What's Wrong With The One Campaign?

A Personal Opinion Article by Dave Y.
December 30, 2006

Ok folks... This is about as "political" I will likely ever get on this website. ;) Why the mention of it here? I guess because I see some similarities to the way this well-intentioned agenda is actually demonstrating a concept that runs similar (in some respects) to the inconsistency that is often propagated by organized religious groups and which, despite its noble claims, actually involves manipulation and illogical, unbiblical reaction. Concerning the ONE Campaign, I understand how good this sounds and I used to support the idea myself. In fact, I had banners posted on a couple of the websites I maintain (including this one) encouraging people to get involved... Very briefly, for those of you unaware, Bono (lead singer) of the rock band U2 started the ONE Campain as an effort in hope to one day see an end to extreme poverty in the world. Since its formation, scores of people have signed on in support of the organization, including many church organizations, charities, and even political representatives. I remain an enormous fan of the music of U2 and I believe that Bono's intentions with the campaign are, indeed, well-meaning (as, presumably, are the majority of those who also choose to participate in the effort). I've read (and thoroughly enjoyed) the book "Bono" (by Michka Assayas), "Walk On: The Spiritual Journey of U2" (one of my favorite books, authored by Steve Stockman), and continue to find value in a number of his perspectives concerning true Christianity; however, there is a concern I have with this particular endeavor after weighing its claimed goals and the method by which they hope to achieve those goals. This brief commentary entails my personal opinion and reason why I now refuse to participate in the ONE Campaign effort.

If anyone finds that I have misunderstood or misinterpreted any aspect of the ONE Campaign's objectives, please e-mail me and I will review those concerns and ammend any errors on my part. The heart here is not to downplay a noble effort but to make certain the whole truth is honestly and fairly conveyed.

Contrary to the program's initial claims that "they don't want your money they just want your voice", this does not appear to be an entirely honest statement. At the very least it may be misleading - in my opinion. The truth is, they are very much asking for money... a lot of money... from the U.S. Government. The ONE Campaign basically wants a tax increase equivalent to 1% of the Federal budget to be paid EACH YEAR (that's approx. $25 billion)! The official website reveals some unclear explanation regarding this 1% amount (and if anyone can clear up the clouded details for me I would appreciate it). On first glance it appears they merely want to redirect existing money to address charitable concerns; however, at the same time the site states they want to "direct an additional one percent of the U.S. budget..." Either way, the vital point they neglect to emphasize is the fact that this is money paid in by Americans through the taxes they are (or will be) be required to submit. In other words, it is in fact YOUR money that they want and not merely your voice.

There is a detail overlooked by so many here that I personally find frustrating. The ONE Campaign talks about the U.S. Government as if it is some separate entity from the people... as if it get's its money out of thin air or something. While it's true their website talks about the help they desire from Americans in general (and such contribution can be made through the purchase of merchandise on the site), it softens any concern over this 1% amount by presenting the U.S. Government almost as though it were some rich tycoon, whom it really wouldn't hurt him to give a little more because he's got so much money anyway. And this is where I get frustrated with their separating the U.S. Government from the people in this regard; It demonstrates that, not only does the ONE Campain "want your money" but, it would rather seem, they really don't even believe it's yours to begin with (it's "the governments"). They also don't seem to think that you are wise enough or compassionate enough to distribute it as you so see fit... and therefore, you shouldn't have the right to choose at all; The government should exercise that obligation for you.

Apparently it's not enough that you work hard to pay your bills, support your family, lend to others you see with needs that you choose to help, and then pay (through your taxes) for all those folks abusing the welfare system, getting grants for college, or to pay for important research to determine whether or not cow flatulence damages the ozone layer (yes that was a real tax-funded study). The ONE Campaign exists to indirectly suggest that they aim to make you give to its cause (through more taxation) regardless of your personal conviction or potential motivation of compassion.

If we were to presume (as statistics suggest) that the average working-class American makes around $35,000 a year, that's $350 a year that the ONE Campaign will be picking from their pocket (or at least helping our government to pick it). For many people in this class, $350 is a month's rent, a car payment, electric bill, medical insurance, or food for their family. It might pay for vital medications for an ill or aging parent, or maybe support that could have helped a missionary in a foreign country that someone has been praying for and want to help financially in some small way. It might go as a tuition payment for their child's school, winter clothing, savings in the bank to prepare for future needs, or gas to get to an already low-earning job. The point is, it's YOUR money, not the U.S. Government's money (as though it were some separate entity) and YOU should have the right to decide how YOU would like to give beyond your obligations. That should not be something anyone else extracts from you or manages without your personal consent and it certainly shouldn't be up to the ONE Campaign to decide these matters for you or speak on your behalf.

