has exactly zero relation to whether it is actually helping minorities. Agronomists supported by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations helped wipe out famine in Southeast Asia by developing high-yield cereal crops; pressure to diversify their labs would have hindered their research, not advanced it.”
An excerpt.
“American philanthropy is the envy of the world. Since colonial times, when Benjamin Franklin’s Junto Society, a proto–think tank of public-minded Philadelphia citizens, developed volunteer fire departments and a lending library, Americans have evolved a unique civic culture of giving and entrepreneurial problem solving. From 1995 to 2002, charitable donations as a percentage of GDP were nearly six times higher in the United States than in France and 14 times higher than in Germany. In 2007, America’s charitable giving amounted to $306 billion. No wonder that European universities and arts organizations look first to their American alumni and patrons for support when their government funding dries up.
“Yet American generosity is under fire. A growing number of activists and politicians argue that foundations should meet diversity targets in their giving and on their staffs. If foundations fail to diversify “voluntarily,” threaten the race, ethnicity, and gender enforcers, they risk legislation requiring them to do so. In other words, the diversity police, having helped bring on the subprime meltdown through mortgage-lending quotas, now want to fix philanthropy. And instead of rebuffing this power grab, the leaders in the field have rolled over and played dead.
“The idea that foundations should view the world through the trivializing lens of identity politics dates back to the 1980s, when some liberal foundations, including the Ford Foundation, started asking groups seeking grants to report the race and sex of their staff and board members. But today, politicians are getting into the act. This latest diversity push began in 2005, when the Greenlining Institute, a “multiethnic advocacy group” in Berkeley, started pumping out studies claiming that foundations were ignoring “communities of color.” (This despite the fact that in California, 39 percent of large foundations’ grants primarily benefit minorities, according to the Foundation Center, a respected research body.) Greenlining’s definition of helping a community of color: bestowing foundation grants on a nonprofit whose staff and board are at least 50 percent minority. In other words, the Greenlining effort is purely a jobs racket. The racial composition of a nonprofit’s staff and board has exactly zero relation to whether it is actually helping minorities. Agronomists supported by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations helped wipe out famine in Southeast Asia by developing high-yield cereal crops; pressure to diversify their labs would have hindered their research, not advanced it.”
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Democracy & Nonprofits
So much of the organized effort to ensure freedom arises and is sustained in the world comes from the nonprofit sector, and that effort is inspired by great ideas, a foundational one of which is explored by the seminal 2004 book by Natan Sharansky, The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny & Terror.
Against the background of what is now occurring in the Middle East, the Wall Street Journal reports on Mr. Sharansky's current perspective.
An excerpt.
“If you want a glimpse of how I think about foreign policy, read Natan Sharansky's book, 'The Case for Democracy.'" With that comment in 2005, George W. Bush created a best seller, impelling hordes of statesmen, policy wonks and journalists to decode this Rosetta Stone of the "freedom agenda."
“In the book, Mr. Sharansky argues that all people, in all cultures, want to live in freedom; that all dictatorships are inherently unstable and therefore threaten the security of other countries; and that Western powers can and should influence how free other countries are. Rarely have these arguments been dramatized as during the past weeks—in Tunisia, Jordan, Yemen and especially Egypt. So late Wednesday night I interviewed Mr. Sharansky to hear his explanation of our current revolutionary moment.
"The reason people are going to the streets and making revolution is their desire not to live in a fear society," Mr. Sharansky says. In his taxonomy, the world is divided between "fear societies" and "free societies," with the difference between them determinable by what he calls a "town square test": Are the people in a given society free to stand in their town square and express their opinions without fear of arrest or physical harm? The answer in Tunisia and Egypt, of course, has long been "no"—as it was in the Soviet bloc countries that faced popular revolutions in 1989.
“The comparison of today's events with 1989 is a common one, but for Mr. Sharansky it is personal. He was born in 1948 in Donetsk (then called Stalino), Ukraine, and in the 1970s and 1980s he was one of the most famous dissidents in the Soviet Union—first as an aide to the nuclear physicist-turned-human rights activist Andrei Sakharov, then as a champion for the rights of Soviet Jews like himself to emigrate. His outspoken advocacy landed him in the Soviet Gulag for nine years (including 200 days on hunger strike).
