Give 'Til It Hurts
Here's a fascinating story in The Chronicle of Philanthropy, about a campaign in Minnesota against a "cuts-only" approach to the state's $5 billion budget shortfall. We are all used to scare stories about victims of budget cuts. And let's be clear: "a balanced approach that includes raising revenue" means jacking up taxes.
The Minnesota Council of Nonprofits is a lead partner along with other religious, labor, and nonprofit groups in a coalition that is trying to persuade lawmakers that they should take a balanced approach that includes raising revenue.
Our coalition, Invest in Minnesota, decided to highlight the impact of 20 specific proposed budget cuts by starting a “20 Ways in 20 Days Campaign” over the last 20 days of the legislative session, which ended on Monday without a budget agreement.
The coalition website offers a fascinating snapshot into this campaign. It makes clear that the "overall package of fair revenue-raising must make the tax system more fair." If you are still wondering about what that means, take a look at the list of "endorsing organizations" right next to it. I didn't even get through the letter A and this is what I found:
Affirmative Options Coalition
A Minnesota Without Poverty
Affirmative Action Coalition
AFSCME Council 5
AFSCME Council 5 Retirees Political Club
AFSCME Council 65
AFSCME Council 868
Alliance of Low Wealth Minnesotans
You get the picture.
- Comment (7)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
In short, fair means unfair, and philanthropy is a synonym for theft.
Apr '11
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
Thanks Bill.
The list reminds me of Milton Freidman's warning of the third party called C that benefits when one party called A wishes to "do good" for someone else called B.
Just let A and B hammer it out directly.
Jul '10
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
This is where the Left has us outmatched: they've built a nationwide web of thousands - perhaps tens of thousands - of these sorts of activist groups.
Funded, in many instances, by taxpayer dollars, as well as by the likes of the Ford Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trust and George Soros they're staffed by gimlet-eyed socialists who practice the tactics of Saul Alinsky - pushing relentlessly for greater redistribution of wealth and bigger government.
Individually, many are as small as a pony-tailed old Bolshevik in Teva sandals with a phone, a fax, a computer and a Rolodex. But collectively, they're a swarm; a virus that overwhelms the system
They're the shock troops of the Democrat Party. Indeed, they're the principal reason the Democrat Party has swung so far and so monolithically to the left. They're the real - and effective - grassroots and no budding candidate can rise through the system without paying fealty.
Edited on May 24, 2011 at 11:15amMay '10
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
Sounds reasonable to me. Let's start by eliminating deductions for charitable contributions. I'm sure the signatories would be on board for this.
May '10
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
I believe the proper term is, "Usual Suspects".
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
I'm with Kenneth here. Much of this is the same old same old from the usual suspects. But the group claims more than 2,000 nonprofits as members, and would be interesting if the people who fund them know they are endorsing higher taxes.
In the same way, though many of the "endorsing organizations" are unions or activist organizations, would be nice to ask those who give to the League of Women Voters, the Minnesota Catholic Conference, the YWCA Minneapolis, etc. if they are happy seeing those groups essentially enter the debate as lobbyists for a more expansive public sector and a higher taxed private sector.
Dec '10
Re: Give 'Til It Hurts
I've had a problem with this, going back for years. I used to be a member of the local Chamber of Commerce and watched, over time, as more and more members were from non-profits.
All non profit means as that they manage to disperse all of their net earnings into new equipment and salaries, by the end of the fiscal year. That means that they never face corporate income taxes, while they often advocate for increases to corporate and income taxes.
I allowed my membership in the Chamber to lapse when they announced that they were very proud of their membership growth amongst the non profits and that they would be pursuing more such members as an active strategy.