Ian on The Pillar

[Ian]

The CCHD is exactly the kind of organization I would not want to contribute to. The bishops would do well to get rid of it as quickly as possible.

The Pillar links to a list of small grants, but does not list the larger national grants, available in the USCCB “flip book” at https://www.usccb.org/resources/cchd-annual-report

The flip book boasts of major funding to promote unions, as if this were still about downtrodden coal miners in 1800s Pennsylvania. Whether one is for or against unions in the US today, they clearly are a well heeled political force and do not need to dip into parish collection baskets. It’s especially laughable that the flip book justifies this by pointing to the role of Poland's Solidarity in bringing down the Soviet Union, as if the UAW and Teamsters are in any way like Solidarnosc.

Speaking of the struggle against Marxism, the second largest national grant is to the “Gamaliel Foundation”, which Wikipedia describes approvingly as working “in the tradition of Alinsky” and who once employed Barack Obama as a community organizer. Many others of the same ilk.

In fact the grantee list reads like a yellow pages of Democratic party booster organizations, mostly based in large Democrat-stronghold cities like Chicago. There are a smattering of organizations that look worthwhile, like co-ops that facilitate finding work or franchising a cleaning business, but these are a minority.

Even if the choice of grantees were not so awful, the overhead involved in having a middleman organization is hard to justify. The report lists annual revenue of $9.2M and costs of running CCHD of about $3M (most of this is buried in a line item called “internal grants” which includes both operations expenses and money diverted to another USCCB program, in a gem of accounting transparency.)

So of every dollar that goes into the collection basket that’s supposed to help the poor, about a third is consumed in expenses, and the remaining two-thirds goes to organizations that don’t actually help them - but will supposedly indirectly help, eventually, by promoting left wing goals and organizations. Got it.

My own donations may not be all that consequential, but I will direct them where there won’t be this kind of malarkey.

[Kurt]

"The flip book boasts of major funding to promote unions,..."

Which is a core tenant of Catholic Social teaching.

[Patricius Clevelandensis]

Ehh, I think that's a stretch. The role of unions is central, no question. However, I don't think that funneling money into American unions (in the way they currently exist) is a core part of Catholic Social Teaching. And along those lines, what's the union's worldview? If they see the world through a lens of Marxism and class struggle, it's inappropriate for the church to give them a single cent.

But should people be allowed to unionize, and should we support good unions? Absolutely.

[Kurt]

Is there a CCHD grant you think does not meet these standards?

[L Campbell]

Well, that depends on the union. American unions are pretty flush with cash. I can attest to that, as a former steward (retired). Most members are members by default (mandatory) and dues are automatically withdrawn, as a condition of employment. Authoritarian-run countries are not going to allow unions for the betterment of the workers. If they have a union, they want a cut of the money. There are much better ways to help the poor here and abroad.

[John]

Yes, the bishops should use this perfect opportunity to let CCHD die a death it has deserved for decades. Lepanto gets criticized for revealing things that people don’t want to know. Their research is robust and well-informed.

[Sue Korlan]

Worker owned cooperatives provide the same benefits as unions while also helping these owners learn to run organizations. They cut out those who own simply to gain more money.