“Mr. Sharansky was released from prison in 1986, after his wife Avital's tireless campaigning earned his case international renown and the strong support of President Ronald Reagan. He moved to Israel, where he eventually entered politics and served until 2006 in various ministerial posts and in the parliament. Throughout, he preached and wrote about, as his book's subtitle puts it, "the power of freedom to overcome tyranny and terror."
“This idea is the animating feature of a worldview that bucks much conventional wisdom. Uprisings like Tunisia's and Egypt's, he says, make "specialists—Sovietologists, Arabists—say 'Who could have thought only two weeks ago that this will happen?'" But "look at what Middle Eastern democratic dissidents were saying for all these years about the weakness of these regimes from the inside," and you won't be surprised when they topple, he says.
“And yet policy makers from Washington to Tel Aviv have seemingly been in shock. Many of them—on the right and the left—look upon the demise of Hosni Mubarak and the potential rise of the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood with dread.
"Why is there such a big danger that if now there will be free choice for Egyptians, then the Muslim Brotherhood can rise to power?" Mr. Sharansky asks. "Because they are the only organized force which exists in addition to Mubarak's regime." Mr. Mubarak quashed almost all political dissent, with the general acquiescence of his American patrons. But he couldn't stop the Brotherhood from spreading its message in mosques. Meanwhile, he used the Brotherhood as a bogeyman, telling the U.S. that only he stood between radical Islamists and the seat of power.”
Against the background of what is now occurring in the Middle East, the Wall Street Journal reports on Mr. Sharansky's current perspective.
An excerpt.
“If you want a glimpse of how I think about foreign policy, read Natan Sharansky's book, 'The Case for Democracy.'" With that comment in 2005, George W. Bush created a best seller, impelling hordes of statesmen, policy wonks and journalists to decode this Rosetta Stone of the "freedom agenda."
“In the book, Mr. Sharansky argues that all people, in all cultures, want to live in freedom; that all dictatorships are inherently unstable and therefore threaten the security of other countries; and that Western powers can and should influence how free other countries are. Rarely have these arguments been dramatized as during the past weeks—in Tunisia, Jordan, Yemen and especially Egypt. So late Wednesday night I interviewed Mr. Sharansky to hear his explanation of our current revolutionary moment.
"The reason people are going to the streets and making revolution is their desire not to live in a fear society," Mr. Sharansky says. In his taxonomy, the world is divided between "fear societies" and "free societies," with the difference between them determinable by what he calls a "town square test": Are the people in a given society free to stand in their town square and express their opinions without fear of arrest or physical harm? The answer in Tunisia and Egypt, of course, has long been "no"—as it was in the Soviet bloc countries that faced popular revolutions in 1989.
“The comparison of today's events with 1989 is a common one, but for Mr. Sharansky it is personal. He was born in 1948 in Donetsk (then called Stalino), Ukraine, and in the 1970s and 1980s he was one of the most famous dissidents in the Soviet Union—first as an aide to the nuclear physicist-turned-human rights activist Andrei Sakharov, then as a champion for the rights of Soviet Jews like himself to emigrate. His outspoken advocacy landed him in the Soviet Gulag for nine years (including 200 days on hunger strike).
“Mr. Sharansky was released from prison in 1986, after his wife Avital's tireless campaigning earned his case international renown and the strong support of President Ronald Reagan. He moved to Israel, where he eventually entered politics and served until 2006 in various ministerial posts and in the parliament. Throughout, he preached and wrote about, as his book's subtitle puts it, "the power of freedom to overcome tyranny and terror."
“This idea is the animating feature of a worldview that bucks much conventional wisdom. Uprisings like Tunisia's and Egypt's, he says, make "specialists—Sovietologists, Arabists—say 'Who could have thought only two weeks ago that this will happen?'" But "look at what Middle Eastern democratic dissidents were saying for all these years about the weakness of these regimes from the inside," and you won't be surprised when they topple, he says.
“And yet policy makers from Washington to Tel Aviv have seemingly been in shock. Many of them—on the right and the left—look upon the demise of Hosni Mubarak and the potential rise of the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood with dread.
