White Courtesy Telephone

Charity for the 5th Largest Economy in the World

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

We read with great interest the recent New York Times article describing plans to address California’s $36 billion deficit. Our understanding is that while the state’s health insurance program for children, Healthy Families, will remain in the budget, it will also be cut by $144 million. According to the article, thousands of children who need health care will be placed on a waiting list unless "a private foundation makes up the balance," something the Legislature apparently hopes will happen soon.

Sir, those of us who blog at the White Courtesy Telephone work at foundations that have very little by way of discretionary assets.  We are nevertheless writing to offer to restore the $144 million in cuts. Apart from your undying gratitude, all we ask is that you and the Legislature grant us the power to levy taxes on California residents, a power you have but are apparently too faint of heart to exercise.

We philanthropoids are many things, sir, but we are not girlie men.

We look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,

The White Courtesy Telephone Team

Refreshing Candor From An Immigrant Rights Advocate

We asked Q—, a national immigrant rights advocate, to describe the current environment in her field.*  Here’s her surprising answer …

“The immigrant rights movement is going through an overwhelming, tense, and confused time, which is hopefully setting the stage for changes that have been needed for a long time.

“The down side:

“A lot of people didn’t like the immigration reform legislation in the Senate this year.  But now the only thing that might have been a solution is gone, and both political parties are saying they won’t pursue anything comprehensive and humane for at least the next several years.  And that means the lives of immigrants are likely to get a lot worse before they start to get better.

“We’re facing the entrenchment and elaboration of a separate and unequal legal system for immigrants that doesn’t provide checks and balances necessary for ensuring that the government follows the law.

“We’re facing a lack of hope among Americans—including immigration activists—that the federal government can fix anything, let alone anything as complicated as immigration policy.

“We’re facing an overwhelming number of anti-immigrant measures introduced in cities and states.  According to the National Conference of State Legislatures,

As of July 2, 2007, no fewer than 1404 pieces of legislation related to immigrants and immigration had been introduced among the 50 state legislatures.  From January to July 2nd 2007, 170 bills became law in 41 states ... State legislators have introduced roughly two-and-a-half times more bills in 2007, than in 2006.  The number of enactments from 2006 (84) has more than doubled to 170 in 2007 ... In the continued absence of a comprehensive federal reform of the United States’ challenged immigration system, states have displayed an unprecedented level of activity.

“We’re facing racial profiling, as people are being asked for their documentation on traffic stops if they look ‘foreign.’

“We’re facing attacks in Congress that keep chipping away at the rights of immigrants to argue their cases in court, the power of judges to make decisions about individual cases, and assurances that detention facilities keep people safe.

“We’re facing the enforcement of ‘material support’ laws that define immigrants and others as terrorists if they have ever provided any help to a rebel group, even if that rebel group fought alongside American troops, and even if the choice was to carry water for an army or be shot in the head.

“We’re facing a seemingly endless trail of death at the US-Mexico border.

“We’re facing the tangled interests and assumptions of African Americans, Latinos, labor, agribusiness, churches, and practically every other politically powerful interest group.

“Many immigrant rights activists are feeling overwhelmed and scared.  A lot of people are angry, and some are more reflective than they had been.

Flu Shots: Blogging the Approaching Pandemic

       P   O   S   T   E   D       B   Y       A   L   B   E   R  T

The Department of Health and Human Services is sponsoring a blog summit on preparing for the coming flu pandemic.  I agreed to participate after being assured that bloggers would not be censored and that all comments adhering to reasonable standards would be posted.  You can find influenza and bird flu resources here.  I cross-post my first submission below ...

As with most natural disasters, a flu pandemic will not be an equal opportunity killer.

The winds and rains of Hurricane Katrina buffeted the just and the unjust, the black and the white.  The storm wasn’t selective about the structures it destroyed.

But it didn’t affect all populations equally.  The poor, the elderly, and the infirm were hardest hit, populations least able to shelter properly, or flee, or recover from the storm’s devastating effects.

Likewise, while a flu pandemic can affect anyone, at any income level, those of us who are not already weakened by food insecurity, who have access to quality health care, who can afford to stay home from work to avoid infection—have a much better chance of surviving.

