Tag: charity

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies

King’s Dream, Tea Party-Style

In the Washington Post’s Book World segment, surprise was noted how quickly Dick Armey and Matt Kibbe’s Tea Party manifesto, Give Us Liberty, fell off in sales. Why? Perhaps “Tea Party folks . . . already knew who they were and what they believed?”

Good guess.

But what do they believe?

Alveda King is the niece of Martin Luther King, whom she refers to as “Uncle Martin.” Fielding questions from CNN’s Larry King after she had participated in Glenn Beck’s recent Washington rally, Ms. King insisted that “It’s not so much about the man as the message.” The “issues” she emphasized were the ones that Beck, to the surprise of many, had also emphasized: Faith, hope, charity, and honor.

“My uncle said we have to live together as brothers — and I add, as sisters — or ‘perish as fools.’” If Ms. King is not out of place in Beck’s wing of the Tea Party, then what of all the noise about racism? Could widespread opposition to Obama be mainly about policy?

When Rev. Sharpton talked about “going all the way in civil rights,” Ms. King clarified something that might be useful in helping left-leaning folks understand Tea Party folks’ attitude towards policy: “My uncle was not teaching that we needed the government to take care of us.”

His main message had something to do with liberty. And respect for all.

Tea Party people appear to be in the main stream of modern American culture in claiming such ideas as theirs, too.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
too much government

UNkindest Cut of All

One of the sad truths about trying to help folks in far, distant lands, is that so much of the aid gets soaked up in overhead.

But if you think it’s bad with charities, prepare to wince at the United Nation’s Haitian peacekeeping efforts. It turns out that only 4.6 percent of the $495.8 million the UN spends on salaries, hazard pay, and the like goes to “national staff” on the ground in Haiti. The rest goes to support staff at some remove from the island nation’s devastation.

So does $461.9 million out of $495.8 million seem like a good cut for overhead?

Seems steep to me.

The entire budget is well over $700 million. Nearly $200 million of that comes from U.S. taxpayers.

The Fox News story from which I harvested these figures goes on to discuss the boats used to house some personnel. $112,500 per day. One of the boats is nicknamed “The Love Boat.” I don’t think I want to know more.

This should be a big story, except that, in context of today’s typical government operations, it’s not out of the ordinary. These days, operations often get judged not by the good done but by the number of people and dollars associated with it.

People in Haiti suffer. So we naturally don’t want to complain about money spent helping them. But, like so much else in government, efficiency is out of the question.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
tax policy

Taxing Charity

The federal government allows people to give money to non-profit organizations and then deduct the money they give from their taxable income. If you donate to a hospital, a homeless shelter, the Salvation Army or an educational foundation, you don’t have to pay federal income tax on that money.

But President Barack Obama wants to change that longstanding provision, at least for higher income taxpayers — you know those newly suspicious folks who make $250,000 or more a year. These “wealthy people” wouldn’t get to fully deduct their charitable contributions.

Obama insists this won’t matter to donors or to the charities they support. Regarding the hurt this might put on charities, who have already been hit by the economic downturn — and I quote — “It’s not going to cripple them.”

Gee, thanks for not absolutely “crippling” charities.

Studies suggest charitable donations could fall by 5 percent, however. That’s almost $4 billion that won’t go to feed the poor, help the sick, educate people or provide legal defense for citizens fighting for their rights.

As times get tough, now seems a bizarre time to undercut charitable giving. Instead of removing some tax-deductibility from wealthier Americans, we ought to give extra deductibility to everyone.

Isn’t the goal to maximize help for those in need?

Don’t tell me it’s to maximize government’s role, to the exclusion of private charity.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.