Voluntarism and Philanthropy

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009
Pointer/Kelly/Corrigan
1 Philanthropy
Philanthropic Organizations CPs / DA

Philanthropic Organizations CPs / DA........................................................................................1 Gates Solves (social services).........................................................................................................4 Gates Solves (Education)...............................................................................................................5 Gates Solves (Education)...............................................................................................................6 Gates Solves (Health Care)...........................................................................................................7 Gates Solves (Health Care)...........................................................................................................8 Gates Solves (Natives)....................................................................................................................9 Gates Solves (Poverty Reduction)...............................................................................................10 Gates Solves (Poverty)................................................................................................................11 Gates Solves Funding................................................................................................................12 Gates Democracy DA................................................................................................................13 Clinton CP Text ...........................................................................................................................14 Clinton Solves Cash, Expertise................................................................................................15 Clinton Solves Social Services..................................................................................................16 Clinton Solves Social Services..................................................................................................17 Clinton Solves Laundry List....................................................................................................18 Clinton Solves - Poverty..............................................................................................................20 Clinton Solves - Funding.............................................................................................................21 Clinton = Growth.........................................................................................................................22 AT: Slate Studies..........................................................................................................................23 Clinton - Corruption....................................................................................................................25 Clinton Conflict of Interest......................................................................................................26 Perm Solves...................................................................................................................................27 Soros CP Text...............................................................................................................................28 Soros Solves - Poverty .................................................................................................................29 Soros Solves - Poverty..................................................................................................................30 Soros Solves - Poverty..................................................................................................................31 Soros Solves - Funding................................................................................................................32 Soros Solves - Funds....................................................................................................................33 Soros Solves - Health Care..........................................................................................................36 Soros Solves - Education.............................................................................................................39 Perm Solvency..............................................................................................................................40

2 Philanthropy
Perm solvency...............................................................................................................................41 Perm Solvency..............................................................................................................................42 Soros Poverty Turn......................................................................................................................43 Soros Conflict DA (1/2)................................................................................................................44 Soros Conflict DA (2/2)................................................................................................................45 FBOs Solve....................................................................................................................................46 FBOs Solve....................................................................................................................................47 FBOs Solve Racism/Immigration............................................................................................48 FBOs Key to Activism.................................................................................................................49 FBOs Perm Fails.......................................................................................................................50 FBOs Perm Fails.......................................................................................................................51 FBOs Neoliberalism DA to Perm.............................................................................................52 FBOs Spillover.............................................................................................................................53 Carter Center Solves HC.............................................................................................................54 Carter Center Solves HC.............................................................................................................55 Carter Center Solves HC.............................................................................................................56 Carter Center Solves HC.............................................................................................................57 Link - Tradeoff.............................................................................................................................58 Link - Tradeoff.............................................................................................................................59 Link Tradeoff............................................................................................................................60 Link - Tradeoff.............................................................................................................................61 Link - Tradeoff.............................................................................................................................62 Link - Tradeoff.............................................................................................................................63 UQ Volunteers Up.....................................................................................................................64 UQ - Donations Up.......................................................................................................................65 UQ Donations Up .....................................................................................................................66 UQ Volunteers Up.....................................................................................................................68 UQ - Volunteers Up.....................................................................................................................69 UQ Volunteers Up.....................................................................................................................70 UQ Volunteers Up.....................................................................................................................71 UQ Volunteers Up.....................................................................................................................72 DA Turns Case.............................................................................................................................73 Activism solves Poverty...............................................................................................................74 Activism solves poverty...............................................................................................................75

3 Philanthropy
Activism Solves Poverty..............................................................................................................76 Impacts of poverty- Cycle of Poverty.........................................................................................77 Impacts: Dehumanization...........................................................................................................78 Poverty Impacts- Death ..............................................................................................................79 Impacts: Health............................................................................................................................80 Private Philanthropy Solves Better............................................................................................81 Philanthropy Snowballs..............................................................................................................82 NU Donations Down ................................................................................................................83 NU Donations Down.................................................................................................................84 NU Donations Down.................................................................................................................85 No Link - Tradeoff.......................................................................................................................86 No Solvency...................................................................................................................................87 State Action Tradeoff..................................................................................................................88 Activism Tradeoff........................................................................................................................89

4 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (social services)

The Gates Foundation funds a myriad of social services without the bureaucracy of the government making it much a much more effective actor.
Wavell, Writer for the London Times, 2006 (Stuart, Giving away billions is a hard business, London Times, July 2nd, 2006, pg. 7, AJF) The City's movers and shakers are minnows compared with the 75-year-old investment strategist Warren Buffet, the second richest man in America, who last week made the greatest charitable gift in history by pledging $31 billion of his $44 billion fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in installments. He, and they, are following in the footsteps of the Scottish-born steel magnate Andrew Carnegie, who gave $350m (equivalent to around $8 billion today) to build libraries and other projects throughout America at the turn of the 20th century. Yet Britain's new philanthropists share with Buffet and Gates a mixture of impatience and business acumen that is shaking up the charity world. Reluctant to sign away their money to traditional NGOs, they are adopting a hard-nosed approach that insists on looking at the bottom line. They want to make a difference, but balk at feeding the maws of selfperpetuating bureaucracies that squander money on administration and promotional campaigns. If charities don't cut the mustard, they are prepared to go it alone. A typical skill-building exercise at the Institute of Philanthropy features an imaginary entrepreneur who sells his business and moves to a fictional Pacific island to invest his millions in social projects. "They are involved in all sorts of things, from juvenile justice to women's rights in the developing world, renewable energy, public health projects, you name it," LaSpada says. Besides altruism, the trend is spurred by several motives ranging from cheating the taxman to the fear that the children will blow an inheritance on a life of extravagance. A sense of mortality also plays a big part. Both the American multi-billionaires had planned to give away their fortunes at their deaths until the death of Gates's mother and Buffet's wife provided their Scrooge moments. "It's something you can't buy," Buffet discovered. "The way to be loved is to be lovable. You always get back more than you give." The decision by the old "Sage of Omaha" to park his money in the tightly focused organization run by the 50-year-old Gates reflects a determination among Britain's hedge fund kings to get the best for their money. The trend is apparent to New Philanthropy Capital (NPC), which advises donors and charities on how to be more effective. "What we're seeing is potential and actual donors becoming more and more concerned with the effectiveness of the charities they support, how the money is used and what difference the charities actually make on the lives of the people they work with," says Nigel Harris, NPC's chief executive.

5 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Education)

The Gates Foundation is a leader in education reform and policy Alter, award-winning columnist and author, 2008 (Jonathan, Bill Gates Goes to School, Newsweek,
December 15, 2008, pg. 42, AJF) The Gates Foundation has learned some lessons from its investments in recent years in path breaking schools.
The first big idea--to break up big schools into smaller, more manageable units--proved insufficient without major changes in personnel. Gates argues that rigorous accountability is the only option, from mayoral control (elected school boards are mostly a menace) to principal control (teacher tenure and onerous work rules are quality-killers) to data control (IT systems that closely track performance are a must). Betraying his own professional background, Gates shakes his head in dismay at the idea of secondary schools and colleges trying to function at all without simple software that offers them basic statistical information about how students and teachers are performing over time (for-profit colleges are an exception). Everyone in education knows why: unions have simply prevented teachers from being judged, even in part, on whether their students improve during the course of the year. It's no surprise that Gates is a believer in merit pay and incentive pay and has little use for teachers colleges as presently constituted because there's no evidence that having a master's degree improves teacher performance. You never hear Gates or his people talk about highly qualified teachers, only highly effective ones. Whenever he gets depressed about education, Gates says he visits one of the more than 60 KIPP schools nationwide, where the energy is palpable and the results
irrefutable. He's also proud of his foundation's support for other innovative schools like the Green Dot schools in Los Angeles, Aspire Public Schools and Hidalgo Early College in California and the Noble Street Network in Chicago. At YES College Prep in Houston, 95 percent of the students are African-American or Hispanic and 80 percent are poor. But since 2000, every student has gone on to a four-year college. One hundred percent. Conventional schools with comparable demographics face dropout rates of more than 50 percent and send only a handful to four-year colleges. So the challenge is not to find what works for at-risk kids--we know that by now--but how to replicate it. Gates's answer is to keep funding his reform ideas in five or six states to set an example of successful "effectiveness-compensation systems." He says Washington's job is to spread best practices and help implement accountability standards. Gates is right that there's "little appetite" politically for an increased federal role in education, which is mostly a state and local matter. But maybe he can expand that appetite
by helping persuade Congress to fund proven models. Gates does seem to be weighing in on Obama's pick for secretary of education. He favors choosing from today's exciting collection of hard-charging, china-breaking school superintendents.

6 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Education)

The BAMGF is key to improve educational programs. Calefati, senior staff writer, 2009 (Jessica, USNEWS, Gates Foundation Gives 16.5 Million for
Community-College Programs, June 30, 2009,http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-education/2009/06/30/gatesfoundation-gives-165-million-for-community-college-programs.html, accessed 7/11/09, AJF) The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation renewed its commitment to improving college graduation rates for low-income and minority students by giving $16.5 million in grant money to expand remedial education programs at the community-college level. Fifteen community colleges and five states with model remedial education programs received the grants last week. The model programs share qualities such as accelerating the speed at which students complete remedial courses, providing students one-on-one support with class work and homework, and offering courses with open entry and exit dates so that students who miss registration deadlines can still enroll, says Hilary Pennington, director of special initiatives in the Gates Foundation's United States program. She added that the foundation hopes the grant recipients can act as replicable models to other community colleges and states looking to improve their remedial education offerings. The need for strong remedial education programs is vast, according to a recently released report by Jobs for the Future, a nonprofit research and advocacy agency. The report indicates that about 60 percent of students enrolling in community colleges across the nation take remedial education classes to shore up their mastery of basic academic skills. This statistic tops 90 percent for low-income and minority students at some community colleges, yet the number of students moving from remedial education classes to college-level courses can drop as low as 15 percent, according to the Gates Foundation. Pennington says the focus of the foundation's postsecondary success strategy is helping more students not only go to college but go through college and that remedial education classes at open-access community colleges are needed to achieve that goal. This is the first in a series of grants the Gates Foundation plans to award over the next few years to continue funding efforts to "crack the code of accelerating academic catch-up," Pennington says. The Lumina and Ford foundations have also invested in remedial education at the community-college level.

7 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Health Care)

The BAMGFs empirical success in world health care proves that similar outcomes would be produced if it pursued a domestic model.
Bazell, Chief science and health correspondent, 2007 (Robert, NBC, Global health is fashionable but falls short, April 24, 2007, http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/returnTo.do?returnToKey=20_T6944125732, accessed 7/10/09, AJF)
Before the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation took on the monumental challenge of solving the world's health problems, such efforts wallowed in hopelessness that aspired to spend a few million dollars here and there. Few dreamed there could be a reduction in the 10 million yearly child deaths worldwide from preventable infectious diseases. From its inception, the Gates Foundation has committed an astounding $7.8 billion to global health causes alone. The foundations massive generosity set an example that governments and charities have followed, with varying success. A group called the Global
Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has pledged $8.6 billion, but raised about half that. President Bushs Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief has pledged to spend $15 billion; Congress has so far allocated about $8.6 billion. Countless smaller, private philanthropies, supported by luminaries including former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, rock star Bono, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, are making their contributions. In the past few years, in large part because of Gates, global health has become very fashionable. So what is the criticism? The organizations at the
forefront of the global health movement are now undergoing both increasing outside scrutiny and internal soul-searching about what they are actually accomplishing, Jon Cohen, a highly respected science journalist, wrote last year in the journal Science. For example, the World Health Organization has aspired to have 3 million people in poor countries on the new, life-saving AIDS medications by 2005. In 2007, the number is closer to 2 million. For other diseases the measures of accomplishments are even worse. The problem is, it is no simple matter to rapidly and vastly increase spending for anything, especially an effort involving more than 50 poor countries around the world. Corruption and inefficient bureaucracies remain constant challenges.

8 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Health Care)

(__)The BAMGF is a global leader in healthcare domestic issues wont be a problem. Bazell, Chief science and health correspondent, 2007 (Robert, NBC, Global health is fashionable but falls short, April 24, 2007, http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/returnTo.do?returnToKey=20_T6944125732, accessed 7/10/09, AJF) And no single person better exemplifies this resurgent spirit of altruism than Bill Gates, founder and co-chairman of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, a 6-year-old organization that has already had a profound impact on global healthcare, providing billions of dollars for international health initiatives in vital areas such as AIDS research and childhood immunization. The world's richest man, Gates doesn't fit the mold of the traditional healthcare heavyweight-he's not a powerful lawmaker, a ubiquitous policy wonk or an influential heathsystem executive-but his name is No. 1 on Modern Healthcare's fifth annual listing of the 100 Most Powerful People in Healthcare. Few individuals worldwide boast the kind of economic power and can-do clout of Gates, who will give up his post as Microsoft Corp. chairman in July 2008 to focus his considerable intellect and energy on the worldwide efforts of his Seattle-based foundation, the world's largest with more than $30 billion in assets. As the first private citizen to claim the top spot in the annual rankings, the 50-year-old entrepreneur placed one notch above President Bush, who finished No. 2 in this year's poll, and well above such high-profile industry insiders as Donald Berwick (No. 24), president and chief executive officer of the Cambridge, Mass.-based Institute for Healthcare Improvement; Jack Bovender (No. 46), chairman and CEO of Nashville-based HCA; and Karen Ignagni (No. 81), president and CEO of Washington-based America's Health Insurance Plans, the trade group for the managed-care industry. "When you talk about influencing what actually happens to people-as an individual, not as an agency of government-Bill Gates absolutely is making an incredible difference," says Patrick Quinlan, CEO of the Ochsner Health System in New Orleans and a first-time member of the 100 Most Powerful, ranking No. 17 in his debut on the list. "He is using his money to try to reach as many people as possible who have so little help right now. He is putting his money where the money will really matter." The influence of Gates, who formed Microsoft in 1975 and now boasts a personal net worth of about $50 billion, is almost certain to grow in the coming years. His off-the-chart influence grew immeasurably when Warren Buffett, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and the world's second-richest man, announced two months ago that he would donate, over time, the bulk of his estimated $44 billion fortune to the Gates Foundation, doubling its size and its annual charitable output. With that bankroll, Gates, who helped reshape information technology, now appears intent on making a similar impact on global healthcare."

9 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Natives)

(__)The BAMGF successfully aids American Indians. Native Times, American Indian News Paper, 2009 (Native Times, MERICAN INDIAN
ASSOCIATION OF ILLINOIS OPENING FIRST NATIVE EARLY COLLEGE IN CHICAGO 2009, http://nativetimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1859&Itemid=37 accessed 7/10/09, AJF) Antioch University Seattle and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded Center for Native Education have selected the American Indian Association of Illinois (AIAI) and the Black Hawk Indigenous Early College Academy as the latest Native American Early College High School. AIAI is currently the only Native Early College grantee east of the Mississippi. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have been working with Antioch University Seattle since 2002 to promote Early College High School initiatives in American Indian communities. AIAI will work with the Chicago Public Schools, Title VII American Indian Education Director, Jolene Aleck, Dr. Kaye Woodward, from Eastern Illinois University, Chicagos Native American community and Antioch University to develop an early college high school slated to open in August of 2010. Early colleges are high schools that blend high school diplomas and associates of arts degree requirements so students earn diplomas and associate of arts degree credits concurrently. While American Indian, Alaska Native, and Hawaiian students are the focus of this initiative in Cook County, other students may also access this school. With over 20,000 American Indian citizens, Chicago is an Indian community larger than most reservations. AIAI is the newest urban American Indian organization funded in an effort to better serve Native American students, students who unfortunately have the highest dropout and lowest college completion rates of any ethnic group in the country. Only about half of Native American students graduate from high school. Of those who do graduate, less than four percent will earn a bachelor's degree. AIAI was started as a student, parent and volunteer led group centered on American Indian education, college preparation and American Indian cultural arts activities. The opening of an Early College High School for American Indian youth in Chicago will realize our dream of creating a school where academic excellence and success can be realized for our youth, said Dr. Dorene Wiese, AIAI President. Dr. Wiese currently runs the Medicine Shield College program in cooperation with EIU. AIAI joins eleven other Native American groups in this groundbreaking work to establish early college high schools in Native communities. Black Hawk Indigenous Early College Academy is now part of a larger $120 million initiative funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, the Carnegie Corp. of New York and the Ford Foundation to create or redesign 170 early college high schools for undeserved and low-income young people across the nation.

10 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Poverty Reduction)

The Gates Foundations major goal is poverty reduction in the US with 37 billion dollars in 2008 alone its viable.
NPR, 2008 (NPR,Bill and Melinda Gates Name New Foundation Head, May 12, 2008 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90373773, accessed 7/11/09, AJF) Bill and Melinda Gates announced Monday that Microsoft executive Jeff Raikes will take the helm of their $37 billion foundation the world's largest such philanthropy in September. A
27-year veteran of Microsoft, Raikes will take over as chief executive of the foundation on Sept. 2, replacing Patty Stonesifer, who announced her resignation in January. From their home in Medina, Wash., the Gateses tell Michele Norris in an exclusive interview that they picked Raikes because he shares their passion to try to help minimize poverty in the developing world and the U.S. The head of Microsoft's business division, Raikes will now shift gears and start giving away massive amounts of the Microsoft fortune. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation distributes more than $3 billion in grants each year. NPR has received grants from the foundation. Raikes announced his resignation from Microsoft in January. Stephen Elop, former chief operating officer at Juniper Networks, will replace Raikes at the software giant. As of July, Bill Gates himself will transition from a day-to-day role with Microsoft though he'll remain its chairman to focus more on the foundation's work. The Gateses have known Raikes and his wife, Tricia, for the past two decades, and the two couples have traveled extensively together. Bill and Melinda Gates say they were particularly impressed when Raikes chaired the United Way's 2006-2007 fundraising drive in King County, Wash. At the time, he also worked full time for Microsoft. As part of his work with United Way, Raikes "went out at night on the homeless count to see what it means to sleep at 3 a.m. on the streets of Seattle," says Melinda Gates, who co-chairs the Gates Foundation with her husband. She says that got Raikes thinking about big-picture efforts to
tackle homelessness. That broad perspective has also characterized the Gates Foundation's approach to poverty and global health. The foundation has been the object of awe, envy and, at times, anger because of its big budget and broad agenda which includes improving education, alleviating poverty and combating diseases such as malaria and HIV.

11 Philanthropy
Gates Solves (Poverty)

The BAMGF is the best actor it has no limitations on finding the best solutions to poverty questions.
GERTNER, A Senior Editor of Money magazine- also a contributing writer to Money and The New York Times magazine, 2008 (JON, The New York Times, For Good Measure, March 9, 2008,
http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/returnTo.do?returnToKey=20_T6944522868, accessed 7/11/09, AJF)

Much of their money either goes into or comes out of private foundations, those largely opaque institutions with huge endowments that, in the jargon-rich environment of philanthropy, differ from charities like the Red Cross in their tendency to engage in long-term ''strategic grant-making.'' Such foundations do not exist to give emergency aid during crises arising from war or natural disaster; instead, their purpose is to attack social and scientific problems at the root, a process that sometimes requires substantial allocations of grant money over 5, 10 or even 20 years. That's a long time to wait before you know whether your money is doing any
good. As Judith Rodin, the head of the Rockefeller Foundation since 2005, puts it: ''Critics have talked about the field of philanthropy and said: 'Has it really made a difference. And how would you know?' '' To Rodin, these are
perfectly legitimate questions, even when they're posed indiscreetly by business titans who only recently entered the genteel world of charity. ''If we really want to do work that makes a difference, work that has some effect, then we have to know whether it is working,'' she told me recently. ''And if you really do it well, you don't only want to know what works; you want to know how it works.'' It's not a simple task. As far back as the late 19th century, John D. Rockefeller anguished over where his charitable donations might make the biggest difference. In recent years, one guiding idea behind strategic grants, whether from old-money
institutions like the Rockefeller Foundation or new-money outfits like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is that they fill gaps in the modern economy opened up by the neglect or failures of the marketplace. ''They're the only unrestricted pool of funds to finance innovation in the social sector and to facilitate major social change,'' says Joel Fleishman, a professor at Duke who recently wrote a book on the role of private foundations in American life. Fleishman explains that foundations can take risks that private companies might shun and can also finance programs that governments might be unable (or unwilling) to support. Foundations can thus experiment with cures for poverty or disease that are largely unproven, with the hope that evidence of success will entice private enterprises, politicians or other foundations to follow suit.

12 Philanthropy
Gates Solves Funding

The Gates Foundations money encourages others to spend and is necessary as government budgets get tighter. BISHOP, New York bureau chief of The Economist and co-author of ''Philanthrocapitalism: How the Rich Can Save the World, 2008 (MATTHEW , A Tarnished Capitalism Still Serves
Philanthropy, New York Times, November 11, 2008, AJF)
Soon after, back in Manhattan, Grand Street Settlement, a nonprofit organization providing education and social services on the Lower East Side, decided not to bother asking Lehman for another round of financing. What would be the point? In recent years, rapid wealth creation, particularly on Wall Street, has resulted in a surge not just in giving, but in a new, businesslike approach to giving that I call ''philanthrocapitalism.'' Now, people are asking whether the recent struggles of some of capitalism's biggest winners, and the growing suspicion of some of capitalism's core methods, including Wall Street's use of leverage, mean that philanthrocapitalism is in trouble, too. In fact, there is reason to think that the need for philanthrocapitalism will be greater than ever, and that leverage will be one of the main reasons. Philanthrocapitalists have developed a new vocabulary to describe their approach to charity, which borrows enthusiastically from the business lexicon. They call themselves ''social investors'' or ''venture philanthropists,'' and try to make donations that are ''high performance'' and ''strategic.'' Above all, they love to ''leverage'' their money. Though leading philanthrocapitalists are giving away unprecedented amounts of money -- Bill Gates and Warren
Buffett are together handing out about $3.5 billion a year through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation -they are quick to recognize that even those sums are dwarfed by government and big business budgets. (The New York City schools budget is about $17 billion a year, by comparison.) To make a real difference, philanthropists have to find
ways to use their money that have an outsize impact, typically by using donations to change how others spend their money. This kind of leverage -- using a relatively small donation to enlist others in a cause -- is very different from the Wall Street kind, which by multiplying the size of traders' bets sometimes has blown extra air into financial bubbles. Expect philanthropic leverage to become more important in tough economic times as social demands increase and government budgets get tighter -- the need to get the maximum bang for the increasingly soughtafter philanthropic buck should become even more critical. The Gates Foundation, for example, has tried to ''leverage'' the research and development budgets of the big pharmaceutical companies by giving incentives to encourage them to spend more of their research budgets on discovering, say, a vaccine for malaria (which kills millions) rather than a cure for baldness (which hurts only vanity). Another leveraging strategy has been to encourage research that combines a variety of inexpensive drugs to cure a different disease. The X Prize Foundation, with its lavish awards for achievements like privately financed manned space flight or speedy sequencing of the genome, can convince competitors to spend far more collectively than the amount they stand to win if they succeed. And then there is the most tempting pool of money -- government spending, much of which is already directed at solving social problems. Leveraging those budgets has become a core strategy for many of today's leading
philanthrocapitalists, including Mr. Gates and Michael Bloomberg, whose use of his own money to get elected mayor of New York, one could argue, is the clearest example yet of philanthrocapitalistic leverage.