In 2004 there were 46 million uninsured people in the United States, most of them poor or low-income.  Eleven percent of U.S. households in 2005 were food insecure.  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 6.4 million working poor in 2000; by 2003 that number had grown to 7.4 million.

I applaud the efforts of the Department of Health and Human Services to help Americans prepare for an influenza pandemic.  But as I see it, the most effective way to help those in the lowest income brackets prepare for this tragedy is to urge this and all Administrations to bolster—rather than dismantle—the safety net for the poor.

The President’s 2008 budget proposed deep reductions in domestic discretionary spending to continue financing tax cuts for those of us who are well-off.  According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities:

The discretionary programs in the budget subfunction known as “health care services” include community health centers, HIV/AIDS programs (for U.S. residents), maternal and child health programs, the Indian Health Service, substance abuse and mental health treatment ...  This subfunction is slated for $2.5 billion in cuts over the next five years, relative to the expected fiscal year 2007 funding level adjusted for inflation.  The cuts would reach $861 million, or 4.1 percent, in 2012.

The President’s budget also included a provision that would cut the Food Stamp Program by $740 million over the next five years, taking more than 300,000 low-income people off the program in an average month.

If we want to help all Americans prepare for the inevitable flu pandemic, what’s the sense in decreasing, rather than increasing, the resiliency of our most vulnerable neighbors?  What, if anything, did we learn from the experience of Hurricane Katrina?

The Democrats Dance a Box Step Around Lobbying Reform

       P   O   S   T   E   D       B   Y       J   O   H   N

Remember how, during the 2006 elections, exit pollsters reported significant voter frustration with corruption in politics?  Nancy Pelosi, then soon-to-be Speaker of the House, promised a shakedown in Congress.  “The Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history,” she said in an apparently unguarded moment.

As many predicted, the Democrats have already started back-pedaling on meaningful lobbying reform, moving to strike provisions that would:

• Require lobbyists to disclose details about large donations they arrange for politicians.
• Make former lawmakers wait two years, instead of one, before lobbying Congress.
• Bar lobbyists from throwing large parties for lawmakers at national political conventions.

Apparently if it pays, it plays. 

Meanwhile, lawmakers continue their periodic assaults on nonprofit advocacy rights.  Our colleagues at the Alliance for Justice need to be ever-vigilant for legislation that would erode the ability of Third Sector organizations to speak out for or against legislation, register voters, and, in general, engage a wider spectrum of the American public in civic deliberation.

Nonprofit advocacy organizations provide a voice for low-income and other aggrieved communities.  They’re a great democratizing force, frequently challenging government and big industries on a range of issues.

Apparently in politics as in other domains, the squeaky wheel gets the grief—especially if that wheel doesn’t offer you a golf junket to Scotland.

Hunger Strike for the People of Darfur

       P   O   S   T   E   D       B   Y       D   I   X   I   E

Mr. Start Loving describes himself as a “would-be disciple of Jesus.”  He’s on the 36th day of a hunger strike that he hopes will awaken our moral conscience to the genocide of the Fur, Zaghawa, and Massaleit people of the Darfur region in Sudan.

He’ll stop his water-only hunger strike when he’s assured that there will be an “airtight protection” of the people of Darfur against attacks by the Janjaweed, a militia group recruited by the Sudanese government from among the Bedouin Arabs of the region.

This is an unprecedented opportunity, he believes, for the United States to exercise leadership and reacquire some of the moral authority it has lost over the past six years.  According to his analysis, the United States refuses to take more vigorous action because it doesn’t want to upset China, a country that buys 70 percent of Sudan’s oil.

You can read his blogs here and here.

Let's Just Skip the Election

       P   O   S   T   E   D       B   Y       D   I   X   I   E

It doesn’t matter who you vote for, the government always gets in.

I suppose that’s what was on the mind of Mr. Hohensee, pictured at right.  His flyer reads:

rick_hohensee@email.com for President by Constitutional Amendment # Senator Feingold for VP # my pre-Murtha Iraq withdrawal plan endorsed by Col. Ann Wright # incarcerate and prosecute GW Bush # decommission the CIA # real 9-11 investigation # real recovery in the Gulf region # real intervention in Darfur # the GW Bush regime is an emergency …

Rick also has a  website. 

