By Congressman Joe Pitts

“In America I came across types of associations which I confess I had no idea existed, and I frequently admired the boundless skill of Americans in setting large numbers of people a common goal and inducing them to strive toward that goal voluntarily.”
- Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

One of the fundamental strengths of American democracy is the engagement of our citizens in civic causes through voluntary organizations.  Today, we call these non-profits, or charities.  During the early days of the republic, the French writer Alexis de Tocqueville simply called them associations because the very existence of private individuals gathering together outside the realm of the state in order to take action was new to him.

Yet de Tocqueville found that these associations were one of the greatest strengths of the young nation and one of the aspects of America with which he was the most impressed.

Unfortunately, some politicians in Washington seem to have turned their backs on this notion and are taking steps to concentrate more and more power within the federal government.

I believe the American people know how to run their own lives better than bureaucrats in Washington.  I also believe that groups of concerned citizens can respond better, faster, and more efficiently to the needs of their community than a politician or bureaucrat in Washington.  Indeed they have been doing so for hundreds of years, dating back to colonial times. 

Two specific policies Congress has recently passed display a chilling movement away from the volunteerism and civic participation that has made America strong, and toward central government-concentrated power and decision making.

On March 31, the House passed H.R. 1388, the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, which will spend $5.7 billion of taxpayer dollars to expand government programs that pay so-called “volunteers” in programs like AmeriCorps who are paid to do service work in communities across the country.

Some AmeriCorps work has proven highly controversial, including work done on behalf of Planned Parenthood.  I know many Americans who do not wish their tax money going to benefit such an organization.  AmeriCorps volunteers also do good work, but the argument against such a model of “service” goes deeper than just the kind of work being completed.  Volunteering through private charitable organizations has been a hallmark of American society.  Shifting this process to a civilian force of paid individuals suddenly answering to a politically charged White House will do no good for our country, and will only serve to weaken the private organizations by siphoning off funding.

It is not as though I do not support service.  I just believe the service should come from private organizations within the communities they serve.  Why do politicians in Washington believe they know better how to allocate the $5.7 billion in taxpayer money than the individuals within the communities that will be served?  

Volunteers in the kinds of private charities de Tocqueville was so impressed with are better motivated, quicker, and more effective than any government program can hope to be. 

Take the Hurricane Katrina disaster as an example.  Private charities, volunteers, and church groups were on the ground faster and have stayed longer than nearly any of the government agencies involved in either the rescue or rebuilding efforts.  And rarely do you hear about corruption, incompetence, or cronyism in the Red Cross or Habitat for Humanity that seems to be endemic in large government bureaucracies.

The $5.7 billion that will be used to pay for government hired and paid volunteers is similar to the amount of private giving economists estimate will decrease due to President Obama’s budget, which was recently passed by Democrats in Congress.

The budget would reduce the amount of tax deductions some individuals can take on donations to non-profit organizations, creating a disincentive to donate to charities, during a difficult economic time when charities are needed most in our communities.

Martin Feldstein, an economics professor at Harvard University, writing in the Washington Post claimed “President Obama's proposal to limit the tax deductibility of charitable contributions would effectively transfer more than $7 billion a year from the nation's charitable institutions to the federal government.”

If the goal is to help communities, the government shouldn’t have taken the $5.7 billion from the taxpayers in those communities to begin with.

The two policies are just a part of a larger and deeply troubling trend.  This administration clearly believes that individuals and even private charitable organizations should be superceded by a strong federal government who will make better decisions regarding your healthcare, your energy consumption, and what causes you choose to support with your hard earned money.  These actions are taking us down a road that would put an end to the America for which de Tocqueville had such high praise.

Congressman Joe Pitts represents the 16^th Congressional District of Pennsylvania.

###