13 Philanthropy
Gates Democracy DA
The Gates Foundation essentially steals precious money from the government destroying democracy.
Ahn, a policy analyst with expertise in globalization, philanthropy and Korea, 2007 (Christine, NCRP, Democratizing Philanthropy, Fall 2007, http://www.ncrp.org/files/rp-articles/RP-Fall%202007Ahn-lowres.pdf, 7/11/09, AJF) In 2006, Warren Buffet pledged to donate more than $30 billion to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Three trusteesBill Gates, Melinda Gates and Mr. Buffettand two other key playersBill Gates Sr. and Gates Foundation CEO Patty Stonesiferwill decide how to allocate the $3 billion the foundation is required to pay out each year. While it is impressive that Mr. Buffet, or Bill Gates for that matter, chose to donate their excess wealth to the Gates Foundation, the reality is that foundations are made partly of dollars that, were it not for charitable deductions allowed by tax laws, would have been public funds to be allocated through the governmental process under the controlling power of the electorate. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, these charitable deductions cost the Treasury Department $40 billion in lost tax revenue in 2006.4 In fact, it is estimated that at least 45 percent of the $500 billion that foundations hold in their coffers belong to the American public. As Akash Deep at Harvard University and Peter Frumkin at University of Texas note, When a foundation is created today, the burden of lost tax revenue is borne by citizens today in the form of a tax expenditure, with the promise that it will be paid out in the future.5 This is best illustrated by investigative journalist Mark Dowie, who wrote in his seminal book, American Foundations: An Investigative History, a story about a meeting of the trusted inner circle of the Open Society Institute (OSI), a private foundation started by the international businessman George Soros. During a protracted argument that kept the groups discussion going in circles, a frustrated George Soros exerted his authority, slammed down his fists, and said, This is my money. We will do it my way. This interjection silenced the room, except for a courageous junior member who raised his voice in objection to tell Mr. Soros, No, it isnt. The young dissident went on to say, Half of it is ours. If you hadnt placed that money in OSI or another of your 25 foundations, sir, about half of it would be in the Treasury.6 We need to have the same courage to reform American philanthropy to salvage democracy. The considerable tax benefits that Mr. Buffett will receive for his generous donation translates to more than $10 billion that we, the American public, have agreed to entrust to five individuals to determine, based on their worldviews, which causes and organizations are worthy to receive a portion of this largesse.

14 Philanthropy
Clinton CP Text
Counterplan text: The Clinton Foundation should Observation 1: Competition
Observation 2: Solvency The Clinton foundation is implementing reforms and plays a large world role in aid already, they easily have the means to solve Wilhelm, Senior Writer at The Chronicle of Philanthropy, 08
( Ian, Columbia University - Graduate School of Journalism The Johns Hopkins University quoted as an expert on philanthropy by various news media, including NPR, ABC News, and Newsweek, Reporter at Business Publications Inc. Editorial Assistant at Community Development Publications, The Philanthropic Journal, Bill Clinton's Concessions on Nonprofit Work Worry Some Nonprofit Leaders, 11-21-08, http://philanthropy.com/news/updates/index.php?id=6367, accessed 07-02-09,ET) According to a person familiar with the negotiations between the Clintons and representatives of Mr. Obama, Mr. Clinton has agreed to suspend his daily responsibilities at the William J. Clinton Foundation, in New York, and would require future contributors to his philanthropic efforts, which include the foundation and his presidential library in Little Rock, Ark., to be cleared by the White House general counsel and the State Department.The person confirmed news reports that the former president had turned over more than 200,000 names of donors who have given to his nonprofit groups, a move he has resisted in the past. Whats more, Mr. Clinton is expected to divorce himself from the Clinton Global Initiative, an annual meeting of world leaders, wealthy philanthropists, and celebrities. It is unclear how the conference would continue without Mr. Clinton, who has been praised for using the event to bring together donors and charities to make big pledges to fight poverty and ameliorate other social ills. Since it started in 2005, Mr. Clinton says the meeting has generated $46billion in charitable commitments. Millions of Dollars Raised For his own efforts, Mr. Clinton has garnered hundreds of millions of dollars for his foundation, which provides AIDS medicines, health-care services, and agriculture assistance in Africa and elsewhere. The Clinton Foundation is one of the most successful fundraising organizations in the United States; it ranked No. 168 on The Chronicles most-recent list of the 400 charitable institutions that raise the most money.

15 Philanthropy
Clinton Solves Cash, Expertise

The Clinton foundation uses every opportunity to raise money for their foundation, making them well funded agents with experience Olsen, AP Business writer, 06
(Kelly, The America's Intelligence Wire, Three-day Bill Clinton belated birthday bash raises money for foundation., 10-28-06, http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-22960775_ITM , accessed 07-0209, ET) Former President Bill Clinton was starting a belated three-day celebration of his 60th birthday, with deeppocketed donors forking over sizable checks to Clinton's foundation for the chance to dine, play golf and attend a Rolling Stones concert with him. Clinton, who turned 60 in August, has already observed the occasion at parties in Martha's Vineyard and Toronto. This weekend bash starting Friday is a fundraiser for his William Jefferson Clinton Foundation and is being co-hosted by his daughter, Chelsea, and by Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton friend and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to attend at least some of the events. The festivities were set to begin Friday night and continue through late Sunday evening, with a series of cocktail parties and dinners across New York and a round of golf in New Jersey. The centerpiece events were a dinner Saturday night at the Museum of Natural History, and a private Rolling Stones concert at New York's historic Beacon Theater on Sunday. Tickets to the three-day affair started at $60,000 with a VIP package which includes special seating at the concert and dinner and a photo with Clinton running $500,000 . The Clinton Foundation operates programs to combat AIDS in Africa, as well as global poverty and ethnic strife.

16 Philanthropy
Clinton Solves Social Services

The Clinton foundation already has successful social service and poverty programs in place William J Clinton Foundation (William J Clinton Foundation , Clinton Economic Opportunity Initiative, http://www.clintonfoundation.org/what-we-do/clinton-economic-opportunity-initiative/ , accessed 07-07-09, ET)
Former President Clinton, building on his long-term commitment to economic advancement, established the Clinton Economic Opportunity Initiative (CEO) to help families and individuals in the United States succeed and businesses in Americas underserved communities grow with funding from the Bill Clinton Foundation.CEO advances its mission through programs that focus on two primary areas: The Financial Mainstream Program helps people access lower cost, safer social services, and the support they need to develop and sustain good financial habits. The Entrepreneur Mentoring Program and the Harlem Restaurant Program promote business-to-business public service, helping entrepreneurs reach higher levels of success.
The Clinton Foundation can solve through a variety of projects in place Willoughby, Brazils leading Newspaper head journalist 08
(Elizabeth, Canadian columnist, Journalist BS, published at WorldGuide.eu, Sunday News (Sao Paulo, Brazil), Brazzil, and others, Look to the Stars: the World of Celebrity Giving, Bill Clinton Refocuses on Charity, 06-1208, http://www.looktothestars.org/news/896-bill-clinton-refocuses-on-charity, accessed 07-02-09, ET) Former US president Bill Clinton is fueling a new charity drive for both the corporate world and the community at large. World wide poverty, climate change and health care all issues of his own Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) were on the agenda as Clinton spoke in Manhattan last week. CGI, a project of the Clinton Foundation since 2005, aims to link global leaders with real solutions to world problems. Already this year CGI has several projects under way. Visa Inc has committed to small business development and literacy for 10 million people over five years; the Energy and Resources Institute has committed to bringing solar light to millions of rural Indians who normally rely on kerosene lanterns after dusk; Fundacin Paraguaya is to provide education for sustainable agriculture in developing countries over the next 10 years; Standard Chartered Bank maintained its commitment to microfinance African and Asian institutions to benefit millions of farmers and negotiated a hydro-power project in Uganda to reduce emissions and decrease power costs; and Action by Lizzy Dupont has produced practical, instructional health videos in sign language for the deaf in Mali, Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Morocco. Clinton said, Health care problems are profound, many people go to bed hungry every night, one in four deaths every year are claimed by AIDS, TB, malaria and infections related to contaminated water. Besides endorsing the current US policy of both distributing food to the needy as well as cash to famine-area farmers, Clinton also made mention to his New York audience of issues specifically affecting Americans at home. In this decade weve had the biggest increase in income inequality in America in 80 years Income is 1,000 dollars lower today than the day I left office, while health care costs have doubled. At any given time in the year about 100 million will be without health care and the cost of a college education is up 75 percent. The average debt of a college graduate is 50 percent higher than it was at the beginning of this decade. You see that there is a fair amount of inequality problems in America and climate change affects us all.

17 Philanthropy
Clinton Solves Social Services

The Clinton Foundation effectively implements social service programs Chadwick, MA in journalism from university of New Mexico, 07
( John, Mineweb: uncompromising independence, Huge initiative for mining to alleviate Latin American poverty, 06-25-07, http://www.mineweb.com:8080/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page38/page68?oid=22558&sn=Detail, accessed 07-10-09, ET) Last week former US President Bill Clinton announced his foundation is launching a new sustainable development initiative in Latin America, the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative (CGSGI), thanks to the major financial commitment of two prominent philanthropists, Frank Giustra and Carlos Slim Hel. Giustra, a Canadian businessman, has pledged a minimum of $100 million to the effort, as well as one half of all of his future earnings from his work in the natural resources sector. He has also been the driving force to bring together a coalition of mining industry and non-industry actors that will make CGSGI possible. Carlos Slim Hel, the Chairman of Grupo Carso, has already answered Giustra's call for financial commitments to CGSGI and committed at least $100 million to CGSGI's work in Latin America. Mining companies around the world are joining in, and are widening the scope of this initiative into Africa. "Collective action is the best strategy to address the economic, educational and health hurdles that confront millions in the developing world," said Clinton. "I'm proud of the coalition in the natural resources industry that has come together to invest in sustainable growth in emerging economies, and humbled by the enormous financial commitment to this work by Frank Giustra and Carlos Slim. This initiative will focus on improving living conditions in Latin American countries and other nations, in partnership with the mining industry and other sectors. Ultimately, our goal is to bridge the gap between the rich and poor, and give all people a shot at a better life." CGSGI will focus on alleviating poverty in the developing world and build on the Clinton Foundation's successful record of implementing and scaling-up development initiatives in other countries. The Clinton Foundation will act as the implementing partner, bringing together key stakeholders from the natural resources sector as well as the business community in the developing world.

18 Philanthropy
Clinton Solves Laundry List

The Clinton foundation has made a laundry list of good impacts with their programs already in poverty, proving its capable of a myriad of services William J. Clinton Foundation , International Aid Organization, 09
( William J Clinton foundation, Accomplishments, http://www.clintonfoundation.org/what-we-do/clinton-globalinitiative/what-we-ve-accomplished, accessed 07-02-09, ET) (Since its launch in 2005, CGI members have made more than 1,300 Commitments to Action valued at $46 billion to improve the lives of more than 200 million people in over 150 countries. CGI U and Mycommitment.org also have inspired action on a large scale. As a result of our members work, CGI commitments have already helped to: Cut the equivalent of 40 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions; Provide 34 million people with access to treatment for neglected tropical diseases; Reduce malnutrition among more than 42 million children; Provide more than 4 million people with access to clean-energy service in the developing world; Provide more than 8 million children with access to schooling; Provide access to safe drinking water for 3 million people in Asia; Fund more than 270 microfinance institutions, empowering 3 million entrepreneurs with access to microfinance.CGI University has: Convened a membership of nearly 1,000 students, more than 60 university presidents, and more than 60 national youth organizations, representing all 50 states, 53 countries, and more than 280 universities. As a result of commitments made by students at the inaugural CGI U Meeting at Tulane University in New Orleans in 2008: More than 26,000 university students and 2,000 university faculty and staff became actively engaged in efforts to promote clean energy, mitigate climate change, alleviate poverty, improve global health, and promote human rights and peace. More than 74,000 members of the university community were reached by educational efforts and outreach about clean energy, environmental awareness, and sustainability. More than 3,800 new recycling containers were placed on college campuses and in the surrounding community. Students raised $260,000 for humanitarian relief, and more than 2,500 refugees received assistance. Students raised $375,000 to fund scholarships and collected more than $100,000 worth of educational resources including books, laptops, uniforms, and pencils for students in need. Students raised $354,000 to fund global health programs and have reached over 70,000 people with health-care and social services.

19 Philanthropy

20 Philanthropy
Clinton Solves - Poverty

The Clinton foundation solves poverty through partnerships in its myriad of initiatives. William J. Clinton Foundation , International Aid Organization, 09
( William J Clinton foundation, What Weve Accomplished, http://www.clintonfoundation.org/what-wedo/clinton-giustra-sustainable-growth-initiative/what-we-ve-accomplished , accessed 07-10-09, ET) Clinton Giaustra Sustainable Growth Initiative. Since its establishment in 2007, CGSGI has been actively promoting sustainable development and alleviating poverty in economically distressed countries. Some of CGSGIs milestones to date: * Provided medical treatment to more than 35,000 people in remote areas of Colombia through medical missions in partnership with La Fundacin Angelitos de Luz (Angels of Light Foundation) and improved the quality of life and general health of rural, underserved areas. * Helped TANA an organic spice business in Choc, Colombia reach the break-even point and renew its organic certification for 2009. Funded improvements to TANAs processing plant and two 1,000-liter rainwater collecting tanks that will provide potable, clean water for the processing of the spices. These improvements will ensure that TANA maintains the hygiene standards expected by buyers and will keep TANA on a sustainable path. * CGSGI is scaling-up the successful Poverty Reduction and Alleviation (PRA) Program in the Ancash and Cajamarca regions of Peru. This expansion will include the opening of two additional Economic Services Centers (ESC) in Casma and Huari (Ancash), and one in Cajamarca. The ESCs, which provide technical assistance and consulting services, will help approximately 3,600 producers expand their businesses and facilitate access to market information.

21 Philanthropy
Clinton Solves - Funding

The Clinton foundation has a huge budget due to a myriad of international donators: this allows it best fiscal action Jones, Journalism masters degree at Columbia and senior researcher on committee to protect journalists, 08
(Kristen ,fellow in the Toni Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism at Columbia University, ProPublica, Whos not on the Clinton Foundation Donor list?, 12-18-08, http://www.propublica.org/article/whos-not-on-the-clintonfoundation-donor-list-1218, accessed 07-02-09, ET) Curiosity killed the Clinton Foundation Web site. In response to a deal with the Obama transition team, the foundation publicly posted its list of contributors today, drawing enough traffic to crash its fragile server. (The Wall Street Journal has put up its own list [3] of the major donors.) Those who were able to access the list found an impressive roster of foreign governments likely to be interested in getting a word in with Hillary Clinton, future secretary of state. The Washington Post points out that the governments of Saudi Arabia (more than $10 million), Norway ($5 million to $10 million), Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Oman ($1 million to $5 million apiece), Italy and Jamaica ($50,000 to $100,000 apiece) all ponied up. So did billionaires and business interest groups from Israel, China, India and Ethiopia, the former deputy prime minister of Lebanon, the son-in-law of the former prime minister of Ukraine and many, many more. The Blackwater Training Center [5] threw in $10,000 to $25,000. The Post notes that military contractor Blackwater's controversial deal with the State Department is up for renewal next year. There's also money from businesses at the center of the ongoing financial crisis, like Citigroup's Citi Foundation ($1 million to $5 million), AIG ($500,000 to $1 million), Lehman Brothers ($100,000 to $250,000) and Goldman Sachs ($50,000 to $100,000). (Disclosure: The Sandler Foundation, ProPublica's chief funders, are listed [3] as giving $100,000 to $250,000.) But while the list may look comprehensive, it doesnt include everyone with connections to the Clinton Foundation. The foundation includes a number of different charitable projects, including the Clinton Global Initiative, which focuses on issues like HIV/AIDS, Malaria and global warming. International NGOs and corporations can become partners of the Clinton Global Initiative.

22 Philanthropy
Clinton = Growth
Clinton foundation provides opportunities for economic growth in America and has had substantial impacts William J. Clinton Foundation , International Aid Organization, 09
( William J Clinton foundation, What Weve Accomplished, http://www.clintonfoundation.org/what-wedo/clinton-economic-opportunity-initiative/what-we-ve-accomplished, accessed 07-06-09, ET) The Clinton Foundations domestic economic work began in 2002 with the Harlem Small Business Initiative. Since then, the broader Clinton Economic Opportunity Initiative (CEO) has expanded its reach to help more entrepreneurs succeed and individuals and families to get, stay and succeed in the financial mainstream. Over the years, CEO has: * Provided more than 65,000 hours of pro- bono consulting services worth more than $14 million to New York City area entrepreneurs, in association with Booz & Company, New York Universitys Stern School of Business, and the New York Chapter of the National Black MBA Association the program. * Worked with ACORN and Operation HOPE to help survivors Hurricane Katrina claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), securing more than $10 million in EITC funds. * Developed working relationships with cities and states to increase access to low-cost financial services.

23 Philanthropy
AT: Slate Studies

The neg evidence from Slate publications lacks warrants and fails to take into account any of the good the Clinton foundation does Boelhart, senior fellow at Media Matters for America, 08
( Eric, Senior writer for Salon, Boehlert's book, "Lapdogs: How The Press Rolled Over for Bush," was published, The Huffington Post, Slate Plays Dumb About The Clinton Foundation, 11-26-08, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/emslateem-plays-dumb-abou_b_146631.html, accessed 7-03-08, ET) We've noticed lots of news outlets that have done this. When discussing Bill Clinton and the foundation he heads (and there's been lots of discussion lately about possible conflicts of interest with Hillary perhaps becoming SoS), the word that the Beltway media often refuses to use in connection with the foundation is "charity." Chris Matthews did this all the time on MSNBC in recent days, relentlessly referring to international "business" connections Bill Clinton has. Charity was almost never mentioned. Slate just published a 900-word piece in which writer Christopher Beam insists Clinton close down his foundation because of the "inevitable" financial scandals that will emerge in coming years, and how it would distract from his wife's work as SoS. The tsk-tsking article mentions "foundation" 21 times. But for some reason it only mentions "charity" once. ("Charity" also appears in the pun-driven headline.) Interestingly, the piece never actually explains to readers what the Clinton Foundation does. Answer: It helps poor people around the world. Why does Slate purposely play dumb about what the Clinton Foundation is? Why does Slate carefully avoid mentioning the Clinton Foundation battles the HIV/AIDS pandemic and fights hunger in Africa? My guess is that makes it easier for Slate to make the cavalier demand that, in order to please Beltway nay-Sayers, the foundation should be shut down; that "the Clinton Foundation effectively has to close shop." If Slate thinks its narrow definition of conflict of interest trumps helping poor people around the world, than just say so. But don't play dumb in the process.

24 Philanthropy

25 Philanthropy
Clinton - Corruption
Clinton foundation bad: they get funding off of political tradeoffs that are unethical and corrupt Jones, Journalism masters degree at Columbia and senior researcher on committee to protect journalists, 08
(Kristen ,fellow in the Toni Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism at Columbia University, ProPublica, Whos not on the Clinton Foundation Donor list?, 12-18-08, http://www.propublica.org/article/whos-not-on-the-clintonfoundation-donor-list-1218, accessed 07-02-09, ET) In response to a deal with the Obama transition team, the foundation publicly posted its list of contributors today, drawing enough traffic to crash its fragile server. (The Wall Street Journal has put up its own list [3] of the major donors.) Those who were able to access the list found an impressive roster of foreign governments likely to be interested in getting a word in with Hillary Clinton, future secretary of state.Who exactly is on the list? The Washington Post points out [4] that the governments of Saudi Arabia (more than $10 million), Norway ($5 million to $10 million), Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Oman ($1 million to $5 million apiece), Italy and Jamaica ($50,000 to $100,000 apiece) all ponied up. So did billionaires and business interest groups from Israel, China, India and Ethiopia, the former deputy prime minister of Lebanon, the son-in-law of the former prime minister of Ukraine and many, many more. The Blackwater Training Center [5] threw in $10,000 to $25,000. The Post notes that military contractor Blackwater's controversial deal with the State Department is up for renewal next year. There's also money from businesses at the center of the ongoing financial crisis, like Citigroup's Citi Foundation ($1 million to $5 million), AIG ($500,000 to $1 million), Lehman Brothers ($100,000 to $250,000) and Goldman Sachs ($50,000 to $100,000). (Disclosure: The Sandler Foundation, ProPublica's chief funders, are listed [3] as giving $100,000 to $250,000.)But while the list may look comprehensive, it doesnt include everyone with connections to the Clinton Foundation The foundation includes a number of different charitable projects, including the Clinton Global Initiative, which focuses on issues like HIV/AIDS, Malaria and global warming. International NGOs and corporations can become partners of the Clinton Global Initiative, known as "CGI Members [6]," by pledging money generally to the areas of interest to the initiative, sometimes gaining face time with Clinton. Clinton Global Initiative's "partner organizations" are not listed since they're not donating to the foundation itself. For instance, Coca-Cola has committed $13.5 million to reforestation in Brazil and in return been invited to Clinton Global Initiative functions. Youll have to dig elsewhere for that info. Others on the list show up lower than they might if all their contributions to the Clintons' various initiatives were tallied. Vinod Gupta, a businessman, has spent several million keeping Bill Clinton on his payroll as a consultant and donating to his various charitable events, according to National Public Radio [8]. But the Clinton Foundation only lists his contributions as $500,000 to $1 million. (Also, Wall Street scamster and bad guy du jour Bernard Madoff [9] hasn't shown up. But shaky access to the foundation's Web site means we haven't been able to do a full search yet. Madoff was big on charity [10] and was a contributor [11] to Hillary's political campaigns.) As part of his deal with the Obama administration, Bill Clinton has promised to scale back his international fundraising activities. But Politico notes that there are plenty of loopholes [12].

26 Philanthropy
Clinton Conflict of Interest

Because of Hilarys political position, the Clinton foundation needs to close for risk of international use of it to gain political lobby. Beam , Slate Magazine Writer and Journalism Masters from Columbia, 08
( Christopher, political blogger for Slate,writes the online magazine's "Trailhead" blog, and has appeared as a guest on the Colbert Report, coufounded Ivyblog (for ivy league journalists), slate, How Bill Clinton's donors pose a conflict of interest for Hillary., 11-25-08, http://www.slate.com/id/2205432/, accessed 07-03-09, ET) Now that Barack Obama's selection of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state is pretty much set, all that remains is the small print about office dcor, letterhead font and her husband's continued solicitation of millions of dollars from foreign business interests. Bill Clinton resisted pressure before and during Hillary's primary campaign to release the names of the 208,000 donors to the Clinton Foundation. Now Bill is cooperating with the Obama transition team by giving them the foundation's donor list. But that won't be enough. The only solution may be for the former president to dissolve his foundation entirely. When public officials face conflicts of interest, there are two standard remedies: disclosure and recusal. Butto the former president's creditthe Clinton Foundation has larger array of activities and programs in more nations than any other presidential foundation. For Clinton's post-presidency, as for his presidency, the usual rules don't apply. Clinton's position as head of the foundation is similar to that of secretary of statehe travels the world, schmoozes foreign leaders, talks global economics. But instead of advocating U.S. interests, he asks for money for his foundation. If he were in charge of the foundation while Hillary served as secretary of state, donors might assume that giving money to the foundation would buy them Hillary's earor, at least, an ear that rests on the same pillow as Hillary's. Bill could, and undoubtedly would, do his best to disabuse them of that assumption. And he can be very convincing. But the assumption of influence would persistand no amount of persuasion or disclosure could ever erase it. Disclosure, after all, does not eliminate conflict of interest. It merely exposes it. People would still give to the Clinton Foundation because they think they're buying influence. It's not a crazy supposition. In 2005, Canadian mining executive Frank Giustra gave the foundation $31 million a few months after Bill Clinton helped facilitate a lucrative deal with the government of Kazakhstan. All told, that arrangement was relatively benign: Clinton was simply using his influence as an ex-president, as many ex-presidents do. If Clinton's wife were secretary of state, though, the exercise would be less innocent. Financial scandalor what passes for it with the Clintonswould be inevitable. The only variable is how hard it will be to unearth. If the foundation discloses the donors, potential conflicts of interest will be a Google search away. If it doesn't, they will dribble out one leak at a time. But, you say, the donors haven't leaked so far. Well, some have. And that was before reporters had much incentive to dig. Every foreign government or business with interests in U.S. policy would have reason to give to the Clinton Foundation. And every donationeven well-meaning oneswould therefore be suspect.