I wish Mr. Hohensee well.  However good or bad a governor he may turn out to be, I appreciate it that he, like all good citizens, sticks his nose into matters that are properly his business.

Introducing Democracy to Our Nation’s Capital

       P   O   S   T   E   D       B   Y       S   T   U   A   R   T

This past November, the official website of the multinational force in Iraq, Operation Iraqi Freedom, told the story of Sargeant John Eldridge, 372nd Military Police Battalion, 89th MP Brigade, who had been deployed for a second time and would miss sharing Thanksgiving dinner with his family.

This story about the Washington, DC native concealed a great irony.  He had been sent overseas, according to official reports, to fight for the cause of democracy, but back home he and half a million fellow Washingtonians would be barred from full participation in the democratic process: residents of our nation’s capital have been denied a voting representative in Congress since 1801. 

Perhaps, as one wag suggested, the U.S. Marines should have invaded the District of Columbia.

Those who live in the seat of American democracy pay their taxes, are called for jury duty, and serve in the armed forces, but are denied the most basic of democratic rights.

Representative Tom Davis (R-VA) was part of a congressional delegation that went to Hong Kong and pressed leaders there to allow democracy.  Davis said a senior Hong Kong official told him, “Give your nation’s capital the right to vote and then come talk to us about democracy in Hong Kong.”

Big props to my peeps at DC Vote for their recent voting rights victory in the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, a first step toward righting a great historical wrong.

DC Vote is sponsoring a Voting Rights March on Emancipation Day, April 16, 2007, starting at 2:30 p.m.  For more information visit the DC Vote website.

The Public Will and the Public Won't

A recent article by Rick Cohen points to one of the classic tensions between foundations and government and one of the possible downsides of Warren Buffet’s gift to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation:

In President Bush’s proposed budget for the fiscal year 2007, the administration justified proposed cuts in its small schools programme by citing the availability of funds for the same purpose from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. That made a foundation programme, where the decisions are made by a few administrators and the foundation's two trustees, a potential substitute for a federal government action. …

This happens regularly in the US. In the administration’s 2006 budget, the White House proposed terminating programmes to educate children about the dangers of obesity due to the availability of projects sponsored by Disney and the Nickelodeon channel, again substituting charity for governmental obligations …

Mr. Cohen has it exactly right.  I’ll wager half my tax return that today, in some foundation in this country, you’ll hear an exchange like this one:

Program Officer:  ‘The city has decided it’s going to discontinue funding transitional housing programs, so ABC, Inc. is requesting $100,000 to replace lost city funds.’

Foundation Executive:  ‘Why should we replace lost city dollars?  Transitional housing programs for low-income people are a public responsibility and should be supported by tax dollars.  If we make up the funding gap, we’ll only encourage city officials to stop funding other programs.’

There are several possible outcomes to this discussion.  The foundation might decide to fill the gap for a year, to give the nonprofit time to find replacement dollars.  Or, as often happens, it might decide to hold the line.  It’s then left as an exercise to the program officer to determine how best to communicate the bad news to the applicant, to explain a decision that begs a thousand questions.

I’ll leave it to historians to describe, for a given community, how the line of scrimmage between public and private responsibility fell where it did.  The question then becomes, how and under what circumstances does that line ever shift?

Here’s an example of how that game is played: Elected officials succumb to public pressure to cap or reduce taxes.  Smaller tax revenues mean less public support for safety net programs for the poor.  Foundations yell “foul” and refuse to step into the funding breach, claiming that foundation dollars should be used not for funding basic services, but for testing new ideas, supporting programs unpopular with individual donors, and other like purposes.

Foundations have a few plays of their own in this game.  Many will support nonprofit advocacy efforts to shore up or increase public support for safety net programs.  It’s now elected officials who cry “foul” and threaten to strengthen legal strictures on advocacy funding.

It’s an old contest and the balance shifts this way or that with the blowing of political winds.

Is it the proper role of foundations to plug the gaps created by retreating public funds?  Those who say yes will often argue along Libertarian or humanitarian lines: government should be smaller, say the former, foundations should not leave poor people in the lurch, say the latter.