Karl Zinsmeister, a long-time figure in American philanthropy and former director of the White House Domestic Policy Council under President George W. Bush, has addressed the current state and challenges of charitable giving in his new book, “Sweet Charity: Why Private Giving Is So Important to America (And Must Not Be Wrecked By Politics).” Zinsmeister previously served as vice president at The Philanthropy Roundtable from 2011 to 2020, where he created “The Almanac of American Philanthropy.”
Zinsmeister argues that while philanthropy and charity deserve respect and protection, there are risks of misuse. “The charitable impulse can be misused and manipulated,” he writes. “It’s absolutely appropriate for regulators to crack down when this happens.” He emphasizes that charities are granted tax benefits because they serve society truthfully. According to him, “Their donations are not supposed to go to partisan causes or overt political activism, personal enrichment, or violence. If charitable gifts are being exploited in this way… there must be a law-enforcement response—but a cautious one.”
He notes that liberal policymakers have been more inclined to use charitable giving for political goals but sees errors on both sides of the political spectrum regarding their criticism of philanthropy. “[C]ritics of left and right all make one massive misdiagnosis—which is to paint U.S. philanthropy as primarily a game of national manipulation played by ‘the billionaire boys’ club.’”
Zinsmeister contends that media attention on billionaire donors overshadows the reality that most U.S. philanthropic activity comes from everyday Americans through small-scale giving outside public view.
He describes this decentralized approach as “one of our most pluralistic and democratic elements,” stating it gives individuals opportunities to directly impact their communities.
Zinsmeister acknowledges an increase in politicized charity over the past decade—particularly among progressive billionaires—while noting that conservative donors have generally been more careful about separating civil-society work from politics. He also claims that funding directed toward right-leaning causes is much smaller than what progressive nonprofits receive.
To address concerns about politicization and abuse within the sector, Zinsmeister recommends several policy reforms:
– Cutting off foreign philanthropy linked with politicizing American charities.
– Stopping Internal Revenue Code § 501(c)(3) groups’ voter registration efforts if they cross into political activity.
– Preventing these groups from participating in ballot initiatives.
– Disallowing them from channeling funds to politically active § 501(c)(4) organizations.
– Tightening rules around how much political activity is permitted for § 501(c)(4)s.
– Considering time limits on foundations.
– Requiring foundations to distribute a higher percentage (up from five percent annually) of their endowments each year.
“Refined rules and improved enforcement could make philanthropy even better,” Zinsmeister writes.
He cautions against broad attacks on philanthropy prompted by high-profile cases involving large donors: “While taking sensible criticisms seriously, we must make sure that politicos don’t destroy one of America’s most important secret weapons: the decentralized giving and organizing that solves millions of community needs through spontaneous, voluntary, grassroots action.”
Zinsmeister stresses maintaining clear distinctions between small-scale charitable efforts and large-scale politicized donations when considering policy changes or public discourse about civil society’s role.
###
