WSJ: On Diversity in Civil Society

The Wall Street Journal recently published an interesting op-ed piece describing the reticence of large private foundations to contribute to the Greenlining Institute’s efforts to increase the participation of underrepresented classes in nonprofit financial decision making:

What if the Greenlining Institute held a shakedown and nobody paid up? The Berkeley-based outfit invited representatives from America’s top 50 foundations to come to their offices two weeks ago for a chat on the urgent national priority of “diversity in philanthropy.” Among the questions posed: “What percent of the asset management firms under contract with your foundation are minority-owned?” We’re delighted to say that not a single one of the foundations sent Greenlining any data and no one showed up to the meeting. Maybe they’re starting to catch on to this con game.

The op-ed piece continues by describing why the Greenlining Institute’s efforts is accurately described as a “shakedown.”  Many in the nonprofit sector thoughtfully and legitimately disagree with the recently tabled California legislative proposal to mandate higher levels of diversity participation in civil society, but their disagreement was primarily and legitimately focused on the proposed means to the good end.  I had my own doubts.  But thoughtful opposition was not a collective agreement that the effort is itself illegitimate.  Calling it a “shakedown” is silly.  Why do people who believe in the power of the market always instinctively recoil from any effort whatsoever to remove the distortion of discrimination from that same market?

dkj