"Why is there such a big danger that if now there will be free choice for Egyptians, then the Muslim Brotherhood can rise to power?" Mr. Sharansky asks. "Because they are the only organized force which exists in addition to Mubarak's regime." Mr. Mubarak quashed almost all political dissent, with the general acquiescence of his American patrons. But he couldn't stop the Brotherhood from spreading its message in mosques. Meanwhile, he used the Brotherhood as a bogeyman, telling the U.S. that only he stood between radical Islamists and the seat of power.”
Friday, February 4, 2011
Redevelopment Funds
As many states, ours is one, debate the future of redevelopment funds which have driven some urban development for several years, it is worthwhile to consider, as this article from the Wall Street Journal does, allowing the effort to become a nonprofit enterprise.
An excerpt.
“Some cash-strapped states have identified another job they want to shift to the private sector: economic development.
“A number of governors are working to turn their development offices into some form of nonprofit private entity, a move that would transfer the task of giving out state grants, tax breaks and other economic incentives from the hands of government.
“The idea, which has as much to do with economic philosophies as with saving money, is mainly gaining ground in states with Republican governors, including Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and Arizona.
"It's a matter of greater flexibility and the ability to act more like a chamber [of commerce] rather than a state agency," said Wisconsin's new Republican governor Scott Walker, adding that private groups are better equipped to create jobs and attract companies.
“As tax revenue has shriveled in recent years, cities and states have moved to privatize various operations, such as state-run liquor stores, local libraries and parking meters.
“Seven states, including Michigan and Florida, already have some form of private group filling the economic-development role. Critics say handing this power to a private entity can create conflicts of interest, because the nonprofits usually have boards made up of public officials and private business leaders. This can create conflicts as these boards help steer tax breaks and incentives.
“Also, in many cases private economic-development agencies aren't subject to the same standards for public disclosure as government agencies, even though they receive government money. In Ohio, where newly elected Gov. John Kasich has proposed dissolving the state's Department of Development and creating an entity called JobsOhio, lawmakers have pushed to increase disclosures and allow the state's inspector general to investigate the proposed entity.
“Advocates say it makes sense to separate the task of creating jobs from large government agencies that often have a broader mission. In Wisconsin, the current Department of Commerce has responsibility for regulation as well as economic development. Among the 400 employees in Ohio's Department of Development, 60 are focused on economic development; the balance handle areas including homeless programs, community development and home energy assistance.”
An excerpt.
“Some cash-strapped states have identified another job they want to shift to the private sector: economic development.
“A number of governors are working to turn their development offices into some form of nonprofit private entity, a move that would transfer the task of giving out state grants, tax breaks and other economic incentives from the hands of government.
“The idea, which has as much to do with economic philosophies as with saving money, is mainly gaining ground in states with Republican governors, including Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and Arizona.
"It's a matter of greater flexibility and the ability to act more like a chamber [of commerce] rather than a state agency," said Wisconsin's new Republican governor Scott Walker, adding that private groups are better equipped to create jobs and attract companies.
“As tax revenue has shriveled in recent years, cities and states have moved to privatize various operations, such as state-run liquor stores, local libraries and parking meters.
“Seven states, including Michigan and Florida, already have some form of private group filling the economic-development role. Critics say handing this power to a private entity can create conflicts of interest, because the nonprofits usually have boards made up of public officials and private business leaders. This can create conflicts as these boards help steer tax breaks and incentives.
“Also, in many cases private economic-development agencies aren't subject to the same standards for public disclosure as government agencies, even though they receive government money. In Ohio, where newly elected Gov. John Kasich has proposed dissolving the state's Department of Development and creating an entity called JobsOhio, lawmakers have pushed to increase disclosures and allow the state's inspector general to investigate the proposed entity.
“Advocates say it makes sense to separate the task of creating jobs from large government agencies that often have a broader mission. In Wisconsin, the current Department of Commerce has responsibility for regulation as well as economic development. Among the 400 employees in Ohio's Department of Development, 60 are focused on economic development; the balance handle areas including homeless programs, community development and home energy assistance.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