If you are curious what political viewpoint the writer of this article is coming from, I cannot give a simple "party affiliation" answer for you (i.e. Republican or Democrat) with regard to this issue. Despite my personal political persuasions on other issues, rather I appeal to you as a Bible-believing follower of Jesus and as a fellow American. When it comes to the role of government, Scripture - yes, even the New Testament - gives a very clear definition of its primary role; "it is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (Romans 13:4). In other words it is the agent of justice in the land. It's objective is to protect those who live justly, providing for peace, and to punish lawlessness and execute justice upon evil-doers. Keep in mind, this is the God-ordained function of "secular" government. Yes, even God approves of its right to collect taxes for the purposes He ordained it to actuate; "For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing" (Romans 13:6). The point of mention here is simply to state that it is not the role of government to serve as a welfare system for the world, no matter how nice that may sound. In fact, the less government involvement in such matters the better for this is not its ordained purpose. God demonstrates His love in care for the needy through HIS PEOPLE who give according to their own individual ability and the motivation of love that has impacted each of them! Republican and Democrat leaders both are often guilty of engaging in the advancement of programs and laws that collect more taxes and build bigger government beyond what is necessary for its primary role as ordained by God. To this end I would not be able to side with either, though I will admit that often the stated role of a conservative agenda is LESS government involvement in personal lives and LESS taxation for social systems, leaving responsibility in the hands of the people, which (in general) I do agree with (AND WHICH ALSO DOES INDEED WORK AS HISTORY CONFIRMS). One major problem I find with the ONE Campaign, as a Christian, is the fact that is disrespects this primary purpose of goverment taxation and presumes that government should be in the business of taking care of the world's physical welfare needs. Worst of all it makes attempt at its agenda through some measure of emotion-based manipulation of reason and supporting "evidence". It bypasses personal liberty and personal conviction of compassion and Christian responsibility and transferrs it to an involuntary mandate. It is, quite simply, not completely honest upfront (in my opinion) and, I firmly believe, does not provide an adequate solution to the problem it claims to want to see resolved anyway.
The persuasion tactics on the ONE Campaign's website are clever and effective but contain inconsistent logic. For example, when referring to the program's goal (as we mentioned earlier), they say they want the U.S. Government to spend an additional 1% on aid. The inconsistency comes when they try to answer the question many people naturally have, "doesn't America already give more money to charity than any other country in the world?" If they were to simply answer that question with a "yes" or "no", the answer would have to be an emphatic YES. America ALREADY gives more money than any other country on planet earth - both on a Federal level and as individual citizens! The statistics from 2006 (as I recall) report that Americans gave $300 billion dollars in charity! $300 BILLION!!! Even more impressive is the fact that 65% of all giving was given by people under the median income level! These statistics are an astounding testimony to the incredible generosity of the American people! However, at this point, rather than deal with the question directly (regarding the fact that America gives mountains of money to charitable causes around the world), the ONE Campaign makes an attempt to bypass the truth of America's generosity and instead give an example of how much money is spent on supposedly "less significant" things. They pull out a statistic that says $42 billion a year is spent on diet and health books in the U.S. The naive reader looks at this argument and says, "wow, that's a lot more than a mere $25 billion," and they sign on to the campaign. The problem with this logic is that the $42 billion number is represented by FREEWILL spending of INDIVIDUAL Americans (not the U.S. Government), whereas the $25 billion the ONE Campaign seeks would not be voluntary at all; It would be extracted from every tax-paying citizen. And besides that, when you set $42 billion next to the $300 billion Americans also give to charity, it's a pretty weak (not to mention shameful) argument on the ONE Campaign's behalf.

In my opinion, the ONE Campaign could find a much better example of waste to direct people's attentions to (though I suppose it might not improve their acceptance by those whom the example is made of). One study done in 2003 estimated that, in the USA, $87 billion was contributed to tax-exempt organizations, the vast majority of those organizations being churches. Since many churches do not file a 990, the exact amount could be considerably more. Somehow I don't think paving church parking lots, installing basketball courts for the youth, new padded pews, and projection systems for a building is more important that reaching out to the hurting and impoverished. I am just as upset with all the religious supporters of the ONE Campaign, who would rather encourage the U.S. Government to take $25 billion out of the tax payer's pocket when they are already taking $87+ billion out to finance their institutions. Why not appeal to these organizations to maybe go without fancy stained glass, $10,000 pianos, $100,000 sound systems, million dollar buildings, and luxury cars for the pastor and give $25 billion to people with actual needs?

