Federal two-step: getting kicked while dancing the national service jig.(GENERAL RAMBLINGS)

This whole national service thing is becoming quite the party. Big donors are lining up with major charities and local groups to fund neighborhood initiatives. There are receptions, bands and happy people ready to pitch in and get their pictures taken with celebrities.

And while the movement has several key leaders, the party's host, it appears more and more, is sitting in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, with the occasional stop for a dinner date in New York City or a ball game in Saint Louis.

The old line is that the optimist says that the glass is "half full" while the pessimist says it's "half empty." In the case of national service emanating from the federal government, the observation should be "what glass?"

Other than for intending to boost the ranks at AmeriCorps, the redesign of the Compassion Capital Fund, the Serve America Act and the new Office of Social Innovation, the White House is ponying up few new dollars but is still attempting to call the tune. There's a lot that can be said about good intentions but little action.

The president of the United States always enjoys a stage from which direction can be set and hopefully the nation will respond. The impending trouble in all this is the potential for deeper control of the charitable sector by the federal government--as if the Internal Revenue Service and Intermediate Sanctions weren't enough.

The great fear is that innovation, the stock and trade of the nonprofit world, will be stifled by bureaucratic red tape that comes with working with government. Make no mistake. The money will come with not strings but ropes attached.

And where the government giveth, it can and will taketh away. While the president on one hand appears to be boosting the sector, he is also attempting to change the charitable deduction rates. That's not being a friend of the sector when money is already tight.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Responsible people can disagree about what will happen to donations when the rates are changed in a down economy. Many say giving will be unchanged while others believe it will significantly decline. Neither of those options is good. That's that glass metaphor again. The best thing to do is keep this deduction change as a theory people can argue about and leave the charitable deduction alone.

When you flip to Page 15 of this issue you'll see some of the most innovative executives in the sector, as we unveil the 12th annual NPT Power & Influence Top 50. Roughly 15 percent of the honorees are directly involved in the national service movement. Their organizations have been around for decades delivering hundreds of millions of hours of volunteer service. These managers didn't need the White House bully pulpit to get rolling. They all agree it is helpful, but were getting the job done while other presidents were ignoring them.

The charitable sector should welcome the help from the volunteer-in-chief, but should not come to rely on it like a junkie needing a fix. If this keeps up, the next generation of volunteer managers will have to reach for the proverbial naloxone to counteract the heroin of federal intervention to wake the sector back up.

Print Get the Mag Weekly Updates