There is a healthy debate over the role of nonprofits in politics.  For traditional 501(c)3s in the United States, part of our charter is that our political efforts will be minimal.  Minimal, however, isn’t nothing; many nonprofits are very successful in making political change a part of their mission.  Others shy away from politics and work to remain apolitical in their outlook.

I was reminded of this debate with the win of the U.S. women’s national soccer team in the most recent World Cup.  Many professional tut-tutters criticized them for bringing politics into sports for saying they will not go to the White House or advocating for equal pay or being open about who they love.  The refrain goes that there should be places we go to just enjoy without the weightier issues of life intruding.  If athletes want to make political statements, they should do it when we don’t have to pay attention to them.

It is instructive that few who decry politics in sports also decry politics in chicken sandwich restaurants or markets for hobby supplies.  Or vice versa.  Across the political spectrum, when you hear a call for politics to get out of something, it is invariably a call for politics that the speaker doesn’t agree with to get out of something.

The truth is that the lack of a political statement is itself a political statement.  It says you are fine with where things are right now.  Silence is consent.

It is also a legitimate political statement.  There are times we must advocate for change.  There are times, to steal William Buckley’s phrase, we must stand athwart history yelling stop.  To each according to their values.

So the question for your organization is 1) are things now as they should be and 2) if not, are we on a trajectory that they will be in a reasonable amount of time.  If the answer is no, we should be advocating. (And if the reasons to change the world don’t sway you, let’s also remember that advocacy is often a strong way to get people into your organization who then may become donors.)

The great part of this is that political does not always mean partisan.  Consider this statement from Billy Shore, founder of Share our Strength, about why they are encouraging people to vote:

“We intend to reach out to donors, volunteers, and grantees to make sure they know that the efforts we’ve worked on so hard for so long — from protecting the vital nutritional assistance provided by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to increasing participation in school breakfast and summer meals — could succeed or fail based on the composition of the next Congress.

We won’t urge them to vote for specific candidates, but we will urge them to vote … There is nothing more nonpartisan, patriotic, or American than encouraging people to vote.  Every nonprofit and civic organization should assume some responsibility for at least communicating with its donors, volunteers, and others who have a stake in their causes.  The reach and influence nonprofits have are valuable assets.  Not to deploy them on behalf of a stronger civic society is not only counterproductive but also civically and morally irresponsible.”

Share our Strength works with executives and legislatures of all parties.  Its mission is, or should be, non-partisan.  That doesn’t make it apolitical – the stakes are high for them on what political decisions are reached.  So too for all our missions.

Or, in the words of a beloved MADD public policy volunteer Nadine Milford, “I can’t tell you who to vote for.  But I can tell you if you keep sending me who you’ve been sending me, you’re going to get what you’ve always got.”

So what statement will you make?  Is there a way your supporters can speed your work with their voices as well as their pocketbooks?

Nick

P.S.  U-S-A!  U-S-A!  U-S-A!