27 Philanthropy
Perm Solves
Mr. Clinton advocates that private action alone wont solve: federal action will be key to solve social services and he advocates a mix of the two Vadum, senior editor of capital research center, 08
(Matthew, utstanding legal journalism from the Pennsylvania Bar Association and M.A. in American Studies from Georgetown University. , Human events, Clinton foundation refuses to reveal donors but sells list to friends, 0205-08, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24826, accessed 07-03-09, ET) .Since leaving the White House in 2001, Bill Clinton has used philanthropy to stay in the public eye. His star power attracts widespread public attention and major donor contributions to the William J. Clinton Foundation, which supports his presidential library and funds many worthy charities. Drawing the very wealthy and the politically ambitious into his orbit, like moths to a flame, Clinton hopes to promote public policies he considers vital for America and the world--and his own new career as a philanthropic rainmaker. And should
Sen. Hillary Clinton become President, she will further boost the prospects of the Clinton Foundation. Bill Clinton's "focus on humanitarian issues" observes ABC News, "is in many ways the perfect balance to his wife's political ambitions--and also repairs the damage done to his reputation by the Monica Lewinsky scandal during his presidency, helping to transform the former President's legacy into one of an elder statesman dedicated to global issues" ("Bill Clinton's Humanitarian Focus," ABC News, Sept. 25, 2007). Clinton is raising money to end poverty and create economic opportunity in countries. He wants to create awareness of threats to public health, whether from HIV/AIDS overseas or sugary soft drinks in local elementary schools. He has joined former Vice President Al Gore in the fight against global warming. Days after the 2004
Indian Ocean tsunami, Clinton and former President George H.W. Bush were everywhere on television, reassuring the world that philanthropy would provide relief. Out of office, Clinton remains a faithful liberal who continues to believe in the blessings of government assistance. But he says he has discovered that personal philanthropy can also do wonders: "I felt obligated to do it because of the wonderful, improbable life I'd been given by the American people and because politics, which consumed so much of my life, is a 'getting business.' You have to get votes, over and over again," Clinton writes in his 240-page book, Giving, which became a bestseller when it went on sale last September. Unfortunately, Clinton's idea of giving includes supporting advocacy organizations that promote more government spending. In his book, Clinton explains how lobbying campaigns can push lawmakers to increase government healthcare spending. He urges his readers to contact the group Families USA, whose executive director, Ron Pollack, coordinated lobbying by outride groups in support of the Clinton Administration's failed healthcare proposals. If readers are aged 50 or over, Clinton urges them to join AARP. He commends the work of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a liberal think tank headed by his former White House chief of staff, John Podesta, and notes that CAP created the "Better Healthcare Together" coalition, an unlikely alliance of labor unions and corporations that are eager to push employee healthcare costs onto the taxpayers. While Clinton lauds private citizens for giving to their places of worship and local charities, he says it's not enough. Big Government remains the solution: "Many of the problems that bedevil both rich and poor nations in the modern world cannot be adequately addressed without more enlightened government policies, more competent and honest public administration and more investment of tax dollars." Public interest in what Bill Clinton has to say is sustaining the market's demand for his speeches. Touring the world giving talks and wagging his famous finger has made him a wealthy man. Clinton gets six-figure fees for his paid speaking engagements, earning him some $31 million from 2001 through 2005.Where Does the Money Go? The William J. Clinton Foundation states that its mission is "to strengthen the capacity of people throughout the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence." It focuses on four "critical areas": "health security, economic empowerment, leadership development and citizen service, and racial, ethnic and religious reconciliation."

28 Philanthropy
Soros CP Text
The Open society and George Soros Foundation Network should Observation 1: Competition Observation 2: Solvency The Soros foundation already alleviates poverty in the United States successfully: New York proves Open society and George Soros Foundation Network, international aid foundation, 09
(Open society institute and Soros Foundation, George Soros Announces $50 Million Matching Grant to Fight Poverty in New York, 5-12-09, http://www.soros.org/newsroom/news/newyork_20090512, accessed 07-03-09, ET) The Open Society Institute has pledged $50 million to the Robin Hood Foundation to help people in New York City in need of basic services like food and shelter. George Soros, chairman of OSI, on May 12 announced the donation in an effort to inspire other philanthropists and institutions to step up their giving in this time of economic crisis. One of the largest gifts ever made to satisfy basic necessities, the grant hinges on Robin Hoods board matching Soross contribution dollar for dollar. As a result of the financial meltdown, we are seeing a humanitarian emergency right here in the United States with New York at its epicenter, Soros said at the annual fundraiser. The city has seen a record increase in new homeless families over the past several months. Behind the statistics there are individual stories of dislocation and distress and, as always, the most vulnerable are hurt the most. The grant aims to fill the gap left by foundations and charities hit by the recent financial downturn. Just as needs have increased so tremendously, the philanthropic organizations have been also victims of the crisis, and they have to cut back, Soros said. We want to reverse that with this gift. Established in 1988, the Robin Hood Foundation supports more than 240 nonprofit organizations that implement a variety of anti-poverty programs in New York City, from providing early childhood education, to running food pantries, to housing survivors of domestic violence. Over the past 15 years Soros and the Open Society Institute have supported Robin Hood. While the Open Society Institute will continue to tackle pressing global challenges, it also recognizes the urgency of providing basic services to New Yorkers struggling during harsh economic times. This is an exceptional situation and it calls for an exceptional response, said Soros. The Robin Hood Foundations event raised more than $72 million.

29 Philanthropy
Soros Solves - Poverty

The Soros Foundation has empirically overcome a myriad of challenges to solve poverty and urban challenges: Baltimore proves Open Society Institute, 04
(Yale school of Management case studies, The Baltimore Fund, Feb 2004, http://pse.som.yale.edu/papers%20and %20cases/Yale_Baltimore_Fund_Case.pdf, accessed 07-10-09, ET) In 1998, OSI opened its Baltimore office to focus on critical national urban issues on a local level. The offices mission was to grapple with issues of national consequence that took on the limitations and opportunities created by local social, economic, and political conditions. During its tenure in Baltimore, the organization had learned much about the city and its ongoing issues and concerns. During the last thirty years, the Baltimore economy had shifted from manufacturing to services and advanced technology. Between 1970 and 1997, manufacturing employment declined by approximately 60,000 jobs.7 The national consolidation of the financial and business services in the early 1990s contributed to the loss of another 11,000 jobs in the city.8 Despite this bleak history, Baltimore was showing new signs of life. Significant growth had recently occurred in the services, health services, high technology, and retail/entertainment industries. In addition to the growth in these industries, there was a new, energetic young mayor in office, who was focused on improving neighborhoods. More than $300 million in commercial development had begun along Baltimores shoreline that would, over the next five years, produce shops, restaurants, offices, condominiums, rental apartments and museums.9 Moreover, investments in building Baltimores digital harbor and rehabbing of old manufacturing plants and warehouses had begun. The citys growing sector of information technology companies was quickly leasing these new development properties as soon as they were placed on the market. Outside of the Inner Harbor, the downtown office building market was coming back and the occupancy rate had grown from 45% to 90% in just a few months.10 The challenge was clear. How could the city spread this economic growth and resulting jobs into the neighborhoods that were struggling with poverty? In Baltimore, 24% of the population was living below the official poverty line, including 36% of the children. The official unemployment rate was 7.3% versus 4.1% in the region. Yet these 20,000 unemployed residents did not include the 8,500 individuals returning from the criminal justice system each year, the 2,000 students that both drop out of school and are unemployed each year, and the thousands of people on public assistance. Some neighborhoods had true unemployment rates of over 30-40%.The citys labor participation rate was only 57%, 10% below the state and 20% below several suburban counties OSI wanted to help those neighborhoods that were not participating in the current economic growth. With leadership and capital to invest, OSI believed that helping to create high quality jobs could narrow the gap between Baltimores rich and poor. Approval & Challenge To meet Soros challenge, OSI-Baltimore hired the Community Development Venture Capital Alliance (CDVCA) to perform a market study of the financing needs of businesses in the Baltimore area and to write a business plan detailing how to design a potential venture capital fund. The business plan and market study presented by the CDVCA made a sound argument for investment in the region. Although there were other investment funds with social objectives to promote business growth in Maryland (See Exhibit 2), there remained a need for further equity capital strictly focused in the Baltimore region. Additionally, other funds focused on different social objectives and did not include workforce development for low-income workers as a primary objective. The CDVCA report highlighted the importance of providing business counseling and human resources assistance to emerging companies, as well as leveraging local community expertise and existing city initiatives.

30 Philanthropy

George Soros uses his foundation to make open societies that promote anti-poverty and his projects yield results, making his foundation a highly effective way to combat poverty Soros / Open Project foundation 09
( Open society institute and Soros foundations Network, About us: Executive bios: George Soros, 2009, http://www.soros.org/about/bios/a_soros, accessed 07-03-09, ET) A global financier and philanthropist, George Soros is the founder and chairman of a network of foundations that promote, among other things, the creation of open, democratic societies based upon the rule of law, market economies, transparent and accountable governance, freedom of the press, and respect for human rights. Philanthropy- As his financial success mounted, Soros applied his wealth to help foster the development of open societies. In 1979, Soros provided funds to help black students attend the University of Cape Town in apartheid South Africa. Soon he created a foundation in Hungary to support culture and education and the countrys transition to democracy. (One of his projects imported photocopy machines that allowed citizens and activists in Hungary to spread information and publish censored materials.) Soros also distributed funds to the underground Solidarity movement in Poland, Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia, and the Soviet physicist-dissident Andrei Sakharov. In 1982, Soros named his philanthropic organization the Open Society Fund, in honor of Karl Popper, and began granting scholarships to students from Eastern Europe. Bolstered by the success of these projects, Soros created more programs to assist the free flow of information. He supported educational radio programs in Mongolia and later contributed $100 million to provide Internet access to every regional university in Russia. The magnitude and geographical scope of his philanthropic commitments, coupled with the core principle of fostering open societies, has allowed Soros to transcend the limitations of many national governments and international institutions. During the 1980s, Soros financed a trip by young economists at a reform-minded think tank in China to a business university in Budapest; he also established a grantmaking foundation in China to foster civil society and transparency. In 1991, he helped found the Central European University, a graduate institution in Budapest that focuses on social and political development. Soros spent $50 million to help the citizens of Sarajevo endure the citys siege during the Bosnian war, funding among other projects a water-filtration plant that allowed residents to avoid having to draw water from distribution points targeted by Serb snipers. Most recently, he has provided $50 million to support the Millennium Villages initiative, which seeks to lift some of the least developed villages in Africa out of poverty. In 1993, Soros created the Open Society Institute, which supports the Soros foundations working to develop democratic institutions throughout Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. His network of philanthropic organizations dedicated to building open societies has expanded to include more than 60 countries in the Middle East, Central Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Despite the breadth of his endeavors, Soros is personally involved in planning and implementing many of the foundation networks projects. His visionary efforts have produced a remarkable record of successful philanthropy, including efforts to free developmentally challenged people from life-long confinement in state institutions, to provide palliative care to the dying, to win release for prisoners held without legal grounds in penitentiaries in Nigeria, to halt the spread of tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS, to create debate societies, to promote freedom of the press, and to help resource-rich countries establish mechanisms to manage their revenues in a way that will promote economic growth and good governance rather than poverty and instability. In 2003, Soros said that removing President George W. Bush from office was one of his main priorities. During the 2004 campaign, he donated significant funds to various groups dedicated to defeating the president.

31 Philanthropy

Seros is committed to solving poverty through the work of his foundation: Africa proves Seemungal 06
(Martin, ABC News, A Big Boost in the Fight Against Poverty, 9-18-06, http://abcnews.go.com/m/screen? id=2429324&pid=74, accessed 07-04-09, ET) The fight against poverty got a big boost today. George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist, has pledged $50 million to the United Nations' Millennium Villages project in Africa. As part of a five-year U.N. commitment, 78 villages in 10 African countries receive support in the fundamental areas of farming, health care and water. Jeffrey Sachs, the American economist who is convinced that poverty can be beaten in our lifetime, is in charge of the project. He said the Soros pledge is important because it will act as an example to others. In an interview with The Associated Press, Sachs said "[Soros] just empowered us to do something that is incredibly important." Sachs was in Mbola, Tanzania, recently to meet the villagers who are part of the project's latest effort. It's a place with no running water and no electricity. Preventable diseases, such as malaria, still kill people there. On one scorching hot afternoon, several hundred villagers listened intently as Sachs, with the help of a translator, explained how the project works. When Sachs asked the gathering how many people had been sick with malaria this year, a forest of hands shot up. Sachs promised the villagers that in coming weeks they would receive specially treated bed nets to keep out the mosquitoes that carry malaria. The nets, which cost only $7, can save lives. Experts from the Millennium Villages project will visit Mbola regularly to ensure the villagers use the nets correctly. For proof of the difference the nets can make, visit Sauri, Kenya, the site of the first Millennium village. Over the course of a year, malaria cases dropped 60 percent there. Farmers in Sauri have also tripled their harvests, thanks to the improved seeds and fertilizer the Millennium Villages project provided. Better harvests mean more food, and now Sauri's main school provides a free lunch to students every day. According to the principal, the students seem more energetic and more attentive, and their marks have shot up dramatically. In contrast, Mbola's classrooms sit half-empty, the students appear half-asleep and seem generally unhappy. There is great hope this will change next year. With the promise of better seeds and fertilizer, Mbola's parents are determined to give their children a free lunch every day. This simple approach, targeting basic needs, is what the Millennium Villages project is all about. "The key is to give a hand up so that people below the ladder of development who can't even get on the first rung ... can start climbing on their own," said Sachs. Sachs urges world leaders, corporations and even individuals to take a positive approach when confronting the enormity of global poverty to avoid what he calls "defeatism." "They don't know how practical the solutions are. They don't realize that at very low cost -- just a few dollars -- you can save children's lives."

32 Philanthropy
Soros Solves - Funding

George Soros works to solve poverty worldwide and is a dependable donor even in times of recession Burton, International Herald Tribune writer, 09
(Katherine, writer for U.S. News & World, Bloomberg, Soros Pledges $100 Million to Charities in Ex-Soviet Republics, 07-19-09, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aK_oQKE_UY5Y, accessed 0706-09, ET) George Soros, the billionaire hedge- fund manager born in Hungary, pledged $100 million to charities in the former Soviet republics, eastern Europe and the Balkans to help counteract the effects of the global recession. In times of economic crisis, the most vulnerable are the ones hurt the most, and the youth, the next generation, are the key targets of this initiative, Soros, 78, said yesterday in a statement. The money will be distributed in 20 countries based on recommendations by local Soros foundations. The charities could include anything from cultural institutions at risk of closing to helping families buy lunches in schools, said Laura Silber, director of public affairs for Soross Open Society Institute.

33 Philanthropy
Soros Solves - Funds

The Soros foundation has the ability to effectively fundraise, proving that the foundation will be resilient in solvency Anderson, Senior associate at Baltimore Sun, Masters in journalism from Northwestern, 06
(Lynn, The Baltimore Sun, Open Society finds local allies: Group set to raise $20 million by 2008, 04-03-06, http://proxy.foley.gonzaga.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=nfh&AN=2W62W63614874005&site=ehost-live, accessed 07-07-09, ET) -Last May, when billionaire financier George Soros challenged Baltimore to raise $20 million to support programs to reduce drug addiction, bolster school reform, and decrease juvenile delinquency, he said he was confident that local "Robin Hoods" would pitch in. Nearly a year later, officials at Soros' Open Society Institute-Baltimore say they are well on their way to meeting that challenge, thanks in part to large contributions from two local nonprofits that also focus on social issues, and that they expect to meet the fundraising goal two years before the 2010 deadline set by their founder and chief benefactor. "Our work in Baltimore is not finished," said Diana Morris, executive director of OSI-Baltimore, who announced last week that her team had raised $5 million so far, including $2.5 million from the Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation in Owings Mills, and $1 million from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, a national nonprofit based in the city. The Casey Foundation also agreed to continue funding worth $4 million for programs tied to local OSI efforts. "We hope others will come to the table and work with us for the good of Baltimore," said Morris, whose focus during the past year has been to reposition the nonprofit, located at 201 N. Charles St., for its next phase. The office opened in 1998 with the goal of understanding and solving urban ills that trouble many older, industrial cities. Soros gave roughly $50 million in startup funding but made it clear that the office would eventually have to find other revenue sources. He surprised many when he announced last year that he would continue to fund OSI-Baltimore as long as local residents would also offer up some funding. Many in the city saw his financial offer as testimony to the success of the office, which has worked, largely behind the scenes, to nearly triple state funding for drug addiction treatment in the city, and leverage more than $20.3 million in public and private funds to help ex-prisoners, among other initiatives. Today, Morris said, OSI-Baltimore is poised to focus exclusively on four key areas: drug addiction, school reform, juvenile delinquency and support for exprisoners. The nonprofit has recently added three new leadership positions to its 11-member board of directors and has also hired professionals with expertise in fundraising and public relations. Morris said she expects the office to remain open for at least the next five years, probably longer, as long as funding continues. OSI-Baltimore's annual budget is about $6 million, she said. The $10 million from Soros and $20 million from local individuals or organizations will cover roughly the next five years of operations. OSI board members said they are excited to be moving forward with new initiatives. "There is a rejuvenated confidence in the city and downtown and its neighborhoods, and it is a very exciting time to be working in the city," said Marilynn K. Duker, the recently elected chairwoman of the OSI-Baltimore board of directors. Duker also serves as president at The Shelter Group, a Baltimore-based real estate development and property management company specializing in multifamily and senior living rental communities.

34 Philanthropy
Despite economic barriers, George Soross Open society institute manages to raise necessary funds to combat poverty, showing its commitment and ability Yale School of Management, 04
(Yale School of Management, Case studies: the Program on Social enterprise, February 2004, http://pse.som.yale.edu/papers%20and%20cases/Yale_Baltimore_Fund_Case.pdf , accessed 07-07-09, ET) Patrice McConnell Cromwell, Program Development Fellow of the Open Society Institute (OSI), prepared her notes for her 9:00 AM meeting. Investors of the Baltimore Fund would soon be gathering in OSIs Baltimore, Maryland office to hear the latest financial and workforce development report from the Funds investment manager. As she gathered her notes, Cromwell reflected on the major challenges the group had faced since April 2001 when they had initiated work on the fund. Getting the Fund off the ground had not been easy. To meet billionaire George Soros challenge of securing $10 million in funds from at least two other sources, Cromwell and her colleagues had turned to private sector institutions as well as small and large foundations in the Baltimore region. Given the difficult state of the local and national economy, encouraging these institutions to make social investments had been challenging. Additionally, once investors had been secured, responding to the individual needs of each had resulted in an extremely complex deal structure. The structure had to reflect the various organizational concerns and cultures of the different participants both for-profit and nonprofit including certain private foundation investors that intended to characterize their participation as a Program Related Investment (PRI).1 As a result, handling all of the legal papers to capitalize the Fund had become more costly and difficult than expected. Despite these challenges, OSI raised the needed capital and the Baltimore Fund was capitalized at $15 million in July 2002. After much consideration, the group made the decision to structure their investments as a fund within a fund. The capital was placed in the Urban Growth Partners Fund (UGP), a multi-state initiative managed by The Reinvestment Fund (TRF). UGP is a $48.5 million fund that invests in enterprises with the potential to generate a financial return for its investors and job opportunities for lowincome urban workers. TRF had agreed to earmark 31% of its funds for investments in businesses in the Baltimore metropolitan area; a percentage proportionate to the sizeable amount of funds the Baltimore Fund had committed ($15M of the $48.5M) to UGP. At the mornings meeting, TRF would report on its investments to date including their first Baltimorebased investment. As the administrator of the Fund, Cromwell knew her co-investors would be anxious to hear TRFs update as many of them still had questions.

35 Philanthropy
solves best: private actors superior

Private actors solve governments shortcomings in global poverty and the Soros foundation is the leading private actor in poverty Brainard, Brookings Global Expert, 06
(Lael,Brookings,Brookings, GLOBAL POVERTY: NEW ACTORS, NEW APPROACHES, p.1,2, 2006, http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2007/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2007/02globaleconomics/200702_10poverty.pdf ,accessed 07-06-09, ET) For much of the late 20th century, combating global poverty was primarily the responsibility of bilateral official donors and multilateral development banks (MDBs) as well as the recipient governments themselves. Now there is growing awareness of the shortcomings of official agencies to confront the multifaceted challenges of poverty in the 21st century. Bilateral donors and MDBs principally deal with the governments of poor countries which themselves can be a principal obstacle to poverty alleviation when corruption or ineptitude prevail. And because they are beholden to their respective constituencies, bilateral donors and the MDBs are politically hamstrung in their ability to exercise the discretion and selectivity that might produce more success stories. Moreover, private flows to developing countriesranging from philanthropy to corporate partnerships to volunteer serviceare now estimated at more than twice the level of public flows. THE CHALLENGE The world has recently witnessed a flourishing of new actors taking new approaches to combat global poverty and increasing competition among aid providers. Primarily drawn from the private sector, these visionary individuals are bringing the same spirit of leadership, innovation and initiative that is required for success in the global marketplace to development enterprises. With large financial and organizational resources behind them, these corporate leaders and enterprising individuals are infusing poverty alleviation ventures with creativity, greater flexibility and a general willingness to take large risks. George Soros was at the vanguard of the foundation movement with his Open Society Institute and network of philanthropic organizations.

36 Philanthropy
Soros Solves - Health Care

Soros solves health care; Russia and Romania proves Pallarito, Senior health reporter at Reuters, 97
(Karen, Reuters, Soros new mission, 11-03-97, http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail? vid=6&hid=4&sid=e98ff90e-0bda-4fed-bb40-62ec134a06af %40sessionmgr7&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d %3d#db=aph&AN=9712032599#db=aph&AN=9712032599, accessed07-06-09, ET) Since 1979 Soros has contributed millions of his personal wealth to some of the world's poorest nations. Last year he invested $2.3 million to improve maternal and child health and medical education in Hungary. His network of foundations in 31 countries will provide $15 million to $17 million in grants and donations to health and medical programs this year. Now, at age 67, the Hungarian-born money manager is upping the ante. In his largest gift ever, Soros will spend $500 million over three years in Russia (See related story in the international section, p. i34). Roughly $100 million of that will be invested in public health projects, exceeding the United States' own $95 million total foreign-aid contribution to the former Soviet republic last year. Soros' goals are lofty: He wants to cure Russia's menacing tuberculosis epidemic and begin repairing the country's tattered public healthcare infrastructure. In an interview with MODERN HEALTHCARE, Soros said he is intervening now because Russia's healthcare system faces a "crisis" and needs immediate rehabilitation. "The authorities are not in a position to do enough about it because the state itself is in disarray," he said. Over the next three years, Soros' philanthropic arm in Russia will fund several projects, with an emphasis on maternal and child health. That's because children, he said, "are the future of the country, and they are also in very bad shape." Seeking open societies. Soros' benevolence is influenced by the writings of 20th-century philosopher Karl Popper. Popper introduced the concept of an "open society," characterized by, among other things, a democratically elected government, moderation in politics and respect for diverse opinions. Soros' New York-based Open Society Institute promotes the idea by supporting educational, social and legal reforms and exploring alternative approaches to complex problems. The fall of the Soviet empire in 1991 presented Soros with a framework for helping build an open society there. Soros, who lives in New York's Westchester County, acknowledges some personal reasons for focusing on Russia. His father was imprisoned in a labor camp there during World War I. "Yes, I have some emotional ties, but I'm not in any way favoring Russia to the exclusion of other countries," Soros said. Once the Russian reforms are in place, Soros plans to move on to other targeted healthcare projects around the globe. "This is only a temporary measure on my part until the (Russian) authorities are able to get their act together," he said. Beginning in 1998, foundation leaders have proposed spending $7 million over three years to expand general practice and family medicine training in Romania. The country suffers from a lack of generalists, Soros said. His philanthropic advisers also are assessing needs in Georgia and Mongolia. Those programs will begin in 1998 as well, although specific funding amounts have not yet been determined. Sources in the international aid community said the amount of Soros' gift to Russia is substantial, but the nation's healthcare needs are larger. Whether it will make a difference depends on how the money is spent, they said. If it's used to leverage other commitments of money and manpower, then it can have a much larger impact, said Christopher Harris, vice president for emerging issues and international programs at the Council on Foundations, Washington. Soros can get the most bang for the buck by concentrating on small projects, working with schools and hospitals to share medical knowledge, for example, added a spokeswoman for the U.S. Agency for International Development. At times his brand of humanitarianism has riled critics. This summer, for instance, Soros donated $1 million to make sterile needles available to U.S. drug addicts at risk of contracting HIV. And last fall, he supported ballot initiatives in California and Arizona aimed at legalizing the medical use of marijuana. Simple measures. In comparison, the Russian initiative seems relatively noncontroversial. His goal is to replicate and expand existing pilot projects in three areas: maternal and child health, medical education and information, and health promotion and disease prevention. Much of it boils down to "simple, basic low-tech intervention," explained Abbey Gardner, a regional director for Russia at the Open Society Institute. Gardner said one possibility is to expand local projects in which maternity ward physicians have been trained to encourage breast feeding, dramatically improving infant health. A lack of funding has prevented the model from being replicated, she said. Russian women lack even up-to-date, basic information on what to expect when they are six months pregnant and how to care for a 5-month-old baby. "Some people are using Dr. Spock if they can get their hands on it, which is obviously out-of-date American information that doesn't work in 1997," Gardner said. One solution, she said, is to commission a textbook author to fill the gap. Soros and his staff have met with key leaders in Russia's Ministry of Health to garner their comments and approval. "Without the ministry's support, it would be impossible to successfully implement the program," Gardner said.

