The Red and Black

Issue date: 3/6/09 Section: Opinions

ROBERT THRASHER

Today is a sad day. Well, only if you're considering your emotional affectability by the direction of our federal government, and that direction's effect on society at large.

President Barack Obama is not who we hoped he would be. Whether you voted for our 44th president or whether you did not but, once he was elected, you gave him your support and hoped for the best, he is not who we hoped for.

How do we know this? Well, there are some obvious flaws in his recent policy. For one, raising taxes during a recession - not a good idea. Or it could be the recently released budget, which pundits from both sides of the aisle resoundingly agree is "uncompromising" and lacks any hint of bipartisanship. It could be either.

Yet, for me, there is one political maneuver that scares me the most and has poked a hole in my proverbial balloon of hope for the Obama presidency. Which one? His decision to include in his budget a tightening of the limits on the tax deduction for charitable contributions made by couples making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000.

His plan will reduce the percentage tax benefit on charitable contributions from 35 percent to 28 percent.

Obama justifies this change by saying it will generate much needed tax revenue. Exactly, it will - on money that is given away to charities. Not to mention, this money already has been taxed fully when the charitably minded donor earned it.

The president is creating a disincentive for philanthropic giving, whether you believe it is subtle or blatant. Several tax policy institutes in Washington, D.C., agree that the effect of the new limit will be to reduce charitable giving by the wealthiest Americans by nearly 5 percent or close to $3.9 billion.

We must also remember that this is during a severe recession - when charitable giving by financially hurting donors is taking a hard hit already.

Further, while the president is lessening incentive for private giving, he is increasing the share of the federal government in social programs. This is a terrible mistake.

In the last two to three years great strides have been made in the progress of creative capitalism - a term coined by Bill Gates. This movement recognizes that just as history has proved time and time again the private sector is the greatest driver of wealth, it can also be the greatest driver for social good.

The movement focuses on the concern and compassion of people for other people - the goodwill of each individual. Obama's budget, however, disincentivizes private charitable giving.

Even if this were not to have a material effect on charitable giving, which it surely will, the social psychological ramifications of the president's decision to disincentivize private philanthropy is enough to cause a painful setback for the innovative social progress espoused by Gates, Warren Buffett and others.

The Obama presidency's effect on charitable giving is a double-edged sword. On one side he is discouraging charitable giving by wealthy individuals, and on the other side, it is as if he is saying, "Don't worry, the big federal government will take care of you."

The human satisfaction and goodwill derived from giving is a real sentiment that each individual person should want each individual person to want.

Follow me? We want others to want to give. It is as if Obama wants to horde the feeling of hero or helper for himself and the federal government.

Maybe he just can make the country a better place. But, much more than during his campaign when Obama's scorecard was clean, that hope is sounding more like mere words without any substantial leading evidence to back them up. Now that's some audacious hope.

- Robert Thrasher is a junior from Atlanta majoring in accounting and economics.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools