Other interpretations aside, President Bush's "thousand points of light" has been from the beginning a
call for volunteerism, as a substitute for governmental social
programs. Although this might be an admirable personal
sentiment, it makes poor public policy.
The harsh fact of life is that volunteerism is
unfair, ultimately a regressive tax: Although there are
exceptions, the lower one's income, the greater share of
one's income (or time) one usually gives to such charities.
This is the opposite of funding such programs with progressive
income taxes: Those who are more able to pay -- those who
profit more in our economy -- bear a progressively larger
burden.
The other harsh fact of life is that
volunteerism is unwise, if one is truly serious about getting
the job done. Over the last decade, as the growth of federal
social programs has been cut, charities have been unable to
take-up the slack -- witness the rising homelessness and
poverty in America. Such wastefulness of our human resources is
as unwise as it is inhuman.
Don't get me wrong: Volunteerism and other
forms of charity are good -- millions depend on our generosity --
but social programs, mandated and coordinated by the
government and reliably funded by progressive taxes, are better.
Some of our "thousand points of light" can -- and should -- burn brighter than others.