37 Philanthropy
Officials hope to launch the Russian initiative within the next several months. Right now, they are busy canvassing the globe for an executive director to oversee the project. Health targets. Soros already has written a $3 million check for the Russia project. The money, part of a $12 million grant, will go for a three-pronged attack against Russia's rampant tuberculosis epidemic and poor infection-control practices. Later, at least $6 million will be devoted to eradicating TB in Russia's prison population. It is estimated that 8% to 10% of the nation's 1 million inmates are infected with the disease, he said. The TB project will be headed by Alex Goldfarb, a researcher at the Public Health Research Institute in New York. Goldfarb's team of researchers will begin by collecting sputum samples in Russian jails. If those specimens show that prisoners will respond to drug therapy, then clinical researchers will begin training prison personnel to administer "directly observed treatment" programs. The final $1 million of the $12 million grant targets Russia's poor hospital infection-control practices. The money will pay for a state-of-the-art laboratory where technologists and clinicians will be trained in modern microbiology. Small steps. Foundation officials measure Soros' philanthropic success one program at a time. One of their proudest achievements is a partnership with the city of Cluj, Romania, where they established "the first baby-friendly hospital in Romania," said Srdjan Matic, director of network medical programs at the Open Society Institute. He said the city donated the building and spent $1 million on reconstruction. Soros' foundation in Romania spent $200,000 to $250,000 on equipment and supplies and introduced the idea of integrated medical teams, in which nurses, physicians, midwives and technicians coordinate care. The hospital offers privacy during labor and delivery, and newborns get to stay in their mothers' rooms.

38 Philanthropy
Soros No Solves
Soros Foundations key investments in the MDG failed, the project had no success and things have been getting worse in the regions where it was supposed to help Rizvi, Masters in Journalism Columbia University, UN Correspondent for IPS, 06
(Haider, IPS, Halfway to MDGs, Little to Brag About, 11-27-09, http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp? idnews=35622 , accessed 07-10-09, ET) "We are still a long way from where we need to be," outgoing Secretary-General Kofi Annan told the U.N. General Assembly. "We have laid a foundation for development, but no more than that." The MDGs include a 50 percent reduction in extreme poverty and hunger; universal primary education; reduction of child mortality by two-thirds; cutbacks in maternal mortality by three-quarters; the promotion of gender equality; and the reversal of the spread of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other deadly diseases, all by 2015. No region in the world is currently on track to meet all of these goals, Annan and others said, noting that the progress made so far is either partial or confined to one region. While East Asian countries have shown substantial progress in poverty reduction, there is no sign of a qualitative change in South Asia. Similarly, Latin America has shown some solid results, but only in certain areas. According to the United Nations, more than one billion people worldwide live on less than a dollar a day. Another 2.7 billion struggle to survive on less than two dollars a day, while 11 million children die each year from completely preventable causes like malaria, diarrhea and pneumonia. U.N. development experts seem most worried about the situation in sub-Saharan Africa, where they see no indication of any progress on any of the goals. Achieving the MDGs in sub-Saharan Africa remains a much "bigger problem" than in other regions of the world, said Kemal Dervis, who runs the U.N. Development Programme. Dervis said that despite substantial economic growth in recent years, disparities within and between countries continue to rise. Since the outset of the industrial revolution, he said, the top 10 richest countries of the world have become 50 times more prosperous than the 10 at the bottom. Annan criticised wealthy countries for failing to fulfill their pledges on funding for the MDGs, but added that developing nations must also live up to their own commitments. "Development will simply not happen if the developing world doesn't get its own house in order," he said. Many developed countries have pledged to allocate 0.7 percent of their GDP to finance development in poor countries, but only a few of them have actually matched their words with deeds. Though the current levels of official development assistance (ODA) from the developed world remain insufficient to meet all the MDGs, U.N. officials stressed some positive trends. "We may not have made poverty history, but we are making progress," said Haya Rashed Al Khalifa, the General Assembly president, noting that last year, ODA had reached 100 billion dollars for the first time. Recently, donor countries agreed to deliver an additional 50 billion dollars in aid, with 25 billion to Africa, by 2010, while they already canceled some of the debt of 20 poorest nations, amounting to about 81 billion dollars. On Monday, the Islamic Development Bank announced it was ready to set up a poverty alleviation fund with initial capital of 10 billion dollars. The Islamic Bank, which operates in 54 countries, will start its funding for poverty reduction, girls' education, health, HIV/AIDS and other MDG-focused projects in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and former Soviet nations in Central Asia. "The fund will provide financing on highly concessional terms focusing primarily on 25 least developed member countries of the IsDB in Africa and Asia," said Dr Amadou Boubacar Cisse, vice president of the Bank's operations. The fund is part of the Islamic countries' apparent resolve to take their own initiatives on financing for development, instead of heavily relying on sources from the outside world. Last December, the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) held a summit in Saudi Arabia, where its leaders approved the idea of setting up the fund. In addition to the Islamic Bank, there are other heavy hitters in the private sector who appear serious about strengthening global efforts to implement the U.N. agenda on development. According to U.N. officials, among other emerging and new donors, they include such well-known names as George Soros of the Soros Foundation and Hisham Alwugayan of the Kuwait Fund for Economic Development.

39 Philanthropy
Soros Solves - Education

The Soros foundation solves education in impoverished regions Editor of New Liberarian, Liberias main online news source, 08
(New Liberian, Soros , President Sirleaf Agree Over Need for Faster Implementation, 02-20-08, http://newliberian.com/?p=249, accessed 07-03-09, ET) American Philanthropist George Soros recently concluded a two-day visit to Liberia, expressing impatience over the slow pace of project implementation in the country. Mr. Soros expressed support for the level of international goodwill toward Liberia, but said there is a need that the support is translated into visible results. Addressing reporters following a meeting with President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Mr. Soros observed that progress is being made somewhere in the offices by pushing papers around, but stressed that efforts must be stepped up toward implementation. An Executive Mansion release says the Founder of the Open Society Initiative of West Africa (OSIWA) expressed confidence in the administration of President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf to deliver on its promises to the people and spend funds received from donors and other partners wisely. Mr. Soros, whose Foundation has made available US $5 million towards the countrys education program, on condition of a US$15 million match from other donors, said the funds have yet to be released. There is so much time taken up by planning and getting everything ready and so on, and so it means that you dont see any progress on the ground, he said, adding, I am personally rather impatient with all of the papers that are being prepared, I rather need to see some actions, Mr. Soros maintained.President Johnson Sirleaf, responding, said her Government was appreciative of the support the American billionaire and his Foundation continue to provide, particularly toward Liberias education sector. The President, who has also repeatedly voiced concern over the slow pace of implementation, expressed the hope that less bureaucracy would give way to faster delivery and implementation of programs.Mr. Soros two-day visit to Liberia on February 8th and 9th followed his participation in the Africa Forum in the Senegalese capital, Dakar. The Forum which ran from 4th February to the 7th brought together regional partners and other affiliates of the Open Society Initiative for West Africa, to discuss emerging opportunities, threats and challenges to the establishment of open societies in the region. Meanwhile, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf has spoken of the need for cooperation amongst all branches of Government if the countrys development agenda is to be realized.Speaking Monday at the Foreign Ministry when she addressed a Legislative Leadership consultation on Governments Poverty Reduction Strategy, the President said the purpose of the forum was to brief the leadership of both the House and Senate about the Strategy. The three year program, the President said, will incorporate the consensus reached by county residents during recently held regional consultations.The interactive forum, an Executive Mansion release says, was attended by Vice President Joseph Boakai, House Speaker Alex Tyler, and Senate Pro-Tempore Isaac Nyenabo, as well as Deputy Speaker Togba Mulbah and other leaders and members of committees of both Houses of the National Legislature.During Mondays forum, presentations were made on Governments four development Pillars by Defense Minister Brownie Samukai, Finance Minister Dr. Antoinette Sayeh, Deputy Planning Minister Simeon Moriba and Public Works Minister Luseni Donzo. For his part, the National Coordinator of the Liberia Reconstruction and Development Committee (LRDC), Mr. O. Natty B. Davis, gave an overview of the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) and spoke about the core features of the strategy as well as the various working groups, and the policy coordinating structure.

40 Philanthropy
Perm Solvency
Soros concedes that full scale poverty solvency would take federal cooperation. This proves perm will solve best for poverty services. News.au New York Correspondents, International news source, 06
( News.com.au, Soros $67m for Africa poverty project, 9-13-06, http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27753,20404513-14305,00.html, accessed 07-03-09, ET) US financier George Soros is to invest $US50 million ($66.7 million) in a development project that aims to show how targeted investment can end extreme poverty in African villages. The Millennium Villages program involves small, focused investment in community-driven projects in the health, education and agriculture sectors. "It's a very ambitious project and a very promising one," the billionaire philanthropist told AFP. "It's, I think, fully justified on humanitarian grounds, just as a demonstration project, but if it actually can be scaled up then it could become a very significant contribution to reducing poverty in the world," Mr Soros said. The project is based on a set of internationally agreed targets for reducing poverty, hunger, disease, illiteracy, environmental degradation and sexual discrimination by 2015 the Millennium Development Goals. The Soros donation will reach some 165,000 people in 33 villages run by Millennium Villages in 10 Sub-Saharan countries, but Mr Soros said the initiative would need government help if it was to be implemented more broadly. "To scale it up would have to be done by governments, because you can't rely on private philanthropy to do it on the scale that would be significant enough to make a green revolution. That would require government support," Mr Soros said. "This is meant to provide a prototype that could attract major support from the governments that's in fact the purpose." The project is involved in 79 villages in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania and Uganda. Jeffrey Sachs, the president and co-founder of the Millennium Promise Alliance behind the project described Mr Soros as "a true visionary in his support for the fight against poverty, and a champion of innovative thinking". Hungarian-born Mr Soros is chairman of the Open Society Institute and founder of a network of philanthropic organisations active in more than 60 countries which have in total donated more than $US5 billion over the years. The foundation aims to shape public policy to promote democratic governance, human rights, and economic, legal, and social reform.

41 Philanthropy
Perm solvency
Soros supports the Obama administration and thinks he will be able to work with them. Norris, chief financial correspondent of New York Times, 07
(Floyd, stock market editor at Barron's National Business and Financial, compiled and edited "The New York Times Century of Business, MBA from Columbia, The New York Times, George Soros Backs Obama (But Hedges His Bets), 01-27-09, http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/27/george-soros-backs-obama-but-hedges-his-bets/, accessed 07-03-09, ET) George Soros, the billionaire former hedge fund manager, met with a group of reporters over lunch on Saturday he paid the check and offered views on everything from markets to American politics to Bill Gates as a philanthropist. His own spending on what he calls civil society projects is on the rise. It peaked at $600 million in the mid-90s, he said. I meant to cut back to 300, but I never quite got there. After stabilizing at about $400 million a year, it will be between $450 million and $500 million this year, Mr. Soros said. He said he is
introducing new projects to promote a common European foreign policy and study the integration of Muslims in 11 European cities. Mr. Soros commended the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for doing good work while avoiding the hostility he had encountered with his efforts to hold governments accountable for spending. They have chosen public health, which is like apple pie, he said. The United States is now recognizing the errors it had made in Iraq, he said, adding, To what extent it recognizes the mistake will determine its future. Mr. Soros said Turkey and Japan were still hurt by a reluctance to admit to dark parts of their history, and contrasted that reluctance to Germanys rejection of its Nazi-era past. America needs to follow the policies it has introduced in Germany, he said. We have to go through a certain de-Nazification process. As for the U.S. 2008 presidential race, Mr. Soros, who gave $18 million to Democratic advocacy groups seeking to defeat President Bush in 2004, said he supported Barack Obama. But he also said he would support Hillary Clinton if she won the Democratic nomination. John McCain, he said, had compromised far too much with the Bush administration and was unlikely to win the Republican nomination. And who will win? Mr. Soros said he thinks the leading possibilities are former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. On investing, which made him rich, Mr. Soros said that hedge funds are the market now, which makes it much harder to beat the market than when he was a prominent hedge fund manager. He cautioned that the heavy use of debt to leverage up financial transactions both in hedge funds and in companies bought by private equity funds could prove damaging when and if the economy stumbles.

42 Philanthropy
Perm Solvency
Obama and Soros share ideologies, theyll successfully work together Scarborough , National security writer author of Rumsfields War, 08
( Rowan, Human Events, George Soros' Liberal Agenda Will Carry Weight In Obama Presidency, 11-05-08, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29359, accessed 07-03-09, ET) No man has a larger stake in a president Barack Obama administration than ultra-liberal billionaire George Soros. This decade, the Hungarian-born hedge fund investor has poured tens of millions of dollars into left-wing attack groups and Democratic campaigns. Soros' grand plan is to destroy the Republican Party and conservative movement, while promoting the wish list of the political Left. With Democratic victories Tuesday, Soros may be on the cusp of fulfilling
his dreams of social reorder -- funded by a fortune of $7 billion he amassed through rampant speculation on world currencies.
Soros has channeled his gains into such groups as Moveon.org and the Center for American Progress, not to mention the Democratic Party and its candidates. He may rightly have claimed any Democrat victory as his own this Election Day and expect President Obama to adopt his American vision. "Soros is Obama's principal patron," said Richard Lawrence Poe, co-author with David Horowitz of "The Shadow Party," a critical look at the network of leftwing tax-exempt groups the investor sponsors. The groups in turn doled out money to liberal candidates such as Obama. The book's subtitle is, "How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party." "He created Obama," Poe told HUMAN EVENTS. "An Obama presidency will be a Soros presidency." Poe said federal election records show Soros jump-started Obama's 2004 U.S. Senate campaign with $60,000 from himself and family members. "These personal contributions are but a drop in the bucket compared to the unknown quantities of money Soros has channeled into the Obama campaign through his so-called Shadow Party," the author said.

43 Philanthropy
Soros Poverty Turn

Soros cant solve poverty, hes too busy creating it around the world for his personal greed, his history proves Cloughley ,commentator on political and military affairs, 09
(Brian, Daily Times, Malefactor of great wealth, 02-11-09, http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp? page=2009\02\11\story_11-2-2009_pg3_4 , accessed 07-10-09, ET)
In the splendid and very funny film Trading Places, the hero, played by Eddie Murphy, falls in with two slick commodities traders who explain to him their method of making money. Then they ask him what he thinks about it, and he sums up the whole seamy business of money manipulation by telling them that they are nothing but a couple of bookies. Indeed they were, just like so many other rich reptiles
whose greed in recent years has brought the world to the catastrophic economic state from which uncountable millions are suffering. The great American President Franklin Roosevelt declared in 1937 that We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics,
predicting the effects of the atrocious selfishness demonstrated in our time by so many gambling bankers and financial stringpullers whose amoral antics have enriched a few and impoverished so many. Exactly thirty years earlier another illustrious president, Theodore Roosevelt, observed that people who made money by taking advantage of society were
malefactors of great wealth, which brings us to a prominent example of the species, one George Soros. Mr Soros is a very rich man who has made billions of dollars in a number of intriguing ways, and has a reputation in some circles as a major donor to charities. It was he who in 1992 gambled against the British pound, thereby making a quick billion and forcing the British government to spend 27 billion of taxpayers money in unsuccessful attempts to stabilize the currency and the financial system as a whole. The housing market crashed and hundreds of small businesses collapsed into bankruptcy. Unemployment exploded and millions of Britons suffered grievous hardship as a result of the meltdown, and the effects were global. His machinations have brought him immense wealth and vast power that he exercises to make even more money. He and his supporters would claim that he uses his profits to benefit charities and good works, but in fact hes nothing but a shabby little crook. In 2005, a French court convicted Soros of insider trading in a shady deal involving the
bank Socit Gnrale. He bought shares after receiving information about a planned corporate raid on the bank, during the notoriously corrupt presidency of the late and unlamented Franois Mitterrand. The fine was ten cents (well, not really: it was two million dollars, which in Soros terms is what ten cents is to the rest of us), and he appealed against his conviction. Next year, the highest court in the land, the Cour de Cassation, rejected his appeal, but of course hes going to take it to the European Court. Thats what rich crooks can afford to do. According to the New York Times, Soros told the court his insider trading conviction had been a gift to my enemies in the United States and elsewhere. My reputation is at stake, he said. To be sure, his reputation was at stake. But like all plutocratic autocrats who thrive by crushing the poor and thrusting them
even further into despair, he considers that it would in some fashion be a bad thing to have his criminality exposed. This man, while wearing his guise of philanthropy, has helped create more misery in the world than even the recently departed George Bush. Mr Soros has dabbled in changing governments around the world, and has been especially pleased about his efforts in Europe. His energy in helping to liberate their economies (in Russia and Serbia, for example) forced them into his model of financial management and drove millions of poor people into even more desperate poverty. But this mattered not one bit to Mr Soros. Nobody elected him to influence world affairs, but he behaves as if he were entitled to do so. To quote one commentator, Soros deems a society open not if it respects human rights and basic freedoms, but if it is open for him and his associates to make money. And, indeed, Soros has made money in every country he has helped to prise open. In Kosovo, for example, he has invested $50 million in an attempt to gain control of the Trepca mine complex,
where there are vast reserves of gold, silver, lead and other minerals estimated to be worth in the region of $5bn. He thus copied a pattern he has deployed to great effect over the whole of eastern Europe: of advocating shock therapy and economic reform, then swooping in with his associates to buy valuable state assets at knock-down prices. Knock-down prices are the goal of the financial vultures who followed the example of the predator-in-chief, George Soros, and gambled successfully against the currencies of Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and other Far Eastern nations in 1997. The financial manoeuvres of these sleazy amoral profiteers had hideous consequences in human terms. When questioned about the devastation that currency speculation caused to countless millions in Asia when his type of gambling caused cataclysmic chaos, Soros replied casually: As a market participant, I dont need to be concerned with the consequences of my actions. No, of course not. The rich and arrogantly mighty are always unaccountable during their lives. They consider themselves above the laws of human decency. It might be thought that we should approve of Mr Soros. He is, after all, said to be a supporter of freedom, of democracy, of persecuted people. Although a Jew, he is no Zionist, and has criticised Israeli fascists for their bigotry and slaughter. But he is an amoral bookie who has caused untold misery around the world: an unrepentant
malefactor of great wealth. No doubt Mr Soros will go to Hell. And very soon, some might hope. But given the deals he seems to have struck with the devil throughout his life, hell probably have arranged a cool spot.

44 Philanthropy
Soros Conflict DA (1/2)

Soros uses his foundation to gain political power and support coups, each instance he is allowed to increase his foundations influence, so will his international influence. We cant allow the foundation to gain more power Morais, Senior Editor at Forbes 97
( Richard C., Owner of at RCM Media Incorporated Sarah Lawrence degree, Forbes, Beware of billionaires bearing gifts, 4-7-97, http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=5&hid=2&sid=7c2f0c3a-03be-48c5-a0d240fafb9fd902%40sessionmgr8&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=ulh&AN=9703263231#db=ulh&AN=9703263231, accessed 07-03-09, ET)
A near decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union, much of Central and Eastern Europe is still ruled by the old gang. Guess who's helping keep them in power?IF YOU'VE DIMLY wondered what is happening in Albania, we can, in a brief sentence, explain: George Soros' friends are coming out on top. Late in February, armed gangs led by gangsters and ex-Communists, many of them veterans of the old secret police state, all but toppled an elected liberal government, and forced the president to appoint a neo-Communist as prime minister. While this was happening, George Soros sat in his London town house and calmly told Forbes that his Albanian Foundation is "an excellent group very much on top of the situation." On top is right: Soros has kept afloat a newspaper, Koha Jone, that egged on the coupists with inflammatory antigovernment propaganda. A pyramid scheme had collapsed, costing many people their savings, and the Soros-supported paper effectively made a call to arms. A top official of the Soros foundation in Tirana boasted to stunned observers: "[President] Berisha's going. We got him." In an age-old tradition of European political patronage, this multibillionaire speculator routinely taps his billions to fund journals, politicians and educators in Europe and elsewhere. More often than not, these have an exclusively left-wing bias. Soros, 67, is Hungarian-born but a U.S. citizen. He recently caused a flutter in the February issue of the Atlantic Monthly by penning a windy attack on free market capitalism. Why is George Soros so cozy with people and causes that might be expected to view his kind as parasites? To understand his charitable works Forbes visited the Soros FoundationHungary's cream-colored villa in the hills of Budapest. Hungary is not only Soros' native land but where his charities have the longest history. There we met Miklos Vasarhelyi, the 80-year-old president of the Soros-funded foundation. This man, who dispenses millions of dollars a year in a rather poor country, has an interesting past. Vasarhelyi was press officer to Imre Nagy, the Communist Prime Minister executed in 1958 for being too independent. Vasarhelyi stood trial along with Nagy after Soviet tanks crushed the 1956 Hungarian uprising. Nagy and most others were hanged or sentenced to life. Vasarhelyi got just five years, the lightest punishment of the pack. Thanks to George Soros, this former Communist has risen again. A political party he helped found is a partner in the present government. That government is a coalition of ex-Communists (now the Hungarian Socialist Party) and a left-liberal group, the Alliance of Free Democrats, a coalition that came to power in 1994 after defeating a rather ineffectual moderate government. Soros blessed the election results. "These are
strong, serious-minded people," he publicly said of the victorious ex-Communists. "I have great expectations in general." Not everyone agreed. One prominent foreign businessman who first considered, then rejected, doing business in Hungary, described the current government as a "bunch of clowns who haven't a clue as to how to run an economy." Soros has since banged heads with Socialist Prime Minister Gyula Horn, but remains close to his coalition partner, the Alliance of Free Democrats. He provides many AFD leaders with income. Besides Vasarhelyi, for example, Soros' Hungarian lawyer, Alajos Dornbach, is a top-ranked AFD official and a legal adviser to the foundation. Soros is the great philanthropist of our age--or so his press constantly remind us. Every year, according to his flacks, he
gives away more than $300 million through a network of 1,000 employees in 30 countries. When Russian scientists were starving he gave each a year's salary; he brought fresh water to besieged Bosnians; he's providing kindergartens for Gypsies. Good deeds, all. But there is another side to the giving, a rather nutty political side. The 50 offices maintained by Soros money are spread from Haiti to Mongolia, and all claim that their works are based on philosopher Sir Karl Popper's views of tolerant, open societies. Thus a common name: Open Society Institute. Behind the nuttiness, there is a consistency. "The people Soros hires," says Mark Almond, a respected Oxford University lecturer, <CONTINUED>

45 Philanthropy
Soros Conflict DA (2/2)

<CONTINUED> "are noted for their anti-Thatcherite views. You'll be hard-pressed to find a religious dissident or staunch anti-Communist in his foundations." Johnathan Sunley, the Budapest-based director of The Windsor Group, puts it even more strongly: "Soros is engaged in a one-dimensional ideological laundering of the old Communist/nomenklatura at the expense of those who didn't get trips abroad."
Sunley means, of course, that real anti-Communists couldn't travel abroad in Communist days; only those in official favor could. Soros has adopted many of these formerly pampered, generally moderate Marxists.
"Soros," says Peter Bod, a former cabinet minister and central bank governor in Hungary, "is the most influential nonelected politician east of the Alps." His power stems not from the ballot box but from his bank account. He wants to see that the old left-wing dictatorships are replaced--not with free market democracies, but with left-wing democracies. "Yes," the prickly billionaire conceded in an interview
with Forbes, "clearly there is a political bias in the [Soros] foundation." Look at the trustees of his U.S. foundation and you will see where the bias lies.

