Ideas range from increasing limits on charitable deductions to simplifying an excise tax on foundations that currently discourages giving. But even if such actions prompt greater giving, charities won't have the funds needed to do everything proponents of compassionate conservatism or the third way would like. But their very responsiveness to individuals and communities means they can't step back as government does to vouchsafe equal rights for the equally needy. They can't always find and serve those in greatest need. Studies of social services provided by local congregations show, for instance, that a small percentage support organized programs that reach much beyond their own neighborhoods.
Government funding has both pluses and minuses.
If government tries to channel too much through charities, these organizations can lose some of their identity, sovereignty, and sense of mission because of bureaucratic red tape. This dynamic relationship between charities and government must be taken into account when considering changing or expanding the role of charities. An otherwise creative and usually collaborative process can sour into conflict if more is expected of either side than it can handle. This delicate balance needs to be addressed squarely. Ideally, a national bipartisan commission will be created to strengthen the tradition of giving and identify the characteristics of successful government-nonprofit partnerships.