The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Marketplace
    • Autos
    • Jobs
    • Real Estate
    • Classifieds
    • Shopping
    • Dining Out
    • Education
    • TWT Store
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • National

    DAVIS: Yankee hater finds love for team

  • National

    Late-season hurricane heads toward Gulf

  • Politics

    Abortion takes driver's seat in debate

  • Sports

    Redskins still going south

  • World

    Democracy a struggle in former Soviet Union

  • Politics

    Roadblock to greet health bill in Senate

  • Politics

    Lieberman vows probe of Hood rampage

Home » Opinion » Editorials

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Shaking the foundations

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
  • Videos

More Editorials Stories

  • EDITORIAL: Mr. Obama, stay away from this wall
  • EDITORIAL: Full 'time' for heinous crimes
  • EDITORIAL: President Obama causes more unemployment
  • EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism

By

Despite our society's significant strides in accepting blacks and other minorities, supporters of race and gender preferences continue to try to perpetuate 1950s attitudes by creatively developing new concerns. Their goal: to expand preferential treatment policies.

In California, private, public and corporate charitable foundations are now being targeted for allegedly not doing enough for minority-run groups. "The Foundation Diversity and Transparency Act" (AB 624), which passed in the California Assembly and is awaiting a vote in the state Senate, would require charitable foundations with assets of $250 million or more to report the race, sex and sexual preferences of its staff, board of directors and grant recipients in the foundation's annual report and on its website. Foundations failing to comply could be subject to fines, legal action and possible revocation of their non-profit status. One group supporting AB 624 is The Greenlining Institute, a left-wing public policy organization headquartered in the radical enclave of Berkeley. According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, the group alleges that minorities are not sufficiently represented in California policy debates. Operating on the notion that this is because minority groups don't have enough money, AB 624 is being sought as a tactic to "shame" foundations into donating more money to minority-led entities.

Why rely on merit when charitable giving can be mandated through the force of law?

The Greenling Institute agenda is clear: use the race card to hijack the power of the state and force charities to fund liberal organizations under the guise of helping minorities.

Like all government meddling, AB 624 will unleash negative consequences. Foundations will be burdened with additional compliance costs. Researching the race, sex and sexual preferences of grant recipients would be time-consuming and waste money better spent on serving the goals of the foundation. Collecting and disclosing such personal information also is a violation of privacy.

Implementation of AB 624 may also deter individuals and companies from establishing philanthropic foundations in the first place. The Greenlining goal is to "shame" foundations. Why establish a foundation with advance knowledge that it will be harassed if it doesn't give away its money in the prescribed, politically-correct manner? Ironically, by seeking to increase donations to certain groups, this legislation may actually result in a chilling effect on overall philanthropy and harm all deserving grant recipients.

While AB 624 only initially affects large foundations, which probably can afford to comply, this is not likely to end. For one thing, there's a likelihood requirements will someday be expanded to cover smaller foundations. Furthermore, California's AB 624 could be a model for lawmakers elsewhere.

California lawmakers would be well-served to read "Not Yours to Give," an essay by the American icon Colonel Davy Crockett recently reprinted by the Foundation for Economic Education. While serving as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Tennessee, Mr. Crockett was challenged by a citizen after a vote to appropriate money for a naval officer's widow. The constituent believed it was not the function of government to be in the charity business, and Mr. Crockett's essay conveys the importance of government's limited role in charity. Since Mr. Crockett's time, the government has overridden this concern.

Given the current economic conditions, more U.S. households are likely to seek charitable assistance. With AB 624, the government is about to make matters worse by interfering in the giving policies of charitable institutions.

Private citizens who are willing to share their wealth should have the freedom to establish foundations based on their personal values and intent. Private donors forced to meet diversity quotas are essentially being subjected to a government-mandated shakedown.

Charities and foundations frequently provide a stepping-stone for the needy. AB 624 would be a stumbling block in their path. Our nation is more equal and accepting than ever before. Allowing a divisive proposal such as AB 624 to advance under the radar would turn back time.

Deneen Borelli is a fellow for the Project 21 black leadership network.

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Ask a Question

You Report

Do you have another point of view, photos, audio, video or more information about a story?

Top Stories

Most Read

  1. EXCLUSIVE: Rare virus poses new threat to troops
  2. Parents buying homes for kids at college
  3. EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism
  4. House OKs health reform bill
  5. Inside the Beltway
More Top Stories »
  1. Sniper's ex-wife speaks out on abuse
  2. Annandale man killed in hit-and-run
  3. Aborted fetus cells used in beauty creams
  4. Sunshine vitamin stirs new debate
  5. PRUDEN: Corpse sits up, gets nice salute

Most Shared

  1. Parents buying homes for kids at college
  2. EXCLUSIVE: Rare virus poses new threat to troops
  3. EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism
  4. Sunshine vitamin stirs new debate
  5. Obama's unlearned lesson
More Top Stories »
  1. NSA surveillance -- of you?
  2. PRUDEN: Corpse sits up, gets nice salute
  3. EDITORIAL: The negative Obama factor
  4. Looking to 2010, GOP focuses on fiscal restraint
  5. Aborted fetus cells used in beauty creams

Most Commented

  1. House OKs health reform bill
  2. EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism
  3. Muslims stunned by Fort Hood shooting
  4. Furious scramble for health reform support
  5. 'Gentle' Army psychiatrist displayed worrisome signs
More Top Stories »
  1. Obama praises those who ended Fort Hood violence
  2. Army chief wary of backlash against Muslim soldiers
  3. Making fun of faith
  4. Israelis unsure of U.S. support
  5. Obama: It's Senate's turn on health care

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin and Melanie Morgan

Question of the day

White House officials and Senate Democrats met in private three times last week to craft health care legislation. Do you think these discussions should be more public?

Blogs & Columns

  • POTUS Notes

    New Dem talking point on Obama approval doesn't wash

  • The Back Story

    12 arrested at Pelosi's office

  • Belief Blog

    Washington goes Greek this week

  • Out of Context

    Foods that might kill libido

  • Technology

    Facebook wins round against phishing spammer

  • On the Fly

    United lifts some 'award' blocking

  • Redskins 360

    Samuels feeling better, hopeful

  • Tara's Two Cents

    On their way to summer vacation..

  • SNOBlog

    Beyond 'Woody'

Videos

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.