46 Philanthropy
FBOs Solve
Empirically, faith-based programs have been a well-established provider of social service. Gibelman and Gelman 03
(Margaret Gibelman and Sheldon R. Gelman. Director of the Ph.D. Program in Social Welfare. Ph.D., The Florence Heller School for Advanced Studies in Social Welfare, Brandeis University. The Promise of Faith-Based Social Services: Perception versus Reality. Social Thought. Vol. 22. 2003) IS Although churches and synagogues may have directly provided the earliest services under religious auspices, the scope of human need and the recognition that expertise was required to plan and deliver services led to the creation of nonprofit service agencies under religious auspices. The primary mission of these agencies
was to provide social services. The religious component was an umbrellathe sponsor of the services. The relationship with the church, however, was one of affiliation only. Thus, the historic
relationship between faith-based sectarian organizations and government is long-term and deeply entrenched, but has been actuated through the social service arms established by religious groups. For
example, the network of Jewish Family Service agencies was created to attend to the social service needs of Jewish people; Catholic Charities USA and its affiliates were created to serve a similar purpose for people of the Catholic faith, separate from houses of worship. Social service agencies under
religious auspices have had a well-established and distinguished role in the history of public-private relationships and have long been a major source of services delivered under purchase of service contracts (Gibelman & Demone, 1998). In comparison to social services provided by congregations, these traditional sectarian agencies have had a far more significant presence and have reached a much larger population of people in need of services of all religions (McCarthy & Castelli, 1998).

47 Philanthropy
FBOs Solve
Faith-based organizations are the best option to address community concerns by drawing on social networks. Wood 09.
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS This ethical and religious critique of poverty policy occurs through a variety of channels: from sermons in local congregations to adult and childrens education programs in evangelical churches; from specific legislative proposals advanced by the bishops Catholic conferences based in most state capitals to highprofile statements issued by denominational authorities. One of the more widespread and effective
prophetic faces of religion in American life, albeit a rather unknown one, draws on diverse religious congregations to challenge political authorities to serve working families. In most major American metropolitan areas there can be found an organization engaged in what scholars call faith-based, broad-based, or congregation-based community organizing. Each metropolitan organization is typically affiliated with one of four national networks (The PICO National Network, the Industrial Areas Foundation, the Gamaliel Foundation or Direct Action, Research and Training) or any of several regional networks (including The InterValley Project in New England and RCNO in southern California). Under the rubric of names like the Washington Interfaith Network, ISAIAH in Minnesota, the San Francisco Organizing Project, Greater Boston Interfaith Organization or PACT in Miami, in about 150 cities around the country members of churches, synagogues and mosques are engaged in faith-based community organizing.4 Similar organizations also operate in Britain and have recently been launched in such diverse settings as Central America, Rwanda and South Africa. In the United States, these are among the most effective organizations advocating for poor to middle class communities around such issues as economic development, funding for public education, police reform, affordable housing, access to medical care and living wage laws. They do this by drawing on the social networks and leadership skills embedded in African American, Latino, white and multiracial congregations to build what they call nonpartisan power organizations to negotiate with political and economic elites. In order to argue for the importance of faith-based organizing within contemporary efforts to deepen democracyand thus the importance of assuring that faith-based social service provision does not undermine such faith-based organizingI next outline three aspects of the field: its sheer scale, its role in building social capital in urban America and the issues it has already addressed.

48 Philanthropy
FBOs Solve Racism/Immigration

Faith-based organizations are unparalleled in connecting racial, ethnic, and immigrant groups. Wood 09.
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS However, in this regard faith-based organizing comes into its own; it appears to be unparalleled in its capacity to build social capital that bridges races and ethnic communities, religious traditions and the immigrantnative divide. Racially, around thirty-five percent of participating institutions in 2001 were predominantly African American, thirty-six percent were white, twenty-one percent were Hispanic and seven percent were interracial.11 This tri-racial structure alone makes the FBCO field quite exceptional within American civil society, so often divided along racial lines. About eleven percent of the FBCOs were predominantly made up of immigrants; a number that may well be higher today, with continuing high levels of immigration into the United States. FBCOs ability to transcend racial barriers may also be of interest to European and other societies, which are increasingly experiencing deep racial ethnic divides of their own. A second measure of diversity is critical because FBCO does not operate as a unified national field. The primary locus of FBCO political action is local, and so it is important to know whether it bridges sectors within the local arena, where most participants actually experience the organizing effort, or only in the national aggregate reported above. Only if the former holds does FBCO in fact foster significant bridging social capital within participants daily lives. Warren and I also examined FBCO local racial composition and found that FBCO groups do work to forge multiracial ties within their local political arenas.12 Although eleven percent of the eighty-two local organizations surveyed were monoracial and five percent had one racial group that was dominant (more than eighty percent of participating institutions from one racial/ethnic group), forty-three percent were biracial (two groups more than fi fteen percent) and thirteen percent were multiracial (three or four groups with more than fifteen percent representation). Furthermore, the monoracial groups were evenly divided among white-dominant, black-dominant and Hispanicdominant organizations. Thus, American FBCO organizations appear to build cross-racial bridging social capital extensively and systematically; furthermore, ethnographic accounts note that this social capital is often built upon social dynamics that foster cross-racial relations of frankness and mutual respect that are rare in American social life.13 These data focus on cross-racial social capital, but another kind of bridging social capital may also be important. Prophetic religion as represented by faith-based organizing also builds significant cross-religious social capital. Nationally, the FBCO field bridges religious institutions across three main categories: Roman Catholics (thirty-three percent of participating congregations); liberal and moderate Protestants (thirty-three percent, made up mostly of Lutherans, United Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians and members of the United Church of Christ); historic African American Protestants (twenty percent, including Missionary, American, National and Primitive Baptists; the African Methodist Episcopal and AME-Zion denominations) hold approximately a sixteen percent share. Wider religious presence includes Jewish, UnitarianUniversalist and black Pentecostal congregations; each constitutes about a two percent share of the total in 1999, and all appear to have grown significantly since then. More widely, it becomes a story of religious absence, however: non-Black evangelicals (especially the large Southern Baptist Convention), Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists and other religious groups participate only in very isolated instances or not at all.

49 Philanthropy
FBOs Key to Activism

Faith-based organizations are key to shaping social reform by engaging in political activism. Wood 09.
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS While these five issue areas are vague enough that they might represent low-level work requiring only a minor degree of political power, we know from case studies that the stronger FBCOs engage in significant structural reform.14 Since until recently scholars have tended to research the more successful and advanced cases of FBCO, their findings should be interpreted not as representative samples of the fields political influence, but rather as showing the fields general potential. Recent accounts of higher-level organizing by current efforts within the large FBCO networks show these organizations increasingly projecting significant power to the regional, state-wide and national levels on such issues as healthcare, living wage initiatives, housing and restructuring regional economic flows However, such studies also offer sobering evidence of the limitations of organizing, at least in the face of current political structures and economic crises.16

50 Philanthropy
FBOs Perm Fails

The permutation undermines the appeal of faith-based organizations by integrating them into the state Wood 09
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS That federal funding for social service provision might undermine the prophetic role of religion is not obvious; after all, religious traditions have sustained both prophetic and priestly roles in diverse societies and times. To understand the potential contradiction, we must recognize that, in order to attain the kind of political capacity and public profile outlined above, faithbased organizations have placed political conflict and building organizational power at the centre of their organizational cultures. That is, these organizations have achieved their significant gains by negotiating directly with political and economic elites; they have arrived at that negotiating table not through the good will of elites but by building power internally within their organizations and entering into the conflictive political arena, insisting that their voices be heard and demanding access to the negotiating table. Though the best community organizing today has left behind the one-dimensionally conflictive tactics of the later years of Saul Alinsky, in favour of striving for greater power and a more constructive role in shaping government policy, conflict remains an important political tool for all such efforts. To the extent community organizing continues to represent the interests of marginalized communities and working class or poor families, the route to an organizations place at the negotiating table is likely to entail some degree of political conflict. Government funding of congregationally-based social services might undermine the ability or willingness of congregations to engage in necessary political conflict, in any of several ways. First, congregational energy and capacity are never infinite, as anyone committed to a faith community surely knows. Limited energy and capacity might be gradually diverted away from political engagement and advocacy for long-term public policy change toward the day-to-day struggles to staff and run social service programs. Secondly, the relations between congregation members of differing social status might shift from that of relative peersall equal in the sight of God, at least in principalto the openly hierarchical patron-client relations typical of social service agencies, with clients presumed to be in need in ways that agency staff are not. Thirdly, in cities where political patronage dynamics are strong, political incumbents may explicitly or implicitly tie ongoing social service funding to a pastors political support, and they may cut off funding for congregations that support more prophetic challenges to political initiatives or that too vociferously demand a public voice. The first two possibilities above would subtly erode the prophetic current of religion, while the last option would do so more directly. At present, we do not know how widespread these dynamics are, nor indeed whether they are occurring at all; but politics and congregations being the imperfect vehicles that they are, caution is surely justified. Whether subtle or not, political strings on public monies are to be expected, unless funding programs for the faithbased initiative are administered in ways that create firewalls against them. How such firewalls are best built is a matter for those with the relevant policy design expertise, but the need for such firewalls is clear and increasingly urgent. Closer to my expertise is the question of how congregations can best understand their prophetic and priestly roles, and thus most effectively serve their members and the wider community. In entering this terrain, I note that decisions on whether a given congregation ought to solicit government funding, and how to combine such solicitation with its more prophetic ministries, are best left in the hands of religious leaders. Nevertheless, I would urge the following considerations.

51 Philanthropy
FBOs Perm Fails

Perm links to the disad- government funding discourages and tradeoffs with religious organization Wood 09.
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS We can thus discern four kinds of potential tensions between prophetic organizing and priestly social service provision that might be exacerbated by government funding for the latter. First, receipt of government money may make religious leaders less willing to risk alienating political patrons. Secondly, any deep investment of the human resources of congregations into social service provision may undercut potential investment of those resources in the prophetic ministries that congregations have long seen as part of their calling. Thirdly, the relations of (relative) peer accountability that develop within at least some congregations may be overtaken and replaced by the patron-client relations characteristic of social service agencies. Some of these congregational relations of accountability are horizontal (occurring between formally-equal congregational members) and others are vertical (occurring between pastors or lay leaders holding formal authority in the congregation and members under that authority). Accountability potentially runs both directions in such relationships; they are thus quite different from patron-client relations. Finally, where resources are scarce and congregations are in high competition for adherents, as in the dense urban religious districts studied by Omar McRoberts, 18 federal dollars might tame or simply divert the prophetic religious voices that have historically been among our most articulate champions of social justice; those of the African American church tradition.

52 Philanthropy
FBOs Neoliberalism DA to Perm

The ability of faith-based organizations to function without interference by the state is essential to offering a compassionate alternative to the neoliberal market fundamentalism Wood 09
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS Given these dangers to congregations vigorous pursuit of their prophetic calling, some articulate religious voices have spoken out against the Bush Administrations faith-based initiative. Yet the needs of disadvantaged sectors of American society cry out for redress and for support from within their own communities, from government, from congregations and from all of us. It appears that the next American president will in some form continue the faith-based initiative.19 In Britain, debate regarding this issue continues, but largely regarding the form under which government funding will occur; the major political players appear to endorse the concept of government-funded social services in principle. It thus appears, regardless of opposition from some quarters, that governmentfunded, religiously-provided social services will be part of American and British society for years to come. We have to consider, therefore, how best to proceed. Reasonable measures would include the following five points. First, religions prophetic role should be protected from political interference, via enabling legislation and administrative policy that clearly codifies the autonomy of federal social service funding decisions from political calculations. That is, the faith-based initiative should be institutionally separated from the political apparatus of local, state and federal administrations, and the autonomy of those decisions should be enforced legally. Secondly, countervailing funding for prophetic ministries should be institutionalized to provide a counterweight to federal funding for priestly religion. Since, by its very nature, government funding of prophetic ministries blunts their cutting edge, such funding should not come from government. It might best be institutionalized in the funding guidelines of religious denominations, local community foundations and major funders of social initiatives in each society (including foundations and individual donors).20 Thirdly, the societal pay-off to justify running these dangers should include a net positive gain for social service funding. That is, major new investment in social services should be made, as resources become available during the next economic recovery, to be sure that new faith-based providers do not simply undermine existing providers (secular and religious). Fourthly, policymakers should design enabling legislation with the knowledge that those holding majority power will one day be the minority. Thus, policies that enable governmental colonization of religion may well eventually rebound against those who today attempt to use religion for their partisan political ends. Finally and most broadly, the faithbased initiative should be seen as one aspect of a broader effort to rethink and redesign the relationship between the market economy and the rest of society; a thoroughgoing critique of market fundamentalismthe notion that unrestrained markets are always the best way to allocate resources should lead to the transfer of national assets from the economy, narrowly understood, to societal institutions less tightly embedded in markets.

53 Philanthropy
FBOs Spillover
Faith-based organizations can help attain the political mass to help shape local politics. Wood 09.
(Richard L. Wood Associate professor, University of New Mexico. Taming Prophetic Religion? Faith-Based Activism and Welfare Provision. International Journal of Public Theology 3 (2009) Pg. 7895 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/brill/18725171/v3n1/s6.pdf? expires=1246664073&id=51055828&titleid=75002149&accname=Gonzaga+University&checksum=7125FA197E8 63FFE8ADB14C88F9A6ADA DA: 7-3-2009) IS In virtually any city in the country, an organization that can mobilize more than 1,000 people to a public action with a focused agenda and reasonably skilled leadership can be expected to have powerful influence upon local political decision- making at least on some issues; about a quarter of FBCO organizations report this level of political capacity. Organizations with the political capacity to mobilize many hundred supporters around a focused policy agenda can likewise be expected to carry significant influence upon local political decision-making; more than a third of FBCO organizations report this level of political capacity. We would expect the political capacities of groups mobilizing up to a few hundred supporters to depend greatly on other factors. In any case, these data suggestthough they do not provethat through FBCO organizations, American religious congregations operating in a prophetic mode can and do project quite significant influence up into the decision-making processes in municipal governments.7

54 Philanthropy
Carter Center Solves HC

The Carter Center would be able to solve for healthcare issues more quickly and efficiently. Hardman, M.D and President and CEO of the Carter Foundation, 2009
(John , President and CEO of the Carter Foundation, Spring 2009, http://www.cartercenter.com/resources/pdfs/news/carter_center_news/CCNews_Spr09.pdf, accessed by 7/2/09, M.E) Last November, the Carter Center was a major sponsor of a major health initiative in Ethiopia, in which some 5 million people were treated for trachoma and tested (and treated, when needed) for malaria in a one-week campaign. You might wonder how many staff members The Carter Center sent from Atlanta headquarters to Ethiopia to handle this unprecedented, labor-intensive effort, called Maltra Week. We sent one person. How did we succeed with so few staff? The answer lies in the Centers general philosophy of working as efficiently as possible, so our limited funds can go as far as possible. First, we relied on in-country staff to handle much of the work. Whenever possible, we set up a field office and hire local staff members to take on long-term projects. This makes sense on many fronts, including economy. But we also know that when local people do the work, a program becomes entrenched in the society and can be sustained long after the Center leaves. Finally, our ongoing commitment in many countries allows us to do more with less. Not only is Teshome Gebre the Centers point man for trachoma in Ethiopia, he also heads up our efforts to fight Guinea worm disease, malaria, and river blindess there, and has been working with us for more that 15 years. Such long-term tenure among senior staff members in the field is not uncommon.
Through massive grant programs, the Carter Center will be able to solve the issue surrounding healthcare.
Staub, editor at the Carter Center, 2008 (Emily, The Carter Center, 12/5/08, http://www.cartercenter.com/news/pr/gates_120508.html, accessed by 7/2/09, M.E) ATLANTAFormer U.S. President Jimmy Carter announced today that cases of Guinea worm disease have reached an all-time low with fewer than 5,000 estimated cases remaining worldwide. To help eliminate the remaining cases, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) announced new commitments totaling US$55 million to support the historic Carter Center-led eradication campaign."Guinea worm is poised to be the second disease eradicated from Earth, ending needless suffering for millions of people from one of the world's oldest and most horrific afflictions," said former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, founder of The Carter Center. "The reduction of Guinea worm cases by more than 99 percent proves that when people work together, great positive change is possible."The $40 million grant from the Gates Foundation is the largest challenge grant in Carter Center history. It includes an outright contribution of $8 million and encourages other donor organizations and individuals to provide an additional $32 million, which the Gates Foundation will match one-to-one. The successful completion of the challenge will raise $72 million to finish Guinea worm eradication. Since 2000, the Gates Foundation has been a valued partner in the Center's Guinea Worm Eradication Program, inspiring an outpouring of contributions from the donor community during this landmark effort.DFID generously pledged 10 million (approximately US$15 million) to support the Guinea worm eradication campaign, and its support will be matched by the Gates Foundation. Both the Gates Foundation and DFID grants will be shared between the Center and the World Health Organization (WHO)."We have made substantial progress; many countries that previously had Guinea worm are now free of the disease. We must now push to eliminate it completely," said Douglas Alexander, the United Kingdom's international development secretary. DFID's 10 million pledge to the Center's Guinea worm efforts underscores the United Kingdom's commitment to promote sustainable development and eliminate world poverty. DFID has helped support the Center's efforts to wage peace and fight disease worldwide since 1997.

55 Philanthropy

The Carter Center has a commitment to fighting disease all across the world.
Hopkins, vice president, health programs, Carter Center, 2008 (Donald, The Carter Center, 10/29/08, http://www.cartercenter.org/health/itfde/index.html, accessed by 7/3/09, M.E) Inspired by the successful eradication of smallpox in 1977, the International Task Force for Disease Eradication formed at The Carter Center in 1988 to evaluate disease control and prevention and the potential for eradicating other infectious diseases. Composed of scientists and notable international health organizations from around the world, the task force has identified seven diseases that could be eradicated. Between 1988 and 1992 the task force concluded that six diseases dracunculiasis, poliomyelitis, mumps, rubella, lymphatic filariasis, and cysticercosis could be eradicated. Measles was added to this list with the current task force in 2002. (See list of eradication and elimination programs currently sanctioned by the World Health Organization.) The current task force reconvened in June 2001 to work further on international health with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The main goals of the revived task force are to review progress in the field of disease eradication, review the status of selected diseases for control or eradication, and make recommendations regarding opportunities for eradication or better control of certain diseases.In 2008, The Carter Center supported two task force recommendations to encourage cooperation between the Dominican Republic and Haiti to eliminate lymphatic filariasis and malaria from Hispaniola, and to convene the first program review for Buruli ulcer programs in Benin, Cote d'Ivoire, Ghana, and Togo. (Read the report from the Oct. 29, 2008 meeting of the ITFDE.)
The Carter Center has had success in every country in which they work in.
Carter, Former US President and founder of The Carter Center, 2007 (Jimmy, The Carter Center, 2007, http://www.cartercenter.com/news/features/anniversary/carter_feature.html, accessed on 7/3/09, M.E) My original concept for The Carter Center was a place for mediation, a place where leaders of countries or regions in conflict could come to resolve their differences. Looking at the work of the Center today, with programs that have touched lives in more than 70 countries promoting peace and good health, it is safe to say that the Center has far exceeded Rosalynn's and my initial dreams. Although our past work has been quite varied, today the Center's projects tend to fall into two buckets: peace and health. Our peace work involves monitoring elections in unstable democracies; strengthening democracy beyond elections through rule of law, transparency, and citizen participation in government; and promoting human rights. On the health side, we focus on tackling neglected diseases, mostly in Africa but also in Latin America. These are diseases that are no longer found in rich countries but still run rampant in the developing world. Such diseases usually do not kill a person but rather make his or her life unbearable.One feature of our work of which I am particularly proud is our desire to see people and countries succeed as active participants in our projects. We work among people who are living on less than a dollar a day. We recruit those people to work side by side with us in solving their own problems. We give them, many of them for the first time, an experience that is successful. We can show them that a disease can be prevented or cured, that they can grow more food in their fields, or that they can have an honest election and choose their own leaders. We give people a chance to shape their own futures, rather than be dependent on others, convinced their suffering will never be alleviated. In fact, early on, the Center would use a generic name such as "Global 2000" for some of our projects, so that village chiefs or heads of state could feel a genuine sense of partnership and be able to claim credit when successes were realized.

56 Philanthropy

The Carter Center has programs all over the world in order to better be able to combat disease. Mallard, editor on Medilinks, 2007
(Cole, editor, 11/12/07, http://medilinkz.org/news/news2.asp?NewsID=22310, accessed on 7/5/09, M.E) Ethiopia, in partnership with the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia, has a public health training initiative that offers training in how to combat these diseases. Dr. Joyce Murray is the director of the Ethiopia Public Health Training Initiative (EPHTI) for the Carter Center. At a conference in Washington, DC, she spoke about Ethiopias effort to solve the shortage of health care providers at the grassroots level. Voice of America English to Africa reporter Cole Mallard covered the event and later telephoned Dr. Murray in Atlanta to find out how the initiative works. In this second of a five-part series on addressing neglected tropical diseases in Africa, Dr. Murray said the initiative has three goals: 1) to develop materials for universities preparing health professionals. She says the Carter Center has developed and distributed case study teaching booklets and lecture notes throughout Ethiopia. 2) to strengthen faculty teaching skills through workshops. She says over 2500 Ethiopian faculty have been trained in teaching, writing, supervision. 3) to improve the learning environment through the purchase of textbooks, medical journals, computers, lab equipment and teaching aids for the seven universities. The doctor says the Carter Center began the initiative in 1997 in partnership with the Ethiopian government. President Carter reportedly met Prime Minister Meles Zenawi on an airplane. He mentioned to President Carter that Ethiopia needed to staff 500 primary health care centers being built in rural areas and asked for help in training.

57 Philanthropy

For the past 25 years, the Carter Center has been solving the issue of diseases all over the world.
Dallet, editor at The African Executive, 2009 (Meg, The African Executive, 4/22/09, http://www.africanexecutive.com/modules/magazine/articles.php? article=4327, 7/5/09, M.E) A delegation of senior health officials from 11 African countries and the African Union presented a leadership award on April 22, 2009, to President Jimmy Carter and The Carter Center for their work over the past 25 years in combating neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) in Africa. The delegation was in Washington to promote public-private partnerships in health and to directly advocate for continued US support and funding for African health initiatives.The presentation was made at a reception on Capitol Hill attended by members of the African diplomatic corps, Congress and the Obama administration, and representatives of the NGO and business communities. It was hosted by Global Health Progress (GHP), a partnership initiative of research-based biopharmaceutical companies; and the global advocacy group ONE. The Whitaker Group (TWG), Washingtons premier consultancy on issues of trade, investment and health in Africa, coordinated the delegations visit to the US.President Carter and the Carter Center lead from the heart, said Ms. Rosa Whitaker, TWGs President and CEO. No one donor or government or NGO can do it alone. The Carter Center shows that leadership working in partnership with African health services and the private sector can and does make a difference in meeting Africas significant health challenges.The delegation, made up of officials from the African Union, Botswana, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania and Uganda, was in Washington from April 19 to 25 to advance health partnerships between governments, NGOs, foundations, universities and the private sector. Hosted by GHP, the visit also provided US government and congressional leaders with the opportunity to hear about Africas health challenges directly from those who deal with them on the ground. There are many things pushing and pulling on the US government at the moment, so we need to have Africans who are on the frontlines talk to members of Congress and the government to keep Africas health needs on the front burner, said Mr. Chris Singer, President International of PhRMA, the trade association that represents Americas pharmaceutical companies and drives the GHP initiative. The African delegation also held numerous meetings with representatives from the private sector, NGOs, foundations and universities to discuss a host of issues including HIV/AIDS, neglected tropical diseases, malaria and safe medicines.Speaking on behalf of the delegation, Dr. Sam Zaramba, Ugandas Director General of Health Services, gave particular credit to The Carter Center for its work in all but eradicating guinea worm disease. Incidence of the disease has dropped 99.7% from 3.5 million cases in 20 countries in 1986, when President Carter launched the eradication campaign, to under 5,000 cases in six countries today.