Sorry to be a kill joy and burst all those nice ONE supporters' bubbles, but I do not believe it is fair nor right to require everyone to pay money (whether indirectly or otherwise) to a cause of charity nor do I believe the ONE Campaign or the U.S. Government has the right to define what charitable giving I should engage in.

This does not mean that I do not believe in giving because I do. Nor does it mean that I lack compassion for the people of Africa and other nations who are struggling to survive. It breaks my heart to see innocent children suffering from terrible, life-threatening diseases and some sicknesses which could easily be treated and cured if they had access to proper medicines. My heart indeed goes out to these people and I know that God is also not ignorant of their plight and He loves them. I am completely in favor of engaging in charitable efforts to reach the people of impoverished nations with God's love, God's truth, and by helping to aleviate their suffering and bring medical aid and education to empower them to rise above and beyond their current state.

If you will allow me a tangent here, for just a moment, I would like to briefly illustrate a somewhat similar ideology that aligns with my conviction concerning the fallacy of the ONE Campaign. Many of you who know me personally, as well as those who are familiar with this website, are acquainted with my views on monetary tithing; that it is actually not found or even implied anywhere in Scripture and has absolutely no place in the Christian Church as some sort of required observance (click here if you would like to read more on this subject). In truth it's just another tax cooked up by the flawed ideologies of fallen men. Am I suggesting that it's wrong for people to give 10% of their income to some religious or charitable organization? Not at all... Am I saying that Scripture doesn't command this? Absolutely!!! It does not! Giving, for the purpose of charitable work (biblically-speaking) should never transpire as the result of compulsion of any kind! So, when churches teach that biblical tithes consist of a person's financial increase and are the commandment of God, they are not teaching the truth and are actually manipulating the truth (by distorting biblical text) for the sake of profit. It doesn't matter whether their purpose in this is to effect some actual good or if it is to simply increase the size of their wallets. It is without authorization from Scripture and with good reason. Such doctrine violates the heart of the Gospel and distracts people from a pure manifestation of Christian giving as demonstrated by Jesus and His followers in the early Church.

I must say that I am just as adamant about agendas like the ONE Campain and I will tell you why. Giving, especially as it is taught in Scripture, must come from a willing heart of love, motivated by God's grace and through freewill volition - not external obligation. It is one of the very traits ("fruits" - if you will) of a believer in Christ; to give freely as we have also freely received by God's mercy and goodness.

2 Corinthians 8:12-13 (NIV)

if the willingness is there

not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed

2 Corinthians 9:7 (NIV)

what he has decided in his heart

or under compulsion

Romans 12:6-8 (NIV)

according to the grace given us

if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously

Love must be sincere

Giving is not effected by means of more taxation or any other kind of compulsion (such as the example of monetary tithing that many religious teachers preach as being obligatory from Scripture - despite the fact that the text reveals no such truth whatsoever but in fact teaches the end of tithing for those who believe in Jesus - Hebrews 7:8-19). True giving is effected by the response of a changed heart that is in love with God and that acts on genuine compassion for others (not to mention according to a person's means; i.e. their financial ability, and willingness, to do so). While giving can certainly manifest in larger, corporate ways (as people will sometimes join together for a mutual effort), it must first be an individual conviction.

What's so concerning about the agenda of the ONE Campaign is that they are not simply requesting that people search their hearts and respond compassionately to a need, but they are seeking to make it a government mandate to support their cause!

In the example of inconsistent logic I mentioned earlier (the $42 billion that Americans spend on diet books), the ONE Campain could indeed (as my suggestion) state the statistics revealing what individual Americans VOLUNTARILY spend their money on, and then request and encourage them to consider VOLUNTARILY giving to, arguably, more noble causes. They could effectively use the influence and convenience of their network and website to pull together resources and inform the public about charities that already are targeting the needs in these impoverished nations. This leaves the choice fully in the hands of the people and makes the most meaningful use of sincere compassion towards others. Some might argue, "but then it becomes just another charity." I would have to disagree. I don't know of too many charities that have at their disposal the kind of massive presence, influence and support the ONE Campaign has achieved. As an organization that brings charities together along with the millions of people that are now aware and presumably more willing to contribute to the cause, it could have an amazing effect toward reaching the goal of helping reduce extreme poverty in the world.

But again, I say it plainly, they DO want your money and they only want your voice to the extent that it will progress their cause and set in concrete the right to exact it of everyone regardless of personal choice! Their intentions are irrelevant. The issue must be examined fully and honestly. Every American who believes in liberty, freedom of choice, and the right to act on individual compassion according to one's own ability and conviction - and especially every Christian who claims to believe the Bible and follow Jesus - ought to refuse to support this liberal agenda! The possibility that the program contains a few good ideas and is promoted by well-meaning individuals, does not change the concerning fact that its method is flawed. There is a better way!

