AB 624
New op-ed raises debate about donor intent and private foundation money
Recently Peter Wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, posted an op-ed in the Chronicle of Higher Education in defense of donor intent and philanthropic freedom - what we believe is the right of donors and foundations to give to the issues, causes and organizations they value in the manner they choose, consistent with the law. He highlighted recent efforts to curtain this freedom by some activist groups including AB 624.
He notes: “American higher education depends profoundly on philanthropy, and whatever threatens philanthropy threatens American higher education… [t]here is actually a more serious threat that was much in the news… the effort to force foundations to “greenline” their philanthropy.”
The Greenlining Institute responded yesterday with an op-ed arguing among other issues for greater foundation transparency and diversity.
Peter Wood continued the debate by responding to Greenlining’s comments.
We’ll continue to follow this debate and keep your posted.
For the full debate visit:
11/17 Generosity, Trussed - by Peter Wood, National Association of Scholars
12/7 The Greenlining Institute Responds to Peter Wood - by Orson Aguilar and Bruce Mirken, Greenlining Institute
12/7 Who Owns Philanthropy? - by Peter Wood, National Association of Scholars
The Washington Legal Foundation just published its Summer 2010 edition of Conversations With…
Conversations With… The Honorable Dick Thornburgh, Dr. Larry P. Arnn, Heather R. Higgins, and Adam Meyerson
This edition is dedicated to threats to philanthropic freedom and features Former Attorney General of the United States and Pennsylvania Governor Dick Thornburgh leading a discussion with Dr. Larry P. Arnn, President of Hillsdale College; Heather R. Higgins, President and Director of The Randolph Foundation; and Adam Meyerson, President of The Philanthropy Roundtable. The three reflect on the American tradition of philanthropy and the growing movement to impose further government regulation on the philanthropic world.
Further Reading
Washington Examiner reports on Greenlining’s efforts in California and beyond
The Washington Examiner has printed a week-long investigative series on Greenlining’s past and current activities.
Below are links to the full series:
Day 1 (4/12/10)
Article: Radical Greenlining Institute perfected legal bank heists
Sidebar: Greenlining founders emerged from civil right movement
Day 2 (4/13/10)
Article: Uncle Sam opens the bank vault to activists
Sidebar: Two peas in a pod?
Day 3 (4/14/10)
Article: The Little bank that fought back
Sidebar: More info on Greenlining
Day 4 (4/15/10)
Article: California bill pushed ‘diversity’ standards on charities
Sidebar: Bullets in Greenlining’s ‘diversity gun’
Day 5 (4/16/10)
Article: Greenlining hits the road, targets private foundations
Sidebar: Is Greenlining in financial trouble?
For more background information on this legislation, click the “AB 624” tag below.
Statement by Terrence Scanlon, President of Capital Research Center
Excerpt:
“A newly released report from the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP) signals the latest step in a continuing war on donors being waged by nonprofit radical advocacy groups with a leftwing political agenda. These groups, representing political activists and special interests, have developed a social theory to justify the claims they make on philanthropists’ money. According to them, philanthropy betrays its highest ideals unless it gives them grants…”
Full the full statement, download the document below.
Further Reading
Op-ed by William E. Simon Jr., The Examiner
Excerpt: “America is the most charitable country on earth. Our citizens have stepped forward with their resources because of an historic tradition that encourages and provides them with the freedom to support causes they believe in. The direction of these resources is not dictated by government or political parties, but instead by the powerful tool of donor intent which is recognized as the most effective means for distribution. This freedom of choice encourages mission, focus and creativity thereby benefiting thousands upon thousands of worthy causes…”
Further Reading
Wall Street Journal, Heather MacDonald
Heather MacDonald argues that “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.”
Also read the ACR’s Letter to the Editor regarding this article available here.
Further Reading
Corrections to Heather MacDonald op-ed by Sue Santa and Sandra Swirski
Sue Santa, Sr. Vice President of Public Policy at The Philanthropy Roundtable, and Sandra Swirski, Executive Director of the Alliance of Charitable Reform, provide corrections to an op-ed by Heather MacDonald in the Wall Street Journal.
Excerpt: “In “Never Enough Beauty or Truth” (Feb. 2, 2009), Heather MacDonald provocatively argues that challenges to philanthropic freedom abound. The Alliance for Charitable Reform (‘ACR”) couldn’t agree more. ACR is a project of The Philanthropy Roundtable established in 2005 to defend the charitable sector against such encroachments… ACR must, however, correct a couple of errors in Ms. MacDonald’s otherwise laudable piece.
Further Reading
ACR continues to identify and respond to challenges to the charitable community in the states as well, particularly those originating from interest groups and activist organizations. For example, last year the California Legislature considered AB 624, a bill that would have significantly increased onerous reporting requirements for foundations and their grantees. The legislation was promoted by Greenlining Institute, an aggressive activist organization.
We believe the impetus for comprehensive reporting was merely a veil for the true goal - influencing and ultimately directing foundations to fund causes preferred by Greenlining itself. Again, ACR activated many in the charitable community to add their voices in opposition to this legislation. While the legislation ultimately failed, Greenlining has expanded its focus to other states and has recently opened an office in Washington, D.C.
In 2008, the California legislature began formal consideration of legislation (AB 624). Under the guise of transparency and disclosure, this legislation would have, we believe, channeled foundation grantmaking to a limited, statutorily-prescribed group of charities. This legislation would have created winners and clear losers in the charitable community.
Continue reading...
Wall Street Journal Editorial, Heather R. Higgins
“A bill purporting to encourage diversity among nonprofits has passed the California Assembly and faces a key vote in the state senate in early June. While little attention has been paid to this bill, it poses an enormous threat to private philanthropy in this country.”
Further Reading