58 Philanthropy
Link - Tradeoff
Government funding crowds out private spending, empirical studies prove. Matthews et al 09.
(Merrill Matthews Jr, Peter S. Barwick, Grace-Marie Arnett, Stanley W. Carlson-Thies and Robert Rector. Ph.D. in Philosophy and Humanities from the University of Texas at Dallas. Charity Tax Credits--and Debits. JanuaryFebruary 2008. Hoover Institute. http://www.hoover.org/bios?sortBy=name&c=y DA:7-11-2009) IS The 1996 welfare legislation took reform a huge step forward by giving states more control over their welfare programs. Now we should consider shifting control to taxpayers themselves with the charity tax credit. The charity tax credit would permit individual taxpayers to allocate a portion of their welfare tax dollars to any qualified charity and receive a tax credit for that contribution. Depending on the proposal, the tax credit would refund part or all of each dollar donated. Though the charity tax credit proposal is still being considered by Congress, the states are also beginning to look at variations of the proposal. It may well be that the states will adopt the approach first. Unfortunately, the proposal has prompted a number of criticisms, primarily from those who benefit financially from the current system. However, critics seem either to misunderstand how the proposal would work or fear letting charities compete for welfare dollars. Among their arguments: If people were able to direct their tax dollars to private charities, they would scale back their overall commitment to aiding the poor. In fact, just the opposite would likely occur. Most economists recognize what is called the "crowding out" effect: When government spending increases, private spending declines. In a 1984 article in the Journal of Political Economy, Russell Roberts found that private relief expenditures rose steadily in the United States until 1932, and declined steadily thereafter as government welfare spending rose. An article in the National Tax Journal that same year found that cuts in government spending resulted in increased interest in private contributions. Thus it is entirely possible that reducing government welfare spending through a tax credit for charitable giving might result in an increase in total spending on the needy.
Government funding crowds out other forms of funding by influencing charities to spend less time raising money. Andreoni and Payne 09.
(James Andreoni, A Abigail Payne. University of Michigan, Ph.D., Economics, 1986. Ph.D. Princeton University Is Crowding Out Due Entirely to Fundraising? Evidence from a Panel of Charities. February 2009. http://econ.ucsd.edu/~jandreon/WorkingPapers/andreoni_payne2.pdf DA: 7-1-09) IS When the government gives a grant to a private charitable organization, how much will this displace private donations? This is known as the crowding out problem and is one of the oldest and most important questions in public economics.1The classic theory also ignores an important aspect of reality, namely fund-raising. Fundraising is a significant undertaking. A typical charity will spend from 5 to 25 percent of its donations on further fund-raising activities.3 While these activities may be profitable for the organizations, managers of nonprofits are forbidden by law from capturing any of this surplus for themselves. Charity managers, therefore, may see fundraising as a necessary evil and, given the chance, might prefer to divert fund-raising resources to their charitable activities.4 Moreover, donors and charity watch-dog groups often perceive large fund-raising expenses, rightly or wrongly, as indications of a low-quality charity. Charity Navigator, for instance, gives its lowest rating to a food bank or community foundation that raises fewer than $5 for every dollar spent on fund-raising.5 Since both donors and managers seem predisposed to dislike fund-raising, a grant to a charity may also crowd out its fund-raising activities. This gives a second indirect way that grants could reduce givingcharities may spend less effort on raising money.

59 Philanthropy
Link - Tradeoff
Government grants crowd out charitable donations due to trade-off perception. Andreoni and Payne 03.
(Do government grants to private charities crowd out giving or fund-raising? James Andreoni, A Abigail Payne. University of Michigan, Ph.D., Economics, 1986. Ph.D. Princeton University The American Economic Review. Nashville: Jun 2003. Vol. 93, Iss. 3; pg. 792. DA: 7-2-2009) IS When a charitable nonprofit organization receives a grant from the government, contributions to charities could fall for two reasons. First, under the classic crowding-out hypothesis, donors let their involuntary tax contributions substitute for their voluntary contributions. This paper raises the prospect of a second reason: that the strategic response of the charity will be to pull back on its fund-raising efforts after receiving a grant. We explore this idea in two ways. First, we develop a theoretical model to show that a charity that chooses its level of fund-raising strategically will reduce fund-raising in response to government grants. If the charitable organizations find fund-raising onerous, then the effect is heightened even more and can happen even if individuals themselves are not crowded out. Second, we examine this hypothesis empirically. We use a rich panel data set of nonprofit organizations, observed for up to 15 years. We focus on two types of organizations: arts and social services. The arts organizations, such as museums or performances groups, get the majority of their funding from private donations and from program service revenue, such as ticket sales, and only a relatively small fraction from the government. The social service organizations are concerned with families, children, the elderly, the disabled, criminals, delinquents, the poor, and the environment. By contrast, these groups rely primarily on government grants to fund their operations. These two very different types of nonprofits provide anchors for our research into the question of whether government funding crowds out fund-raising as well as giving. When looking at the component parts of fund-raising expenses, we find that indeed there is strong evidence that government grants to nonprofits are causing significant reductions in fund-raising efforts. This finding is important for two reasons. First, it means that the behavior of the nonprofit organizations is consistent with the predictions of an economic model within a strategic environment. This suggests that more sophisticated models of fund-raising and competition in "charity markets" could bear fruit. Second, and more importantly, it adds an important new dimension to the policy discussions on the effectiveness of government grants to increase the services of charitable nonprofit organizations. Charities are not passive receptacles of contributions, as they have so often been treated in the past, but are active players in the market for donations. When the government gives charities a grant, we should take into account the behavioral response of the charity itself, as well as the behavioral responses of the individual donors. What do our results suggest for policy

60 Philanthropy
Link Tradeoff
Government and private spending on public good, or charity, directly trade off when the government increases spending, studies prove Heutel, Post doctorate Research Fellow Harvard University , 09
(Gart, National Bureau of Economic Research, CROWDING OUT AND CROWDING IN OF PRIVATE DONATIONS AND GOVERNMENT GRANTS, May 2009, http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~heutel/CrowdOutPaper.pdf , accessed 07-11-09, ET) Public goods are often provided by both governments and individuals. Benevolent governments may provide public goods to overcome the market's failure; altruistic individuals may likewise do so. The interaction of these two sources of the provision of public goods ultimately affects the overall level of funding. In response to an increase in government spending on a public good or charity, altruistic individuals who care about the total level of the public good will reduce their contributions. Because of this "crowding out" effect, a government choosing to increase funding to a charity by a given amount may actually increase the charity's revenues by only a fraction of that amount. The same effect can occur in the opposite direction. If a government sees that private donations to a charity have risen, then it may reduce its support of that charity.
Government spending crowds out charities and every $1000 the government grants reduces giving by $558. Payne, PHD Princeton Economics 08
(Crowding out Both Sides of the Philanthropy Market: Evidence from a Panel of Charities, Feb 2008, accessed 0711-09, ET) We study crowding out and its causes with a panel of tax returns from charitable organizations. Our sample includes over 17 thousand observations from almost 3100 American charities. Our estimates show significant crowding out of about 56 percentevery $1000 grant reduces giving by $558. This figure is robust to a number of different instruments, and is consistent with prior studies. Most importantly, we find that 68 percent of the crowding out is the result of reduced fund-raising, and only 32 percent is classic crowding out.

61 Philanthropy
Link - Tradeoff
Link- Government grants lead to cuts in fundraising and matching-requirements. Andreoni & Payne 09
(James Andreoni, A Abigail Payne. University of Michigan, Ph.D., Economics, 1986. Ph.D. Princeton University Is Crowding Out Due Entirely to Fundraising? Evidence from a Panel of Charities. February 2009. http://econ.ucsd.edu/~jandreon/WorkingPapers/andreoni_payne2.pdf DA: 7-1-09) IS When a charity receives a government grant there can be two paths that lead to lower donations to the charity. First is direct crowding out of givers. Donors who count their contributions through taxation as part of their total contribution will reduce their voluntary contributions to offset the grant. The second path is by crowding out the fundraisers. If charity managers find fund-raising a necessary evil, or fear it may hurt their evaluation from charity watchdog groups, then a government grant will allow them to redirect efforts from fund-raising to providing charitable services. This means that after getting a grant, charities may simply cutback fund raising. If donors are largely unaware of fluctuations in the grants received by
charities, then reductions in fund-raising becomes a sensible explanation for crowding out. We explore these issues with an unbalanced panel of over 8000 charities from 1985 to 2002. Using instrumental variable techniques, we estimate total crowding is around 73 percent, and that this crowding out is almost exclusively is the result of reduced fund-raising. A $10,000 grant, for instance, reduces fund-raising expenses by $1370, which in turn reduces donations by $7271. Adding this $1370 savings in fund-raising expenses reduces the estimate of crowding out to 59 percent. If charities had maintained their fund-raising efforts, our estimates show that donations would have risen by the full amount of the grant. Our study reveals that the actions of the charities themselves are responsible for essentially all of the crowding out. The implication is that there could be many avenues available to a government that wants to remediate crowding out. While there will be variation across charities, our results indicate that, in general, requirements that charities match a fraction of government grants with increases in private donations could be a feasible response to crowding out. Whether such a requirement is welfare enhancing is an open question and depends on what is assumed about the marginal cost of raising public funds. This is, of course, the first study of its kind. As such, additional studies will be needed to establish the robustness of these results. The finding that crowding out is due to reduced fundraising by the charities opens up many new avenues for both researchers and policy makers to discover ways to understand and address crowding out.

62 Philanthropy
Link - Tradeoff
Government program crowds out private welfare funding because donors can still enjoy the same tax reductions regardless of the amount given to charity. Vesterlund 06.
Lise Vesterlund. Ph.D. in Economics, University of Wisconsin. Why do People Give? The Nonprofit Sector, 2nd edition, Yale Press, 2006. http://www.pitt.edu/~vester/whydopeoplegive.pdf DA: 7-1-2009) IS
Theoretical analysis of the public motive also casts doubt on it being the primary contribution motive. A model where the nonprofits output is the sole motive for giving simply generates unrealistic predictions. Consider the classical model of charitable giving. Here it is assumed that individuals solely benefit from their private consumption and the nonprofits output, and that each individual takes the contributions of others as given. One of the extreme predictions of this model is that an increase in taxes to fund government support of an organization will have no effect on total funding to the charity. The reason is that donors are indifferent toward the source of
nonprofit funding and hence will nullify the tax by reducing their contribution to the charity dollar-for-dollar
(Bergstrom, Blume, and Varian 1986; Roberts 1984, 1987; Warr 1982, 1983). This result is referred to as the complete crowding-out result since it predicts that the governments contribution will crowd out private contributions. Bergstrom et al. (1986) show that two conditions
for the complete crowd-out prediction is that the tax is limited to those who contribute to the charity, and that none of the present contributors stop giving after the tax. To see why consider the case where the government funds its contribution to charity through a tax levied solely on non-contributors. In this case the governments contribution will have the same effect as an increase in income. Once the government has contributed, a donor can decrease her contribution to the charity, enjoy the same level of nonprofit output, and still have money left to spend. If increases in income normally are spent on both
private consumption and donations to the charity, then the individual does not reduce her donation dollar-for-dollar, and total contributions to the charity may increase. Interestingly the possibility of increasing total contributions does not exist when there are many potential contributors. Sugden (1982) argues that when there are many donors, then an increase in one persons contribution is almost completely offset by decreases in other peoples contributions.30 Andreoni (1988) extends and formalizes this argument using the classical model, and he proves that when
there are many donors it is not possible for a charity to increase funding by finding new funding sources. The reason is that an increase in contributions by others leads each current donor to decrease her contribution a little bit. Thus if the sole motive for giving is a concern for the charitys output then government
grants can only affect the quantity provided when there are no individual contributors.31

63 Philanthropy
Link - Tradeoff
Link- Recent government funding proves to crowd out private funding due to public perception . Theroux 09. (Mary Theroux. A.B. in economics from Stanford University,Separation of Faith and State. 2009 April 06.
http://www.independent.org/blog/?p=1740 DA: 7-2-2009) IS Government funding crowds out private giving, and separates the haves from the have-nots When government gets involved in a formerly private charitable activity, money going to charity drops. As I detailed here, the governments new AidMatrix Foundation channeled massive amounts of funds to FEMA and state governments in the aftermath of last years hurricanes, and private giving to the Salvation Army and Red Cross plummeted. In a worst-case scenario, such government activity will drive private alternatives out completely, as with the hugely inclusive mutual-aid societies that traditionally provided welfare, unemployment and health care coverage before government programs made them untenable. As people perceive that government is taking care of a need, their giving and volunteering for that purpose dries up. But inserting government between the donor (taxpayer) and recipient severs the personal relationship that used to be common between them. As Alexis de Tocqueville observed in his marvelous book Democracy in America, Americans proclivity for forming innumerable privately-funded charitable and civic projects was a direct and vitally-important component in what he termed our democracy, but we would more commonly call equality. Those of us who volunteer with charitable organizations quickly discover that there is very little difference between ourselves and those we are volunteering to help (There but for the Grace of God, go I). But when your money is separated from your personal involvement, it becomes far easier and more common to think of the recipients as a faceless them. If lawmakers really want to help the poor and suffering, they should go beyond last weeks refusal to cut tax breaks on charitable contributions, and let taxpayers keep more of their own money in the first place: experience shows that when tax rates are lowered, contributions to charity increase.
Recent findings prove government funding crowds out charity. Prefer our evidence, its not written by biased government officials. Andreoni 07.
(James Andreoni. University of Michigan, Ph.D., Economics, 1986 Charitable Giving.New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition, 2007.) IS There are many studies on crowding out, and most show that crowding is quite small, often near zero, and sometime even negative (Kingma, 1989, Okten and Weisbrod. 2000, Khanna, Posnett and Sandler, 1995, Manzoor and Straub, 2005, and Hungerman, 2005). Payne (1998), however, noted that the government officials who approve the grants are elected by the same people who make donations to charities. Hence, positive feelings toward a charity will be represented in the preferences of both givers and the government. This positive relation between public and private donations means that some of the prior estimates could be biased against finding crowding out. Payne (1998) turns to two-stage least squares analysis to address this endogeneity. As an instrument for government grants she uses aggregate government transfers to individuals in the state, and finds that estimates of crowding out rise to around 50%, which is significantly above the 0% crowing that comes when she applies prior techniques to her data. This is a significant new finding. All of this analysis, however, has not accounted for the fact that government grants may also have an impact on the fundraising of charities. Andreoni and Payne (2003) ask what happens to a charitys fund-raising expenses when it gets a government grant. Does it fall, and by how much? They look at 14-year panel charitable organizations and find there are significant reductions in fundraising efforts by charities after receiving government grants. This raises the possibility, therefore, that grants crowd out fundraising, which then indirectly reduces giving, and that this may be the actual channel through which crowding out occurs.

64 Philanthropy
UQ Volunteers Up
The amount of people volunteering is high, with 26.4% of the American population participating in some sort of volunteer work per year Basofin, Director of Editorial Research at Sacramento Bee, MS in Library Science, 2009
(Pete Basofin, Sacramento Bee, How many people volunteer?, March 3, 2009, http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/i-tool_tips/2009/03/how-many-people-volunteer.html, DA: 7/11/09, MEL) With Jesse Jackson looking on yesterday, Mayor Kevin Johnson and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg launched a new campaign to encourage local citizens to donate their time for the betterment of the community. Of course, volunteerism is nothing new; it's as old as the country. But how many people already volunteer? Surprisingly (at least to me) the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics conducts regular surveys to determine the extent and nature of non-paid work in the nation. Its latest study revealed that 61.8 million Americans (26.4 percent) volunteered through or for an organization at least once between September 2007 and September 2008. Continuing a trend, women -- regardless of education, age and other demographics -- volunteer more than men by 29.4 to 23.2 percent. Adults 35-44 continued to volunteer more than any other age group (31.3 percent). The dominant activity for volunteers is fundraising (or selling items to raise money), followed by tutoring or teaching.

65 Philanthropy
UQ - Donations Up
As the economy worsens, charities are stepping up and donating when it really matters Bell 09
(Michael A., American Economy, Despite Economy, King Classic Expected to Be Boon to Charities, 07-11-09, http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/yb/132839199, accessed 07-11-09, ET) When the last putt drops Sunday and the victors hoist their trophies, local charities could be the ones cheering louder than ever. Organizers of the Sunny King Charity Classic to surpass the $2 million mark in charitable donations collected over the golf tournament's 31 years. Last year, the tournament distributed $130,000 to charities, and despite a sputtering economy, this year saw no mild reduction. That means charities such as the American Red Cross, United Way and Second Chance will benefit once again. "That's darn good in this type of economy," said Ken Howell, a member of the Greater Anniston Business and Professional Association, which started the tournament. "It tells me that the local community rallies around it, because they know it's going for a good cause." GABPA has designated about 20 different charities as benefactors this year. Organizers were worried that all of the 204 team slots would not be filled. But, like most years, the community stepped up to the tee and smoked a drive down right down the middle. Hank Smith, event treasurer, said he thought the donations would be down a lot more this year. "That's the great thing about this community," he said. "It's a very giving and charitable community and people stepped up ... in a year when the charities needed it more than ever."

66 Philanthropy
UQ Donations Up
In the economic crisis, places like colleges are able to rely on support of private actors more and more as they increase their spending Oblea, writer for Daily Caliofornication, 09
(Erika, Daily Californication, Donors Offer Campus Some Relief in Midst of Cutbacks, 03-5-09, http://www.dailycal.org/article/104660/donors_offer_campus_some_relief_in_midst_of_cutbac , accessed 07-11-09, ET) In the midst of the economic crisis, UC Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies received $100,000 last month from a private donor who hoped to support student research during difficult economic times. Bill Brandt, a member of the institute's National Advisory Council, had promised in 2005 to donate $250,000 in $50,000 installments over five years. Last month, in a ceremony at the Institute of Governmental Studies, he presented the institute with $100,000, completing the remainder of his commitment early, said Jack Citrin, the director of the institute. "He completed his pledge because he senses accurately that most units on the campus are in a situation of financial stress," Citrin said. The money from Brandt's donation will continue to fund the Mike Synar Research Fellowship for graduates and the Nelson W. Polsby Grants for Public Affairs Research for undergraduates. Citrin said that the money will also fund the institute's seminars and conferences that deal with issues in American politics. "Anything that will further political education and civic discussion to get people involved is something I willingly do and support," Brandt said. Brandt is also involved with the institute as a speaker on its panels. Though the institute uses many funds from private donors, the state still provides the major source of its funding, Citrin said. While funds from donors often support the institute's programs, money from the state pays staff members' salaries. Both the institute and the campus as a whole are looking to private donors as state funding is cut back. According to campus statistics, UC Berkeley received $409 million from 63,000 private donors last fiscal year. Nearly 28 percent of this total came from individuals such as Brandt. Despite economic difficulties, the campus raised more than it ever had previously from private donations last fiscal year, said campus spokesperson Jose Rodriguez. The number of donors and donations is also higher than ever before.

67 Philanthropy
Gates foundation raises their budget for 2009 by 500 million, encourages private action in economic downturn Davis Intelli News, Sub Saharan Africa analyist at ISI Emerging Markets,09
(Sharon, Scidev.net, Gates Foundation increases spending for 2009, 01-28-09, http://www.scidev.net/en/news/gates-foundation-increases-spending-for-2009.html , accessed 07-11-09, ET) The philanthropist Bill Gates, whose foundation has lost 20 per cent of its value during the economic downturn, says he will spend US$500 million more on charitable causes in 2009 than in 2008. The ex-Microsoft tycoon who, through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, spent US$3.3 billion last year much of it on research into the key diseases of the developing world said that his 2009 budget will be US$3.8 billion. In his first annual letter since he began chairing the foundation in July 2008, he said: "Although spending at this level will reduce the assets more quickly, the goal of our foundation is to make investments whose payback to society is very high rather than to pay out the minimum to make the endowment last as long as possible." He called on other donors not to decrease their support during the financial crisis, saying that without sustained investment the world will emerge from the economic downturn with even greater inequalities in health and education.

68 Philanthropy
UQ Volunteers Up
Volunteer rates going to increase due to increase in retirement Hagevig, volunteer president of AARP Alaska, 09 (Rosemary, newsminer.com, Alaska is a volunteer
state, June 21, 2009, http://www.newsminer.com/news/2009/jun/21/alaska-volunteer-state/?opinion, 7/11/09 accessed, GW) Volunteer service brings out the best in people and strengthens communities. Alaskans rank high in volunteerism at 39 percent, or fourth highest in the nation. The average national volunteer rate is 27 percent. Prior to its 50th anniversary in 2008, AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) commissioned a study More to Give on volunteerism and found that four out of every 10 experienced Americans Americans aged 44-79 indicate they are very or somewhat likely to increase the amount of time they spend volunteering in the next five years. Nearly the same proportion (39 percent) of retired Americans report that they increased volunteering after they retired. People who volunteer on a regular basis have a higher willingness to step up to the plate and help their fellow human being. Why people volunteer is as varied as tomorrows weather forecast. The need for volunteers is constant. Fifty-five percent of Americans are very interested or already participate in at least one established volunteer program, such as Meals on Wheels, Senior Companions, Big Brothers-Big Sisters, Foster Grandparents, Driver Safety, or Tax-Aide, but what was surprising to learn is that nearly seven in 10 non-volunteers report that they have never been asked to serve. Existing research shows that when personally asked to serve, more than eight in 10 will do so. On March 26, 2009, the U.S. Senate and on March 31, 2009, the U.S. House passed the Serve America Act (HR 1388), a bill that will strengthen and expand civic engagement and volunteer opportunities for people of all ages. This legislation asks 175,000 more Americans to give a year of service to address specific national challenges, thereby expanding the number of such service participants to 250,000.
Volunteering rates will increase with Baby Boomers National & Community Service, 07 (National & Community Service, Keeping Baby Boomers
Volunteering, March 2007, http://www.nationalservice.gov/pdf/07_0307_boomer_report.pdf, 7/11/09 accessed, GW) Surprisingly, given many of the concerns raised about their lack of civic engagement, Baby Boomers age 46 to 57 are volunteering at higher rates than members of either the Silent of Greatest Generations. The differences in volunteering seem to be the result of several factors, but two are noteworthy. First Baby Boomers have higher education levels compared to older generations. Second, Baby Boomers in their 40s and 50s are more likely to have school-aged children at home than older generations were at the same age. Research shows that the propensity to volunteer rises with increases in education. There is also evidence that adults with children under 18 years of age residing with them are more likely to volunteer than adults without school-aged children. Holding age constant, Baby Boomers appear to be more likely to volunteer than their parents as they reach early and late middle age. The combination of a higher propensity to volunteer and the large size of the Baby Boomers generation indicates a huge potential source of new volunteers for community service activities in the future. As Baby Boomers age, there is a strong possibility that they will volunteer in extremely large numbers over the next 10 to 15 years exhibiting volunteer rates and numbers that exceed earlier generations of older Americans. In fact, the Corporation used Census data to demonstrate that the number of older American volunteers (age 65+) is expected to increase by 50 percent by 2020 (from almost 9 million in 2007 to over 13 million 2020).

