Traditionally, charitable giving has been defended by conservatives, who admired its ability to effectively solve problems without government coercion or taxpayer funds. The political left was where one encountered hostility toward private social action – which sometimes lessens state power. Donor-funded charter schools embarrass and replace failed government schools. Charitable services for the homeless, drug users, and the jobless have more success than bureaucratic agencies. Private funding for science and medical progress is spectacularly more efficient than federal grants.
A spike in politicized giving, however, has now soured some conservatives and centrists on philanthropy. George Soros has made $32 billion of highly political donations over two decades. MacKenzie Scott delivered $7 billion in 2025 – bringing her total recent grants to $26 billion, much of that to nonprofits involved in leftist politics. Pierre Omidyar, Hansjoerg Wyss, Tom Steyer, and others used charitable gifts to push political causes.
Donor-funded activists fueled pro-Hamas campus takeovers. Charitable crowdfunding and grants support accused assassin Luigi Mangione, individuals involved in Antifa street violence, and people arrested for antisemitic actions. Fully 203 nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations were involved in orchestrating partisan “No Kings” protests in 2025. Soft-on-crime reforms have been powered by progressive and libertarian donors. A large portion of climate alarmism has been stirred up by a small circle of nonprofit funders. So has much of today’s anti-ICE agitating. After it became clear that the man accused of murdering Charlie Kirk had been radicalized by organized activism, the Trump administration promised measures to blunt extremism underwritten with donated funds.
The shift toward politicized “charity” surged in 2020 when the Black Lives Matter Foundation scooped up a gush of mogul, corporate, and foundation gifts. These were offered without any accountability, and multiple BLM officials soon misdirected millions, resulting in a flurry of fraud indictments. Another explosion of charitable corruption took place in Minnesota, where more than $1 billion of “COVID relief” and other welfare spending was used by Somali-immigrant ringleaders for private enrichment. Phony nonprofits were protected from scrutiny by politicians and agitators crying race discrimination, until the abuse eventually became impossible to ignore.
After wildfires burned several Los Angeles neighborhoods in early 2025, the FireAid charity raised more than $100 million to help victims. The Annenberg Foundation, an established national philanthropy, was enlisted to administer the funds. But foundation staff ended up giving almost none of the cash to actual fire victims. Instead, grants were showered on “social justice” nonprofits like FreeForm, the Alliance for a Better Community, and the California Native Vote Project.
So: The charitable impulse can be misused and manipulated, and it’s absolutely appropriate for regulators to react when this happens. Charities are given tax and legal protections on the grounds that they are truthful and earnest, that they build up citizens and bolster society. Their donations are not supposed to go to political activism, personal enrichment, or violence. If charitable gifts are being exploited in this way, there must be a law-enforcement response. In my new book “Sweet Charity” I suggest some starting points:
- The foreign philanthropy that has politicized American charities should be cut off immediately. (The five largest foreign donors recently funneled almost $2 billion into advocacy by U.S. nonprofits.)
- Many 501(c)(3) charities have involved themselves in “voter registration” efforts that quickly veer into politicking. This should be stopped.
- Likewise, 501(c)(3)s should not promote ballot initiatives, as some currently do.
- 501(c)(3)s shouldn’t be allowed to take donations and re-grant them to politically involved 501(c)(4)
- The tax-law language which says that 501(c)(4)s can get involved in politics so long as it is not their “primary activity” should be tightened.
- Congress should place time limits on foundations. The longer a foundation lingers as a bureaucracy, the likelier it is to be taken over by politicized staffers.
- Foundations should be expected to distribute 10–12% of their endowment every year, instead of today’s 5%, so they don’t coast as forever-employers of social activists with no fealty to the founding donor.
But here’s a caution light: While there’s no denying we’ve seen an uptick in politicized philanthropy in recent years, there is a crucial larger reality that legislators who address this issue must not lose sight of: Partisan givers and charities are only a tiny slice of American philanthropy. Fully 74% of the money donated in America is given by individuals, not foundations or corporations. And the bulk of that comes from ordinary citizens, at an annual rate of about $3,000 per household. That’s middle America in action, not culture corruption by politicized billionaires or corporations. This civic engagement by generous everyday people must be protected.
Private giving – at our current rate of around $600 billion every year – is the goose that lays golden eggs for America. Personal donations allow our civil society to solve problems and strengthen the U.S. in millions of ways, mostly out of sight and behind the scenes, but with powerful results. Charitable action outside the control of government has been one of the deepest secrets of our nation’s success.
Philanthropy is now being assailed by a mix of progressive projectors of a “billionaire boys’ club” and Trumpers disturbed by flares of ideological charity. We can stanch partisan abuses and corral checkbook manipulators of our culture. But we must do so without crimping one of America’s quintessential superpowers.
