I don’t talk about politics very much, and that’s probably a good thing.  For one: I’m not as educated as I’d like despite a PoliSci degree, and two: I love all of Durham and every one in it, and I’m not interested in alienating folks even I was informed enough to do so. But, there’s one topic that has been on my mind for quite a while and it’s probably time to get it off my chest. And of course, I’d love to get other people’s take on this as it’s possible I’m missing something, either obvious or subtle.

I pay the federal goverment taxes and then someone in Washington determines how to best spend that money with a chunk of it coming back to Durham in the form of federal aid and investment.

Here’s my issue: I think that I know how better to spend and invest in Durham than some analyst up in Washington DC, and I think you do too. I think that the excellent charities in Durham are infinitely more effective and efficient than government agencies. Why? Well aside from a general belief that smaller organizations are more nimble and effective with the decision makers much closer to the people that they seek to serve, there’s the matter of incentive. The folks that run Durham charities (most of whom receive no federal aid) are paid by incentive and the analysts and career government employees are not. There is no such thing as a Success Grant (http://www.durhamcares.org/index.php/grant/) for career federal employees. Even without the Success Grant initiative there is plenty of incentive as these charities must prove to their donors that they are effective if they want to raise money.

So what would I propose?:
Well say I owed $30,000 in federal tax. I’d like to pay $20,000 to Uncle Sam and then show evidence of $10,000 invested in some of Durham’s best charities. For that matter, I’d be fine if I could get out of the final $10,000 if I could show double that amount invested in Durham charities. If someone wasn’t sure which charities were best and wanted Uncle Sam to choose then they could pay the whole $30,000. Doesn’t that make sense? In effect, it’s not too different from the charter school initiative which allows the consumer to vote with the government’s money who is best to educate our kids. Can’t we do that with who is best to serve the poor, put kids in mentoring relationships, and shelter the homeless?

I believe that we as individuals know better how federal money should be spent in Durham than the government and that this knowledge coupled with inherent efficiencies from decreased overhead will allow for lower taxes and better care. Do you agree?

There are no comments for this entry yet.