Sweet charity

San Jose Assemblyman Joe Coto has proposed legislation aimed at directing charitable donations toward more diverse recipients.

Wow. I didn't know there was a way to make me speak out again charitable giving, but high-five, Mr. Coto.

And the Merc's article quotes right-wing bloggers on the matter. Right-wing bloggers! You know you're in trouble when . . . .

Anyway, about the bill:

California's charitable foundations give hundreds of millions of dollars each year to non-profit groups, but the money rarely reaches organizations led by minorities, says a South Bay lawmaker seeking to regulate philanthropy as a way to boost funding for a more diverse group of recipients.

The legislation proposed by Assemblyman Joe Coto, D-San Jose, would require the state's largest philanthropic foundations to disclose the race and gender of staff and board members.

Coto hopes such information will push foundations to redirect their giving to gay and lesbian, African-American, Latino, Asian-American and American Indian causes.

What, holding a mirror up to the whites in charge of distributing cash will ignite within them such liberal guilt that their souls will demand they expand their giving?

"Foundations work in the dark. There's no oversight; there's no reporting regulations on them," he said, "and because nobody knows what they're doing - I think unintentional on their part - they have excluded minority-led organizations."

Some of California's largest foundations - the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation - invested "practically no dollars" in minority-led organizations, Gamboa said.

Do only minority-led organizations fund minority-services? I just am not getting it. I agree that more money should flow freely through charitable channels and that the same handful of organizations benefit because, historically, they always have, but I don't think the fault lies with the color of foundation leadership. The article and the facts cited within it seem to alternate the terms minority-led and minority-based organizations. There's a huge difference there, however, if Coto is trying to show a need for his legislation.

It seems a divisive and - I hope and really do think - antiquated notion. I hope it fails miserably.