69 Philanthropy
UQ - Volunteers Up
Volunteerism up- increased public need Rohwer, writer for Daily Nonpareil, 6/28 (Tim, Daily Nonpareil, 6-28-09, http://www.southwestiowanews.com/articles/2009/06/28/council_bluffs/doc4a46bb251df230244 46127.txt, accessed 7-11-09, AN)
Its been said that for every dark cloud theres a silver lining on the horizon. As so many families and government agencies struggle during these tough economic times with layoffs, reduced hours and shrinking budgets, theres one aspect that has always been a part of everyday life that seems to be on the rise in trying to help out volunteerism. My feeling is that volunteerism is increasing and lot of that based on increased needs, said Ron Abdouch, executive director of the Neighborhood Center. I think people see the importance of getting out in the public and helping each other. I believe you are seeing more stepping up and as Americans thats what they do.
Volunteerism up- Obama provides volunteer leadership Harris, KCBS San Francisco, 6/20 (George, KCBS San Francisco (Radio), 6-20-09, http://www.kcbs.com/SF-Volunteer-CenterReports-Increase-in-Volunteeri/4641238, accessed 7-11-09, AN)
The event kicking off the President Obamas "United We Serve" initiative features First Lady Michelle Obama and California First Lady Maria Shriverbut dont be fooled. San Francisco has been into volunteerism for decades. The Volunteer Center, which was been around 63 years, says there has been a 20 percent increase in people signing up to volunteer since January. Theres a variety of reasons for that. One is we have a president who is speaking out on volunteerism in a very impassioned way, said Executive Director John Power and services manager Damien Chacona.

70 Philanthropy
UQ Volunteers Up
Volunteerism is on the rise as a result of increasing unemployment Goodman, Freelance Writer and Author, 09
(Michelle, NWjobs, Is 2009 the year of the volunteer?, 6/25/09, http://blog.marketplace.nwsource.com/ninetothrive/2009/06/is_this_the_year_of_the_volunt.html?cmpid=2308, Accessed 7/11/09, CAF) You've no doubt heard about the recession driving people to start their own business, try their hand at freelancing, or change careers altogether. You've probably also heard about laid-off folks spending more time volunteering for causes they're passionate about. This rise in volunteerism should come as no surprise: Besides having more time to give back, many unemployed workers have wisely recognized the value of gaining experience in a new field or job skill as a volunteer. What may surprise you though is how many more people are applying for social service programs like the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps this year. Get a load of these statistics the Wall Street Journal recently reported: Applications to the Peace Corps this year are up by 16 percent over 2008. And among the over-50 crowd, applications are up by nearly 50 percent this year. Then there's Teach for America, which matches volunteers with low-income public schools. It received 42 percent more applications this year than last. Curiously, 25 percent of applicants already have jobs, up 80 percent from the previous year. And during the first five months of 2009, AmeriCorps, which matches volunteers to nonprofit organizations in need, got three times the applications it received during the first five months of 2008. Even so, the WSJ reported that AmeriCorps will place 17 percent more workers this year in 10- to 12-month volunteer stints than last year.All great news for volunteerism -- and the organizations and people served by them. But for eager applicants, the competition is stiffer than ever.
Volunteerism is increasing as the need increases ROHWER, Staff Writer, 09

(Tim, The Daily Nonpareil, Increase seen in volunteerism, 6/28/09, http://www.southwestiowanews.com/articles/2009/06/28/council_bluffs/doc4a46bb251df23024446127.txt, Accessed 7/11/09, CAF) As so many families and government agencies struggle during these tough economic times with layoffs, reduced hours and shrinking budgets, theres one aspect that has always been a part of everyday life that seems to be on the rise in trying to help out volunteerism.My feeling is that volunteerism is increasing and lot of that based on increased needs, said Ron Abdouch, executive director of the Neighborhood Center. I think people see the importance of getting out in the public and helping each other. I believe you are seeing more stepping up and as Americans thats what they do.For example, a group of some 20 local residents have gotten together to help raise awareness of the services at the Council Bluffs Community Health Center.These agencies need volunteers because they dont have a lot of money to promote their services, said Nadine Keith, spokesperson for group associated with Organizing for America, a nationwide effort to promote volunteerism in local community. There are a lot of people who arent aware that it (Community Health Center) exists. Her group, which doesnt really have its own name, Were pretty grassroots was formed as a way to publicly express their concern about health care reform, including their support of universal health care coverage, Keith said. Its the big topic in Washington now and this is the time for local people to be more aware of health care reform, she said. We feel everyone should have health coverage.

71 Philanthropy
UQ Volunteers Up
More people are wanting to volunteer- four reasons Mortland, Staff Writer, 09
(Shannon, Crains Cleveland Business, 6/15/09, Outpouring of outreach http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/personalia?ID=11&category=contact, Accessed 7/11/09, CAF)
More people are developing a soft spot for nonprofits these days and are donating their professional skills and services instead of just writing a check, said Brian Broadbent, president and CEO of
Business Volunteers Unlimited in Cleveland, which connects professionals who want to volunteer with organizations needing their help. The reasons, Mr. Broadbent said, are four-fold. Baby boomers are retiring but they want
to remain active within the community and continue to use the skills they honed for so many years; the recession is leaving some employees with more spare time; people in their 20s seem to have a strong sense for volunteerism; and others have been laid off. Most of the people are ready to step up, Mr. Broadbent said. There are statistics that show volunteerism is on the rise. Volunteerism among seniors, for example, is expected to increase 50% by 2020, according to an article that
appeared in the winter 2009 edition of the Stanford Social Innovation Review magazine, which is published by Stanford University's Center for Social Innovation.In addition, 68% of young people ages 18 to 26 said in a recent survey that they preferred to work for an organization that provides professional volunteer opportunities, and that number will continue to rise, according to the magazine. Providence House Inc. in Ohio City can attest to those statements.

72 Philanthropy
UQ Volunteers Up
There has been a spike in the amount of volunteers that are signing up. Geckler, Points of Light Institute, 2009
(Jennifer, Point of Light Institute, 4/17/09, http://www.csrwire.com/press/press_release/16785-VolunteerismSurges-with-National-Volunteer-Week-2009, accessed on 7/11/09, M.E) National Volunteer Week is April 19-25 and according to Points of Light Institute CEO Michelle Nunn, this year, the week takes on special significance with the expected signing of the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act by President Barack Obama and an unprecedented national surge in volunteerism. "We are seeing enormous increases in volunteerism as well as increases in the demand for volunteers," said Nunn citing a 60% increase so far this year in the number of volunteers stepping up to support communities through their national network of 250 volunteer management and connector organizations. "Our HandsOn Network works with over 30,000 nonprofits, developing volunteer leaders, matching volunteers to community needs and managing critical projects like refurbishing schools, supporting shelters and food banks, or helping to reduce a communities environmental footprint. We also help nonprofits and community organizations secure volunteers needed for ongoing program needsand we are experiencing a spike in the need for volunteers right along with the increase in volunteer numbers," said Nunn.
As the economy continues in recession, more people are turning to volunteering.

Mack, author at JConline.com, 2009 (Justin L, author, 6/29/09, http://news.healthhaven.com/?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=author%3A%22Justin+L.+Mack %22&scoring=n, accessed on 7/11/09, M.E) Lafayette resident Chad Alenduff thinks the best way to beat the recession blues is to give back to the community. When he's not busy combing the classifieds looking for available jobs, Alenduff builds his resume by volunteering at Food Finders Food Bank in Lafayette."I've been looking for a job for about a year now," he said."Even though I haven't been able to find work, it makes me feel good to come here and help."Alenduff is part of a growing number of community members who have turned to volunteering to occupy their time during hard economic times. According to the Greater Lafayette Volunteer Bureau, volunteer numbers during the recession are up by nearly 35 percent when compared to last year. While nonprofit organizers cannot pinpoint why more people are volunteering, they are glad to have the extra help."I have had a few tell me that they have been laid off and want to do something with their time," said Samantha Dummel, volunteer services coordinator with the Greater Lafayette Volunteer Bureau. "I don't ask that question when I speak with them. I typically ask them why they are volunteering and sometimes they will offer that information."Headed by the United Way, the volunteer bureau matches volunteers with social service agencies and individuals throughout Tippecanoe County.Dummel said that along with waiting out the recession, people are signing up to volunteer to learn new skills and stay busy during the summer."Last year at this time we had about 432 volunteers contact us or participate in a program, and this year we are at about 582 volunteers," she said.However, as the number of volunteers grows, so does the number of layoffs. A recent report released by the Indiana Department of Workforce Development shows unemployment in Tippecanoe County rose from 8.1 percent in April to 8.6 percent in May. According to recent reports, this is the highest unemployment rate in Tippecanoe County since it stood at 8.8 percent in January 1982. With so many people out of work, the job hunt can become time consuming.

73 Philanthropy
DA Turns Case
Government requirements for charity to match grants tanks giving and is powerless to stop crowding out. Andreoni and Payne 09.
(James Andreoni, A Abigail Payne. University of Michigan, Ph.D., Economics, 1986. Ph.D. Princeton University Is Crowding Out Due Entirely to Fundraising? Evidence from a Panel of Charities. February 2009. http://econ.ucsd.edu/~jandreon/WorkingPapers/andreoni_payne2.pdf DA: 7-1-09) IS This paper is the first to both estimate crowd out and to decompose it into classic crowding out and indirect crowding out due to reduced fund-raising. Why is this endeavor important? First, crowding out is a hidden cost to government grants, and it is important to understand its magnitude and its causes. Second, the nature of crowding out can have significant consequences for potential government policies toward charities and fundraising. Suppose, for instance, that in an attempt to mitigate crowding out the government required that spending by the organization go up by the full amount of the grant, that is, it legislated zero crowding out. If crowding out is entirely due to reduced fund-raising, then this policy is feasible. If, by contrast, crowding out is purely classic and charities are behaving optimally, then the government may be powerless to stop the ill effects of crowding out. Hence, if we are able to find a significant fraction of crowding out is in fact due to endogenous responses of the charity, it expands the policy tools available to a government wishing to maximize the benefits of the tax dollars spent.

74 Philanthropy
Activism solves Poverty

Activism successfully solves poverty; Peterborough proves Changfoot, PHD, Professor at Trent University, 06
(Nadine, Local Activism and Neoliberalism:Performing Neoloberal Citizenship as Resistance, April 2006, http://cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2006/Changfoot.pdf , accessed 07-11-09, ET) This paper examines cultural and anti-poverty resistance in the City of Peterborough reveals activists creatively and vibrantly responding to the effects of neoliberal policy. Rather than conform to neoliberalism, as recent scholars suggest that social movements do, they perform good neoliberal citizenship by discursively appropriating neoliberal goals of economic growth in the case of cultural activism and constructions of the self-sufficient, autonomous citizen in the case of anti-poverty activism. Such performances are in aid of (re)claiming public space and leveraging resources from the local state. Thus far, their efforts have rendered some notable successes, although not without challenges. Challenges include having to cope with slow change because of the time it takes to educate politicians and civil servants of the conditions cultural workers and poor people respectively face and uncertainty over who will maintain performative resistance. Two recent initiatives on the part of Peterborough cultural workers and anti-poverty activists, artsweek, and the work of the coalition between People Putting Poverty on the Agenda and Food Not Bombs provide case studies for how these respective groups partner with neoliberal discourse and the local state to advance their claims. Findings show that neoliberal discourse holds both opportunities and limitations for cultural workers and anti-poverty activists. For cultural workers, neoliberal discourse of market practices, economic development, and cultural development related to the broader discourse of the Creative City influences the way requests are made for support for local cultural production from local government.v Arguments in favor of local cultural production include generating a positive and attractive reputation for the city and nurturing and sustaining cultural production that reflects the history and uniqueness of the city. During artsweek, local cultural producers raised their profile as revenue generators by producing a week of arts events as partners with City Council. This heightened profile gives cultural workers the kind of leverage to push for structural changes in funding for local arts organizations, which in turn, potentially creates more resources for art that very often has social and political goals or content (Changfoot 2005, Kurasawa 2003). People Putting Poverty on the Agenda and Food Not Bombs, since their inception, have used their discourse of self-sufficiency and self-empowerment to create a community of poor people and their allies and agitate for public space from the municipality. Anti-poverty activists emphasize that poor people and their allies can organize themselves ably and independently. On the basis of their claim to be a selfsufficient group, they want the city to acknowledge the usable and available space it has and allocate a permanent public space with cooking facilities to poor people so they can continue to help themselves. This discourse dovetails well with neoliberal citizenship and creates an opening for relations between poor people and the local state.

75 Philanthropy
Activism solves poverty

Activism is good at solving poverty because of anti nationalist economics Emmot, Economist Editor,06
(Bill, The Economist, A Long Goodbye, 03-30-06, http://www.economist.com/printerfriendly.cfm? story_id=6744590,accessed 07-11-09, ET) Economic statistics bemuse and baffle in equal measure. What matters is the human effect, and in that regard nothing matters more than the reduction of poverty. On that, there has been progress but far from enough. According to the World Bank, the proportion of the world's population living on $1 a day or less was 22% in 1993, or 1.2 billion people. By 2001, the proportion had fallen to 17.8%, or just over a billion people. Detractors wave even this aside by saying it is just Asia. Well, it is true that Africa is the continent that has tragically had regress, not progress, because of war, the ravages of disease, and decisions by too many governing elites to stick to kleptocracy. But given that just Asia takes in half the world's population, we should still be encouraged by what has happened. Martin Ravallion, a poverty expert at the World Bank, estimates that if present trends persist the number living on less than $1 a day will have dropped to a little over 620m by 2015, or about 9% of world population. But will they persist? Plenty of people would like to stop them, even some who think they care about poverty. In much of the rich world, globalisation is seen as a threat, to jobs, incomes and the environment. On jobs at least, the facts suggest the opposite: unemployment in the OECD countries in 1993 was 7.8% of the workforce; on the latest figures it is 6.3%. What has occurred, though, is an increase in inequality within the rich countries. The huge expansion of the global labour force represented by the liberalisation of China and India has held down the incomes of the unskilled in all countries; the spread of information technology has had the same effect. The politics of that inequality is finding expression in the rise of economic nationalism in Europe and America. Protectionism is always a danger and always will be: those who lose out from competition make louder noises about it than the more dispersed, albeit larger groups who gain. It will feature strongly in America's congressional elections in November, it already lies behind the roadblocks being laid in Europe and America against foreign takeovers, and is even being expressed in China itself (see article). Deplorable though all such protectionist lobbying is, however, it does not currently pose a serious threat to globalisation. The economic forces in favour of liberalisation remain strong. The most serious threats lie in the murkier world of international politics.

76 Philanthropy
Activism Solves Poverty

Activism is key to solving poverty because its the only way to make the government aware of whats really happening and they have innovative ways of solving Waters, political organizer and writer, 99
(Tom, New Internationalist, (Julia) Chesson's choice: resistance is growing in the richest country in the world , 03-01-99, http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=30471392, accessed 07-11-09, ET) This growth of concentrated poverty is alarming because it is likely to expose poor people to many of the worst of the social dimensions of poverty - crime, low-quality education, lack of opportunities for young people, a toxic environment, and loss of political power and influence. It also makes the realities of poverty less visible to betteroff people, who may become more willing to accept governmental policies that punish poor people. In the 1960s, however, there was a rapid reduction of poverty which suggests that real change can happen when government takes action in response to politically mobilized poor people. The question is: how can poor people and their allies bring about another situation like that one? Movements springing up around the United States offer several different answers. Many of these new movements are linked to issues of selfdetermination and identity for particular groups of poor people. For example, Julia Chesson and other tenants of College Homes could draw on a long tradition of groups of poor black Americans demanding autonomous control over their own neighborhoods. In many other cities, groups of black, Latino, and AsianAmerican low-wage workers have organized through workers' centers, which deal with workplace and sometimes also community issues from a culturally specific perspective. Mothers who receive government assistance are co-ordinating across the country, arguing that their work raising children deserves both respect and economic support. These movements have been responsible for some of the most innovative organizing in the United States, and they have been particularly effective at exposing the political dimension of poverty: the fact that a central experience of poor people is simply being pushed around. They have also produced many of the most militant grassroots activists fighting poverty. At the same time, other groups have pioneered new bridge-building approaches to anti-poverty organizing. These efforts do not necessarily produce the same level of militancy as the more identity-based campaigns, but they do have the advantage of presenting a more united front to business and government decision-makers and offering a more coherent big-picture view of the economic roots of poverty. Often the bridge-building takes a very direct form. Several groups around the US, including the Knoxville-based Tennessee Industrial Renewal Network (TIRN), sponsor exchanges between North American and Mexican industrial workers who work for the same transnational corporations. These trips combat the idea that it is Mexican workers rather than employers who are subjecting North American workers to poverty by taking jobs away. They also build support in both countries for political initiatives that benefit all workers, such as the campaigns against the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and other international agreements that increase employers' power at the expense of workers. Cross-border organizers generally see globalization and the political might of the transnational corporations as an important cause of poverty in all countries.

77 Philanthropy
Impacts of poverty- Cycle of Poverty

Education is key to escape the cycle of poverty, but that costs disproportionate amounts of money, making it vital we allow access to the impoverished Padrn, President Miami Dade College , 06
(Eduardo, Only in America, jun/july 2006, http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=7&hid=5&sid=10ec86cc50d2-4785-8390-311a732a7b8a%40sessionmgr4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d %3d#db=f5h&AN=21121048, accessed 07-11-09, ET) But something is amiss in higher education, and perhaps, on an even larger stage. A number of key factors are conspiring to reverse the egalitarian ethic that had opened up access throughout much of the 20th century. Soaring college costs and major cutbacks in both federal and state financial aid have had a disproportionate impact on low-income and minority students. Factor in a mysterious growth economy that appears to benefit only isolated segments of the population. Too many are making agonizing cost-of-living choices, eliminating one major need in favor of another. The inevitable result is that higher education has been placed on hold for far too many eligible students. The Congressional Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance estimated that 2 million qualified low-income students will be closed out of college, including the cost-effective community college route, by the year 2010. For Hispanics, the narrower opening in higher education's doorway is an ominous signal. Significant population gains have made Hispanics the largest minority in the nation, but college enrollment has failed to keep pace. In 2000, only 22 percent of college age Hispanics (18-24) were enrolled, compared to 31 percent of African Americans and 39 percent of the white population according to the National Center for Education Statistics and HACU. And Hispanics do not benefit from a tradition of experience in American higher education. The Chronicle of Higher Education re ports that 40 percent are the first in their families to attend college. The most threatening market, however, is the most influential: 23 percent of Hispanic adults and 30 percent of Hispanic children live in poverty according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The poor are losing access to college each year. We have no greater priority than education. From early childhood to graduate programs at out finest universities, learning is the lifeline to a fulfilled life and the backbone of a healthy nation. Only a learned people is capable of choosing cooperation over confrontation, openness and respect instead of fear and contempt. Nery Queija crossed a treacherous body of water on a raft with a clear purpose in mind. She will make an extraordinary contribution to her community. Let us hope that the doors of opportunity open wide for her children. Any other outcome would be an insult to Nurse Queija's courage and determination.

78 Philanthropy
Impacts: Dehumanization
Poverty kills emotional well being and identity Park, Post doctorate research fellow, Turnbull, professor of special education, and Turnbull,professor of special education and co-directory, 02
(Jiyeon, Ann, and H. Rutherford, Council for Exceptional Children, Impacts of Poverty on Quality of Life in Families with Children with disabilities, 2002, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb? index=1&did=101380810&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=4&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD &TS=1247357310&clientId=10553 , accessed 07-11-09, ET) Emotional well-being embraces the emotional aspects of family quality of life, such as adaptability, positive thinking, identity, happiness, and stress/exhaustion. Stress, adaptability, and self-esteem are the main themes in the literature regarding the impact of poverty on families' emotional well being. Stress and Adaptability. Earlier in this article, we reported the findings about stress caused by limited access to recreation or unpleasant physical environments. Financial instability itself also is a direct source of stress both in adults and children. McLeod and Shanahan (1993) examined the relationships between length of time spent in poverty and children's mental health based on the data from the 1986 Children of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) (Center for Human Resource Research, 1988). They found that, as the length of time spent in poverty increases, so too do children's levels of stress and feelings of unhappiness, anxiety, and dependence. In addition, low-income adults are more likely to suffer from stress and mental health problems due to difficult life events such as not being able to pay their bills, being evicted, losing their jobs, moving frequently, and worrying about money (McLoyd, 1990).
Poverty is dehumanizing; a condition of hopelessness and misery Wood, MD, MPH, 03

(David, FAAP Pediatrics Vol. 112 No. 3, pp. 707, Effect of Child and Family Poverty on Child Health in the United States, Sep. 2003, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/112/3/S1/707 , accessed 07-11-09, ET) Poverty has been described as an economic state that does not allow for the provision of basic family and child needs, such as adequate food, clothing, and housing. However, the debate about the effects of poverty on the growth, development, and health of children is as much involved with the culture or general context of poverty as it is with the economics of poverty. This culture of poverty is in part mediated through environmental deprivations, such as failing schools, gangs, drugs, violence, and struggling families. Heclo1 described this sociocultural and environmental dimension of poverty as a condition of misery, hopelessness, and dependency. The subject of this article is to review the literature on the effects of poverty on US children as mediated through economic, ecologic, and family influences.

79 Philanthropy
Poverty Impacts- Death

Poverty leads to excess mortality and homicide Geronimus and Waidmann, 99
(AT and TA, Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, USA, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, http://jech.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/53/6/325 , accessed 07-11-09, ET) To describe variation in levels and causes of excess mortality and temporal mortality change among young and middle aged adults in a regionally diverse set of poor local populations in the USA. DESIGN: Using standard demographic techniques, death certificate and census data were analysed to make sex specific population level estimates of 1980 and 1990 death rates for residents of selected areas of concentrated poverty. For comparison, data for whites and blacks nationwide were analysed. SETTING: African American communities in Harlem, Central City Detroit, Chicago's south side, the Louisiana Delta, the Black Belt region of Alabama, and Eastern North Carolina. Non-Hispanic white communities in Cleveland, Detroit, Appalachian Kentucky, South Central Louisiana, Northeastern Alabama, and Western North Carolina. PARTICIPANTS: All black residents or all white residents of each specific community and in the nation, 1979-1981 and 1989-1991. MAIN RESULTS: Substantial variability exists in levels, trends, and causes of excess mortality in poor populations across localities. African American residents of urban/northern communities suffer extremely high and growing rates of excess mortality. Rural residents exhibit an important mortality advantage that widens over the decade. Homicide deaths contribute little to the rise in excess mortality, nor do AIDS deaths contribute outside of specific localities. Deaths attributable to circulatory disease are the leading cause of excess mortality in most locations. CONCLUSIONS: Important differences exist among persistently impoverished populations in the degree to which their poverty translates into excess mortality. Social epidemiological inquiry and health promotion initiatives should be attentive to local conditions. The severely disadvantageous mortality profiles experienced by urban African Americans relative to the rural poor and to national averages call for understanding.

