THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, March 11, 1995 TAG: 9503100034
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Short : 47 lines
Charity is big business in America. That the people are so generous to others, in both ongoing commitment and response to emergency, is something for us to feel good about.
But charity, the statisticians tell us, is not a growth industry. While the percentage of U.S. households who give has remained steady at about 75 percent, the average household contribution, adjusted for inflation, fell 23 percent between 1989 and 1993. The drop is attributed to worries about the economy and personal financial security.
This is an ominous sign at a time when our elected representatives are passing laws to enable the government to do less and calling on their constituents to do more.
Independent Sector, a national forum that encourages and monitors contributions, says: ``Recent trends in charitable giving offer little basis for optimism'' that the private sector can replace lost federal revenue and meet new demands.
For charities, what's happening is a double whammy. Part of the governmental cutback will come in reduced or eliminated appropriations to charities to provide social services. Which means charities will be asked not only to get along with less but also to do more with less. (Charities that charge fees for services have little leeway for raising them, the risk being that those who most need the services will be least able to afford them.)
In recent years many agencies, particularly those dealing with family matters, have developed programs designed to avert crises. Putting the the old ounce-of-prevention theory to work, they try to educate people in how to meet and defuse potential problems.
The funding gaps will present agencies with this Catch 22: Because of reduced funding, they must direct a larger percentage of their resources to emergency situations. Loss of the education programs will then lead to more emergency situations.
The message from the charities, as Independent Sector put it, is that ``we can only do so much. We cannot begin to do it all.''
Clearly, Washington needs to rein in spending, but lawmakers must do this honestly and realistically. Suggesting that private charities can plug ever-larger holes in the safety net is neither honest nor realistic. by CNB