Jesus never appealed to people to impose upon their governments to end poverty through more legalism and taxation. In fact, Scripture gives no such mandate and defines no such purpose for government as God intends it to exist and function. Jesus taught His followers to observe His example (Matthew 20:28; John 13:15; 1 Peter 2:21; 1 John 4:11; Romans 15:1-6; Ephesians 4:32; etc.) and seeing that example to likewise go and reach out to the hurting! Such acts would be representative of their connection to Him, as a genuine response of love and the personal, freewill choice to reveal in a tangible way that they are friends of God.

Matthew 10:8b (GNB)

John 13:35 (NIV)

And consider this from a more social, political observation (an observation which talk radio host Rusty Humphries also aptly noted during one of his broadcast commentaries)... Suppose 100 other charities (no doubt equally deserving) asked for just 1%, what an enormous burden this would be! Can you imagine a 100% tax increase?!! And what's to stop it there? Why not even more? The role of government is not to extract everyone's money to take care of everyone in the world.

I will be blunt with my opinion on this matter... Approaches like that of the ONE Campain are primarily a leftist, liberal-styled mindset... Not to mention a utopian fantasy. God told the Israelites in Deuteronomy 15:11, "There will always be poor people in the land..." Even Jesus said (Mark 14:7), "The poor you will always have with you..." If even God has not predicted in His own Scriptures, through His own prophets and even Christ Jesus the Messiah, that there will never be an end to poverty as long as we exist on this earth, how foolish is the notion to presume that we can end it by raising a few more taxes? God reminded us of the poor so that we would individually choose to reach out with love as a testimony that He is good. As God prospers us and shows His goodness to us, we ought to joyfully reciprocate that goodness to others, but He instructs us to follow - He doesn't crack the whip and force us. Neither does He burden us, tax us, or cheapen giving by making it some rote, mechanical thing. It must come from freewill choice, individual conviction, and sincere compassion. As Paul the apostle so eloquently put it:

1 Corinthians 13:3 (NKJV)

but have not love

It is simply absurd (in my opinion) to take people's money in this fashion, especially to give away to corrupt nations. Promiscuity, sexual perversion, and the lack of personal and governmental responsibility is a huge and increasingly problematic issue in Africa (yet no one seems to be reporting this detail). Furthermore there is the concern of creating yet another welfare state. Giving money away, in and of itself, doesn't solve problems... In fact, it often encourages them. And encouraging a welfare society will likely only create greater dependence on that welfare and will not encourage personal responsibility. History has proven this to be true. In fact, one doesn't really have to look much further than how corrupt the welfare system has become even in our own nation. People on welfare, though there may be few exceptions, often remain trapped in the system. Many others choose to remain trapped and work that system for whatever they can get from it. Money rarely, if ever, solves the problem; however, it is a typical mindset voiced by those on the political left that if you just throw money at everything and tax everyone into oblivion then all the world's struggles will be resolved. Truth be told, this comes very close to a socialist/communist approach to things.

It is truly sad that people are dying of AIDS but giving money is not the answer to the problem. As a follower of Jesus I will boldly say that I believe HE is the answer. I realize that may sound clich� to some but I actually believe it, because as true believers submit themselves willingly to the Lordship of Christ and allow His great love to rule our hearts, we will be His hands and feet in this world.

Additionally, I will offer from a purely natural - "religiously neutral" - observation, there are lots of charities that people are free INDIVIDUALLY to give their money to and also engage in personal, physical service to causes that benefit these people. Those should be encouraged rather than seeing big government as the answer to the all the world's problems. That's my opinion anyway.

Am I against sending physical aid to impoverished peoples of the world? Absolutely not, but don't make this a mandate of government and impose an increase of taxes on people. Let people's hearts be moved by God's grace and through individual compassion. As Christians, we might rather seek a divine intervention through prayer and by individually counting the cost God may be laying on our hearts to give for the glory of God in reaching others with His love. The proof already exists that freewill giving works. The statistics I shared earlier in this document illustrate that.

I applaud Bono for his positive intentions, his compassionate heart, his zeal to do good in some way, his devotion to carry out what he firmly believes in, and I respect his conviction of conscience, but I humbly disagree with the method and I believe it is missing the mark (both spiritually and politically) to presume the ONE Campaign is the right way to approach eliminating poverty in the world and effecting lasting change. Again, I boldly offer - the answer is Jesus Christ (in the sharing of Christian love, Gospel truth, and operation through true compassion), not more taxes, not more liberal ideas, not bigger government, and not more legalism.

God bless,
Dave

TRUTHFORFREE HOME | OTHER ARTICLES | ABOUT US | CONTACT