Public funding to private organizations

[Beavah 205]

Acco says:

 

The USG spends taxpayer dollars for the benefit of the BSA. Yet, our courts have deemed the BSA as a private organization. That decision still has me puzzled.... Public institutions (public schools, military bases, etc.) should not sponsor private organizations.

 

Egad. Public institutions sponsor and support private organizations all the time! Student loans, Pell Grants, and other scholarships go to students at private, even religious colleges and universities. Billions of dollars of research grants go to private and religious universities and companies. As a result, our higher education system and research are the envy of the world.

 

The error is the other way, eh? Every time we make a claim that public monies must only be used by the government, we embrace the old Soviet-style service delivery model. Only the government can deliver service in the name of the People. We're the only nation in the free world that does not support private and religious K-12 schools. It perhaps isn't a surprise that our K-12 students trail other nations' students in any measure of performance you can think of, despite the fact that we spend more real $. We are hardly the envy of the world.

 

Many European nations including some of our strongest allies routinely fund private youth groups like scouting, with direct cash grants.

 

Who did a better job handling Katrina response, FEMA or the Red Cross? Which would you rather have your money fund? Nobody seems to mind Medicare and Medicaid funding the Christian hospitals that provide care to millions of people either.

 

Yah, yah, I understand the ideological positions in all this, and I respect but disagree with the views of Mirlyn and others. I'm a pragmatist. The government interest is in havin' an educated populace, not in monopolizing the methods for educating. Heaven help us if all the Christian and private schools and social service agencies closed up shop. It would bankrupt many districts and states, and be an unqualified social disaster.

 

 

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Nobody seems to mind Medicare and Medicaid funding the Christian hospitals that provide care to millions of people either.

 

Now ask yourself if these hospitals could refuse to serve, say, Jews or atheists, and continue to get funding, and whether they ought to continue to get funding.

[acco40 95]

Public institutions sponsor and support private organizations all the time! Student loans, Pell Grants, and other scholarships go to students at private, even religious colleges and universities. Billions of dollars of research grants go to private and religious universities and companies. As a result, our higher education system and research are the envy of the world.

 

That's just it - Pell grants and other "need" based funds go to students (i.e. the public) which can use these funds at public and private Universities. Back in the day when Pell grants were not named after a politician, (BEOG Grants - Basic Education Opportunity Grant) I was on the receiving end and they allowed me to complete my undergraduate education at a major public university. The result of which made my income grow to such an extent that the USG has reaped back that investment over one hundred fold. It is true that such Government institutions as the National Cancer Institute, funded by congressional appropriations (i.e. taxpayer dollars), doles out research grants to Universities. Heck, I work for a private organization funded by Government dollars (I'm in the defense business). But, we have to meet certain "tests" to be able to win contracts (Equal Opportunity Employer, etc.).

 

Now I don't have a problem with the Government giving out dollars to be spent by private persons or companies. But, like Merlyn said, if the Government maintained that nobody could grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God and therefore withheld Medicare and Medicaid support to those that did not declare a "God obligation" I would have some heartburn with that.

 

The BSA can't have it both ways.(This message has been edited by acco40)

[packsaddle 753]

Agree with ACCO and Merlyn on this one.

[evmori 11]

Now ask yourself if these hospitals could refuse to serve, say, Jews or atheists, and continue to get funding, and whether they ought to continue to get funding.

 

The BSA isn't a hospital. It's a private youth group that has membership requirements.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Yes Ed, everyone knows this. Do you know why we were discussing hospitals?

[evmori 11]

Well gee Merlyn no I don't! I'm just some dumb cluck who don't know his left from his right! And I can't learn so no amount of schooling will help! Twit!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Ed, if you knew why we were discussing hospitals, why did you make the painfully obvious and totally irrelevant remark that the BSA isn't a hospital? I'm not a hospital either.

[evmori 11]

Shucks, Merlyn, I just couldn't help myself! I gots a tought time pickin' up on these things, ya know!

 

What's your excuse?

[packsaddle 753]

OK, OK, break it up.

For some reason, I was under the impression that Medicare and Medicaid funds went to the patients to defray their healthcare bills. Or am I wrong about this? Do the hospitals collect these funds even if no such patients use the hospitals' services?

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Pack, Medicare and Medicaid funds are paid by the Feds and the state to the hospitals who have provided covered services to the beneficiary (patient).

 

It is of note that it doesnt matter what the hospital lists as a cost for the service, Medicare/Medicaid will pay what it deems appropriate and thats all she wrote, the bill is considerd paid and the patient doesnt pay the difference. If the chest x-ray costs $200 and Medicare pays $34.20, thats all the hospital gets, $34.20

[Beavah 205]

But, like Merlyn said, if the Government maintained that nobody could grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God and therefore withheld Medicare and Medicaid support to those that did not declare a "God obligation" I would have some heartburn with that.

 

That's not the question, though, eh?

 

The question is whether the Government should maintain that nobody who publicly professes a belief in God should be eligible for government funds (Medicare, Medicaid, using the field at the Army base, going to school, etc.).

 

The issue isn't cutting access to non-theists. It's cutting access to theists.

 

 

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

Beavah writes:

The question is whether the Government should maintain that nobody who publicly professes a belief in God should be eligible for government funds (Medicare, Medicaid, using the field at the Army base, going to school, etc.).

 

I haven't seen anybody advocating this, and it's clearly grossly unconstitutional. What are you referring to?