80 Philanthropy
Impacts: Health
Poverty kills quality of health due to malnutrition and lack of access to health care Pack, post doctorate research fellow, Turnbull, professor of special education, and Turnbull, professor of special education, 02
(Jiyeon, Ann, and H. Rutherford, Council for Exceptional Children, Impacts of Poverty on Quality of Life in Families with Children with disabilities, 2002, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb? index=1&did=101380810&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=4&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD &TS=1247357310&clientId=10553 , accessed 07-11-09, ET) , The family quality of life domain of health includes a family's health status, health care, and health impact. The impacts of poverty on health relate to (a) hunger, (b) undernutrition during pregnancy, and (c) limited access to health care. Hunger. Poverty puts enormous restraints on the ability to afford a nutritionally adequate diet. An insufficient diet in turn impacts family members' health. The Food Research and Action Center (2000), a leading national organization working to improve public policies to eradicate hunger and undernutrition in the United States (website: www.frac.org), reported after its survey of families living below 185% of poverty guidelines that hungry children suffer two to four times more often than well-fed children from such health problems as unwanted weight loss, fatigue, headaches, irritability, inability to concentrate, and frequent colds. Undernutrition During Pregnancy. Low birth weight (less than 1,250 grams) and related birth defects are associated with undernutrition during pregnancy (McLoyd, 1998). Poor infants are overrepresented in premature samples because of inadequate nutrition and lack of prenatal care (Crooks, 1995). The risk for respiratory, neurological, and cognitive problems (e.g., birth asphyxia, cerebral palsy, seizure disorder, visual and motor coordination problems, mental retardation, and learning disability) increases in premature infants, especially those with low birth weight (McLoyd, 1998). Limited Access to Health Care. Poverty affects all family members' health because of the family's inability to afford; (a) health services from doctors, dentists, or psychologists, or (b) health supplies, such as prescription drugs or first aid materials. Although recent expansions in Medicaid coverage have relieved many poor families from the burden of health insurance for their children, one in four poor children (25.2%) still had no health insurance at all during 1998 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1999). Even with Medicaid, many doctors refuse Medicaid patients because of low reimbursement rates from the government; and many poor families have difficulty paying small fees for covered services, especially when the fees add up because of multiple follow-up visits or several prescriptions

81 Philanthropy
Private Philanthropy Solves Better

Private philanthropic organizations are more effective and solve better than government funding for service programs. Husock 2005 (Howard, Today, Guns Are Butter: The Dems criticism of the Bush budget doesnt wash, city-journal.org, http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_01_31_05hh.html, accessed 7/17/06)
Historically, private philanthropic organizations delivered many of the social services that today government provides or funds through federal agencies like the Department of Health and Human Services. Child welfare servicesrunning orphanages and screening foster familieswere largely the work of religious organizations until well after World War II, for instance. A century ago, a network of hundreds of settlement housesprivate philanthropiescarried out the (successful) Americanization of immigrants. Many of the philanthropists who founded and ran such organizations dreamed that government would one day replace them and carry on their work on a grander, even universal scaleensuring that all poor children, not just those lucky enough, say, to live near the Henry Street Settlement on New Yorks Lower East Side, received free milk. The hope of reaching more peoplecoupled with a desire to secure a guaranteed revenue stream of taxpayer dollarswas understandable. But these earlier philanthropists didnt anticipate what would happen when government became the chief provider: the quality of services plummeted as they became bureaucratized. Instead of model tenements for the poor, we wound up with blighted big-city public housing. State after state began to suffer from scandals of foster care children, supported by public funds in private homes, victimized by abuse or neglect. Even worse, welfare initiatives turned out to encourage the very dependency they were supposed to alleviate. And so on. A complete break with this old paradigm is increasingly feasible. A new generation of privately funded social entrepreneurs has come forward to take on tasks ranging from the education of inner-city pupils to providing homes for foster children. They have come on the scene in no small part because of their dissatisfaction over the poor job government has done. Not to be confused with leaders of advocacy organizations or interest groups, who often claim the same entrepreneurial mantle, these non-profit leaders dont act like bureaucrats. And they encourage those whom they help to be owners of themselves responsible for their own futures. Redonna Rogers of Milwaukees Center for Teaching Entrepreneurship, a group that teaches inner-city minority kids how to start businesses, tells her students that each must learn to be the CEO of me. We shouldnt consider it anachronistic or impractical for privately funded nonfor-profit organizations to provide important social services on a large scale. After all, how many people in 2005 believe that state-owned utilities or airlines are the only way to provide electricity or travel services to the public? Well-established private organizations such as the Salvation Army and Big Brothers Big Sisters have long delivered social services on a massive scale. In recent years, Habitat for Humanity (whose founder Millard Fuller is the premier social entrepreneur of our time) has even shown that the private delivery of housing services can succeed where public housing failed. Whats more, we are entering a period when unprecedented wealthtrillions of dollarswill flow to private foundations. These foundations, if they can find the will and the ways to act in concert, will be able to provide reliable, long-term support for the social-services providers that prove most effective at helping the needy.

82 Philanthropy
Philanthropy Snowballs
The snowball of private philanthropic donations that would be caused by a high profile success would address global warming, species loss, and global human rights The Toronto Star 2006 (What the Buffett billions can buy the world, June 30, Pg A23) Without doubt, the Gates foundation, with the immense injection of Buffett billions, can help promote global health and save countless lives. Which begs the question: What about the next richest people donating their billions to other global concerns? There is the Walton family, of Wal-Mart fame. The combined assets of the four family members amount to more than $60 billion. They might pass the hat around at a family gathering to tackle environmental problems. This could help address global warming, keep air and water dependably clean, protect engendered species and ensure that the foods we eat are free of contamination. This leaves the third richest man in the world, Carlos Slim Helu of Mexico. He could direct some of his $30 billion to a silent killer on the planet - human rights abuses. His donation could be directed to international organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and PEN to free prisoners of conscience, to prevent torture and abolish the death penalty, and to protect freedom of speech worldwide. Should the spectacular Buffett donation spark other superrich people to donate some of their billions to global issues, history will record vast improvements of life on our planet. Not because of this republic or that empire, but courtesy of superrich individuals named Bill, Warren, Sam and Carlos. For starters.

83 Philanthropy
NU Donations Down
Non profit contributions are going down in either funds or services and will continue to do so through economic hardships Zaragoza, ABJ staff, 09
(Sandra, Austin Business Journal, Nonprofits to feel squeeze from reduced giving, increased need, 01-02-09, http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2009/01/05/story8.html, accessed 07-11-09, ET) The outlook for the nonprofit sector is as hazy at it is in the for-profit world. Like all of the sectors, there is just so much we dont know right now about what is going on now or what the next year is going to look like, Lifeworks Executive Director Susan McDowell said. One certainty, McDowell said, is that foundation giving will be down next year. Nonprofits will either have to cutback or dramatically diversify their funding. Many foundations and individuals, with assets pummeled by Wall Streets chaotic year, are cutting back giving in 2009 to the collective frustration of many nonprofits. This year, weve seen the numbers flip flop, with a majority of charities lagging behind in their fundraising when compared to last year. Even those organizations that are raising about the same amount face significant hurdles because of the increased needs, said Paulette Maehara, president and CEO of the Association of Fundraising Professionals. Matt Kouri, executive director of Greenlights for Nonprofit Success, a nonprofit consulting firm that works with area charities, expects the demand for charities services to only increase in 2009 as layoffs continue to strike people across all industries. There is no question that the demand for services is already up and not only across nonprofits, but also for the human and social service sectors as more people lose their jobs, Kouri said. There will be a greater need for basic needs, greater need for job training and education particularly adult education. People that are going to be laid off are going to want retraining, and nonprofits can provide that, Kouri added. There will also be an increase need for mental health services as the pressure of the economy continues to be taxing on folks. Many charities are responding to the recession with an aggressive increase in services. For instance, Capital Area Food Bank of Texas recently increased its mobile food pantry distributions, opened a 30,000-square-foot satellite warehouse and distributed nearly 2 million pounds of food in October the largest single month of distribution in the organizations 27-year history. But all that expansion is still not enough as donors especially corporate ones part with less cash. There is no doubt that the severe decrease in financial donations impacting nearly all social sector organizations has taken a severe toll, Capital Area Food Bank President and CEO David Davenport said in a posting. That said, we are committed to expanding services, distributing more food and assisting our clients and partner agencies through the difficulties ahead. United Way Capital Area, which suffered small job cuts in 2008 because of a decrease in funds raised, is working during the down economy to build support with the city and the banking community for a new financial literacy program that it hopes to launch next year, said Emily De Maria, senior director of United Way Capital Area community development

84 Philanthropy
NU Donations Down
Non-unique- Economic slump shows a huge decrease in charitable contributions. Wright 7/4.
(Tiffany Wright. Daily American Staff Writer. Charitable Donations Down. 4 July 2009. http://www.ourtownonline.biz//somerset_news/news/local/news329.txt DA: 7-11-2009) IS When the going gets tough it is sometimes difficult for residents to dig in their pockets and donate.A study released by Giving USA, an organization that monitors charities, states that total charitable giving from 2008 was down 5.7 percent after adjustment for inflation. The drop was the first decline since 1987 and the second since the organization started publishing the report in 1956. Somerset County charitable organizations are no exception. Many officials say although donations are not drying up, they have decreased in past months.We have seen a decrease in our donations and I think it has a lot to do with the economic state right now, said Holly Skinner, director of the Salvation Army Somerset Service Center. Even donors who were able to donate $15 or $20 arent able to anymore and added up. She said each month there is anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars in donations less than the year before. Right now in our slower season were down at least $1,000 or more, Skinner said. Lisa Beam, director of community services at the Community Action Partnership for Somerset County/Tableland Services, said it is typical for donations to decrease during the summer. The partnership oversees the eight county food pantries at Windber, Hollsopple, Boswell, Central City, Somerset, Berlin, Meyersdale and Confluence. It seems as though in and around the winter months and holidays we see a spike in donations, Beam said. We see the decrease in the summer. Giving in 2009 may be similar to that of last year with a slow rising stock market, credit crisis, the high rate of unemployment and weak housing market, people may be less willing to give away their money. The Giving USA study said there was a decrease in giving in nearly all aspects of charities. Decreases were seen by individuals, corporate offices, education, foundations, health, environment, animal organizations and arts and humanities. Religious, public society benefits and international affairs were the only charitable organizations that saw an increase in donations, according to the study. The study also states that 60 percent of the surveyed human service organizations were cutting expenses in 2009 due to funding shortages. The Somerset County Blind Center, a division of the Susquehanna Association for the Blind and Vision Impaired, is feeling the reverberations of staff cut backs and less donations. Our contributions are down somewhat, but it does not seem as reduced as other nonprofits Ive talked to, said marketing coordinator Rob Stemple. People dont have as much money to give. As to not cut into services, the center has tried to reduce expenses. By doing that the organization lost three employees. Were quite literally to the bare bones, but weve been there before, he said. Skinner said when donations are down it effects the type of service the organization can provide. We can only provide as much services from the amount of funds that come in, she said. Weve been doing pretty good with money from the past. Weve saved enough to have a reserve. Beam said the food pantries will continue to solicit donations and volunteers. Even though they receive state funding it is contingent upon the budget. Funding may be tied up as the state budget has yet to be finalized. Some organizations are not as hard-pressed for donations, primarily because they rely on repeat donors. Our donations stay about the same, said Marge Coddington, director of Meals on Wheels in Somerset. We have a donation drive in November and the same people usually give each year. The organization has 160 clients and delivered 4,700 meals in Somerset County in June. Coddington said she has faith things will work out. If we need something someone is usually always willing to come in with a check, she said. Despite a drop in the percent of giving, donations to charitable causes in the U.S. reached $307.65 billion last year, according to the study. What we find remarkable is that individuals, corporations and foundations still provided more than $307 billion to causes they support, despite the economic conditions, said Del Martin, chairwoman of the Giving USA Foundation. It would have been easy to say not this year when appeals came their way. Skinner is optimistic that things will change for the better. Somerset County is a very strong community and whenever we really need help the community pulls together and we receive what were asking for, she said. Our funding will pick up with our cry for help.

85 Philanthropy
NU Donations Down
Non-unique- Charitable giving at an all time low since the 1970s. Its a period of nonprofit Darwinism. Anderson 7/11
(Zac Anderson. Writer, Herald Tribune. Nonprofits court donors as giving slakes. http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090711/ARTICLE/907111066/2107/BUSINESS?Title=Nonprofits-courtdonors-as-giving-slakes DA: 7-11-2009. ) IS Declines in charitable giving this year could hit levels not seen since the 1970s, national nonprofit experts said Friday. The predictions reinforced concerns among local nonprofit leaders, who said they face budget cuts of up to 20 percent. Scores of them from across the region attended the Community Foundation of Sarasota County's annual "Fundraisers Forum" for advice on raising money during one of the most challenging environments for charitable organizations in at least a generation. "What we're having right now is a period, I believe, of nonprofit Darwinism," said Carol Weisman, author of nine books on nonprofit fundraising and the keynote speaker at Friday's event. Charitable giving declined by about 2 percent nationally in 2008 but could decline by another 4 percent or more in 2009, said Bob Carter, a nonprofit consultant with Changing Our World Inc. who participated in a panel discussion. "The first half of 2008 was pretty good. The second half tanked," Carter said. "So we had a balancing effect in 2008 that is not going to happen in 2009." The worst annual decline in charitable giving was a 5.4 percent dive in 1975, according to numbers Carter compiled from the group Giving USA. Nonprofits play a vital role in Southwest Florida's economy, culture and quality of life. Sarasota and Manatee counties alone have about 1,500 active organizations that provide services for people of all ages, from health care to the arts. Rather than dwell on whether the current philanthropic downturn will be a historic one, Carter, Weisman and the half-dozen other speakers tried to offer creative strategies for raising money in the face of adversity. Their lessons were in high demand. Nearly 270 nonprofit professionals turned out for an event that typically attracts about half as many. They jammed into break-out sessions that were so crowded some people sat on coolers or on the floor. Event organizers said the turnout underscored the challenges nonprofits confront. Groups from Tampa to Punta Gorda attended. "I needed some inspiration," said Patricia Mitchell with the Manatee County group Bridge of Hope, which finds transitional housing for homeless families. "It's very difficult right now. We haven't been able to get a grant from anyone." Data presented at the forum showed that corporate and government funding for nonprofits is declining the most. Tapping private donors was a recurring theme of the event. That struck at the heart of what Carolyn Haworth has been trying to accomplish as the new development director for Child Protection Center Inc. in Sarasota, a group that works with abused children. The CPC faces a 20 percent reduction in the agency's $1.6 million budget, largely because of decreases in government funding and large grants from foundations and groups such as the United Way. Haworth's goal over the next year is to build a strong base of individual donors. Individuals provided 75 percent of contributions to charitable groups, Carter noted. "That's where our focus needs to be," Haworth said. "We need that individual support."

86 Philanthropy
No Link - Tradeoff
Obama encourages volunteering, the good publicity means no risk of tradeoff Padgett, Staff Writer for the Las Vegas Review Journal, 09
(Sonya, Las Vegas Review Journal, HELP WANTED: Poor economy, desire to serve others fuel increased interest in volunteering, June 28, 2009, http://www.lvrj.com/living/49378977.html, 7-11-09, KK) It's hard to say whether this recent uptick in Las Vegas is more for selfish reasons or genuine philanthropy, but it is true that volunteering can provide a host of benefits for a person's career, Kelley says. That's something the Volunteer Center highlights in its efforts to attract more volunteers. "We all know finding a new job is hard, especially in this economy," Kelley says. "Volunteering is a great way to fill gaps in their resumes. We're promoting those ideas if it hasn't occurred to people." The center operates volunteercentersn.org, a Web site advertising volunteer opportunities with United Way agencies. The site receives about 4,000 hits a month. Currently, there are about 100 opportunities posted. President Barack Obama, who worked for several years as a community organizer early in his career, has called on the nation to volunteer more. His administration launched a nationwide service initiative called "United We Serve" that will run through Sept. 11. The goal is to increase volunteerism in communities as a way to address social service needs during the recession. The Web site serve.gov will operate as a jumping off point for those who want to start their own service projects or join one. Kelley says the unemployment rate has helped nonprofits that rely on volunteers to keep their doors open. With monetary donations shrinking, nonprofits have had to cut back staff, leaving them with an even greater need for free labor. "Here's a little slogan I use: A crisis is a terrible thing to waste," Kelley says. "We're in a (situation) where we have very skilled people out of work in need of something to do. Here's an opportunity to use these skilled people." Volunteering can provide more than just a line on a resume, notes Mimi Tilton, executive director for Caring 4 Kids Foundation, a nonprofit that provides homeless children with food. Since October, her volunteer base has increased from seven people to 150 active volunteers. She doesn't know what to attribute the increase to; she actively works to recruit new volunteers. "Is it the economy or from reaching out, I don't know," Tilton says. "But because there's been such a strong influx, it seems like something's going on." Tilton says she has been asked to write letters of reference for volunteers looking for work. One woman needed a reference for nursing school. "Employers are looking for anything that sets you apart from the other 500 applicants," she says. Some people not otherwise affected by the recession want to give back to their community, she says. For whatever reason, they have been inspired to donate time, money or goods. Nonprofits rely on such volunteers to deliver services, she adds. "They are saying, 'There but by the grace of God, go I,' " Tilton says. Kendra Murley, 23, is a good example. She felt like she had lost everything when her relationship ended in October, but she knew there were people in more dire circumstances. "I went through a very hard time," she says. "I was looking for an outlet to help other people and have something to do during the day when I was free." She ended up at Caring 4 Kids Foundation. Helping hungry children put things in perspective for her. "It really did," she says. "It kind of gave me a place to go every week. I met some friends, built a support system and felt like I was making a difference for some kids who needed help."

87 Philanthropy
No Solvency
Private Actors Cant Solve, Only Gov Action Benefits Impoverished Van Dijk, Department of Economics, University of Amsterdam, 98 (Frans, Journal of Population Economics, Private Support and Social Security, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 345-371, Aug., 1998, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20007590? &Search=yes&term=cycle&term=poverty&term=social&term=welfare&term=security&list=hid e&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dpoverty%2Bcycle%2Band %2Bsocial%2Bsecurity%2Bor%2Bwelfare%26wc%3Don%26dc%3DAll %2BDisciplines&item=1&ttl=317394&returnArticleService=showArticle, accessed 7-5-09, MDN)
The results are to some extent disappointing for advocates of private support, whether they be Asian opponents of "welfarism" or Western communitarians. Though private support has many attractive aspects, its applicability as general alternative to public social security/welfare is limited. The analysis suggests that private support cannot cover (semi-) permanent needs, such as those resulting from old age, long-term unemployment and chronic illness. Some of these permanent needs can be taken care of by market insurance, but important categories remain unaddressed. Private support also runs into problems in case of frequent spells of unemployment of the same individuals. It is effective in dealing with evenly spread frictional unemployment and other alternating short term needs. As a further complication private assistance can only be expected to offer protection to a major part of the population in homogeneous societies with equable income distributions. Full protection is, of course, impossible due to limited risk-pooling. In addition, voluntary support will not work for immigrants that cannot fall back on old ties during the period in which they have not yet built up new social networks. For Asian economies that tend to rely on private support also for old age and other permanent needs, the results imply that this reliance may become problematic, especially, if autocratic relationships give way to social networks based on voluntary interaction4. The equable income distribution and low unemployment rates of these countries make private support effective for short term needs. As long as these aspects are maintained and structural unemployment is avoided, a combination of private insurance (for old age, chronic disability and illness) and private support could cover most needs, giving governments a limited task in this area. Nonetheless, some basic provisions are unavoidable. The analysis indicates that with private support some individuals will receive adequate assistance, but others will not. It also follows that in a public social security/welfare system the former category receives benefits that in the absence of such a system would be provided privately. If the size of this category is not insignificant, a public system that differentiates between individuals that can get private support and those that cannot, could be attractive, but may run counter to the principle of equality before the law. It seems a rather theoretical option to require people to prove that they cannot get support, for instance, from their family. This may still be feasible in some countries in Asia, but in Western countries this is not operational, as families do not play a crucial role anymore, and extension to social networks is impossible to implement. Other possibilities are conceivable. First, stopping short of public social security, government can stimulate private giving by granting tax deductions. This option helps to solve, in particular, the problem of small and/or weak networks. Tables 9 and 10, which assume that net contributions affect social ties, illustrate, while Figs. 5 and 6 give summary information about total levels of support. As can be expected, support goes up. The intensity of social ties is affected, but the impact is small. For the case of unbiased high unemployment the average intensity is 0.37 instead of 0.39 in the absence of support. And social cohesion is not threatened. Long term needs are still not covered. Also, this policy does not provide for individuals that cannot get any support through networks. This care would be left to charitable organizations dependent again on voluntary gifts. Donations to such charities are also promoted by tax deductions, but there is no guarantee that sufficient funds become available.

88 Philanthropy
State Action Tradeoff

Reliance on private philanthropy to solve problems discourages government action and risks collapse when fickle philanthropists withdraw funds on a whim Keen 2006 (Andrew, Internet entrepreneur and founder of audiocafe.com, The Great Seduction June 28, accessed 7/17/06, http://andrewkeen.typepad.com/the_great_seduction/2006/06/the_withering_o.html)
Anti social contracts The withering of the traditional state continues. Warren Buffett's $31 billion "gift" to the Gates Foundation exceeds the entire US government's annual spending on foreign development and humanitarian assistance. And Gates and Buffett's cash together ($60 billion) places the Gates Foundation somewhere between the $87 billion GDP of Slovakia and the $43 GDP billion of Slovenia. It isn't absurd now to imagine an American philanthropic organization actually acquiring a small African country in the same way as Second Life allows its members to acquire new plots of virtual land. So what's really going on here? Instead of being taxed by the state, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are redirecting their wealth to their own private philanthropic organizations. The world is fragmenting into an ever increasingly hyperpolar place in which governments just another participant in the order of things. Some of that money I spent on Windows 2000 is now going to solving the malaria epidemic in Africa. I'm not sure whether this is a good or a bad thing. But it certainly is one explanation of why smart, ambitious people go into business rather than politics. Such an anarchic environment lends itself to the antics of mercurial philanthropists like Larry Ellison who yesterday withdrew his $115 million committed to Harvard University because of Larry Summer's resignation from the university. Ellison's action is the equivalent of refusing to pay one's taxes after a change in government. Just as the globally minded Gates is the most acceptable face of the new digital plutocracy, so the anti social Ellison epitomizes the narcissistic amorality of too many Silicon Valley entrepreneurs. The modern state arose in the 17th and 18th centuries in parallel with the social contract theories of Rousseau, Hobbes and Locke. All these theorists made sense of a social contract in the context of a geographically defined, physical community of people. But in an America where the privileged and the poor are living separate lives and where the wealth of the globalized rich eventually gets diverted via philanthropic foundations to Africa or Asia, what exactly does it mean to share a common nationality? The Hobbesian/Lockean version of the social contract is one of the most serious casualties of our descent into hyperpolarity. What, I wonder, will replace contract theory in a world where allegiance is increasingly symbolic and arbitrary.

89 Philanthropy
Activism Tradeoff
Action by philanthropic foundations trades off with government action and individual activists, foundations engage in hollow and ineffective PR stunts, not real reform Simon 2006 (Michele Simon is the director of the Center for Informed Food Choices, based in Oakland, Calif. and the author of the forthcoming book, Appetite for Profit, Soda Deal with Clinton Foundation Latest PR Stunt, commondreams.org, http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0505-32.htm, accessed 7/18/06)
In contrast to this voluntary agreement, the current effort in state legislatures all over the nation to pass bills to rid schools of unhealthy drinks would require actual policy change. Over the past several years, almost every state in the nation has tried in vain to pass legislation to get junk food and sugary beverages out of schools. Just a few states have been able to pass any such legislation, and only after several years of heated political battles. Big Cola spends big money on lobbyists to gut or kill these bills. Theres nothing in the Clinton agreement that requires Coke and Pepsi to stop the lobbying, and indeed industry has continued to fight legislation, even as these negotiations were underway. Thats because corporations prefer selfregulation, a non-enforceable voluntary system that has already proven to be a dismal failure. Has anyone noticed that the ABA policy from last August was never even implemented? And yet we are now expected to trust these same corporations to do with right thing just because Bill Clinton has anointed the proceedings? Most disturbingly, this announcement could potentially undermine ongoing grassroots efforts, state legislation, and other enforceable policies. For example, in Massachusetts where a stronger bill is pending, a local advocate is worried about the adverse impact, since legislators could easily think that Clinton has taken care of the problem and ignore the bill. What was already an uphill battlegetting schools and legislatures to take this problem seriouslywas just made worse, not better, by this bogus agreement. If Bill Clinton really wanted to help Americas schoolchildren, he should work with grassroots advocates, parents, teachers, and others fighting against powerful corporations to pass legally enforceable legislation at the state and federal level to mandate positive policy change. The last we needed was more empty promises from industry in the guise of public health reform.

Voluntarism and Philanthropy

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Voluntarism and Philanthropy

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Philanthropic Organizations CPs / DA

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (social services)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Education)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Education)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Health Care)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Health Care)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Natives)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Poverty Reduction)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves (Poverty)

http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/returnTo.do?returnToKey=20_T6944522868, accessed 7/11/09, AJF)

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gates Solves Funding

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Solves Cash, Expertise

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Solves Social Services

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Solves Social Services

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Solves Laundry List

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Solves - Poverty

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Solves - Funding

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

AT: Slate Studies

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Clinton Conflict of Interest

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Soros Solves - Poverty

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Soros Solves - Poverty

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Soros Solves - Poverty

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Soros Solves - Funding

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Soros Solves - Funds

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

solves best: private actors superior

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Soros Solves - Health Care

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2009