In This Issue Nonprofit Recommendations for Next President   What to Expect from the Congressional Lame Duck Session    Next Year's Budget, Already?   "Jobs v. Environment" More Myth than Reality, Study Finds   Pesticide Label Disclosures Disputed   EPA Seeks Public Input on Information Products Bulletin   FEC Revised Rule on Coordinated Spending   Oregon "Takings" Measure Challenged in Court   Congressional Research Service on “Cyberwarfare”   Tech Help: The Great (Email Privacy) Debate   Nonprofit Recommendations for Next President Guided by results of a first-ever Internet based survey conducted in September, a group of 30 nonprofit leaders from different parts of the country have developed a series of recommendations for action the next President should take to strengthen the nonprofit sector. The project, sponsored by OMB Watch, the Advocacy Institute, the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy and The Union Institute, seeks to provide state and local nonprofits with an avenue to make the new administration aware of broad nonprofit issues that are important to them. All nonprofits are encouraged to review the draft recommendations and send us your comments and input. The final recommendations will be presented to the next President in a meeting with transition and White House staff. Here is a summary of the seven categories of recommendations for change:

1. Money and Politics: Reduce the corrosive influence of money on federal campaigns by embracing the principles of public financing models and other possible reforms.
2. Invest in People Served by Nonprofits: Invest in programs that address community needs and help the many who have not benefited enough from the healthy economy. In a time of great economic prosperity and large federal surpluses, these needs should not go unmet.
3. Strengthen Nonprofit Participation in Public Policy Matters: Simplify rules regarding nonprofit policy participation and improve the relationship between federal agencies and nonprofits of all sizes and types.
4. Giving, Nonprofit Careers, and Volunteering: Allow non-itemizers to deduct charitable contributions on federal returns; permit individuals to transfer funds in certain retirement accounts to charities without being taxed on those assets; maintain the estate tax; create a new student loan forgiveness program for graduates who work in charities; and initiate other efforts to increase volunteering in smaller charities.
5. Improve the Federal Grantmaking Process: Speed up grant payments, simplify application and reporting requirements, and provide technical assistance to smaller nonprofits on how to apply for federal funds. Ensure federal grantmaking conforms fully to the constitutional principles of separation of church and state.
6. Strengthen Capacity of Community-Based Organizations: Create a new national grant program to provide community-based organizations with operating support. Other initiatives to address digital divide concerns, such as through Community Technology Centers, should be undertaken. Finally, encourage foundations, other institutions and individual donors to give more to community-based groups.
7. Strengthen Nonprofit Accountability: Require greater disclosure from nonprofits and philanthropies and improve access to information that is disclosed by nonprofits. IRS enforcement of current laws should be improved. Directories of local services provided by nonprofits should be developed through the Internet.

Back to Top What to Expect from the Lame Duck Session With Congress due to return tomorrow, December 5, and the last continuing resolution expiring tomorrow, what can we expect from this final session of the 106th Congress? Three appropriations bills remain outstanding -- Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education; Commerce, Justice and State; Legislative Branch; and Treasury-Postal Service. In addition, legislation to raise the minimum wage, offer tax breaks to businesses, and increase payments to Medicare providers remains pending. When Congress recessed in mid-November, it anticipated it would know the identity of the new President when it came back for the last of this session. We know now that that is not the case. Nothing has changed for the better regarding achieving a consensus. There are still disputes over benefits to immigrants, education funding, ergonomic protections for office workers, and the Medicare provider increases, among others. Congress may make an effort to pass a long-term continuing resolution, end this session of Congress, and complete the budget work after the new President has been sworn into office. This would mean, however, that important spending included in the unpassed appropriations bills would be further delayed. For the agencies this would mean a continuation of the state of uncertainty about their final spending amounts which has existed for the past two months. It would also mean that new funding contained in the bills could not be implemented, causing the states to lose or delay their education funding to modernize schools and reduce class size. President Clinton has indicated that he would not be receptive to such a move. It is clear that a short-term continuing resolution will need to be passed and signed by the President tomorrow. After that, it's anyone's guess. President Clinton seems to hold the best cards right now and could push for the concessions he wants in the pending bills. Some of the wrangling will be among lawmakers who were defeated in the election or are retiring, which often adds even greater uncertainty to lame duck sessions. As a final touch of weirdness, from January 3 when the new Congress is sworn in until January 20 when the new president and vice president take office, Democrats and Republicans will be evenly split in the Senate with Vice President Gore casting tie-breaking votes. Effectively, this means Democrats will be in the majority for these 17 days. With so much uncertainty in two of the three branches of government, no one is making any firm predictions about the "historic" lame duck session of Congress. Back to Top Next Year's Budget, Already? It might seem too soon to be talking about next year’s (FY 2002, running from October 1, 2001, through September 30, 2002) federal budget. After all, we’re still three appropriations bills and more than two months behind in this year’s budget. But, just to take a look ahead, President Clinton will be submitting a budget for FY 2002 before leaving office, and that work is already well underway. By law, the President’s budget is due in February of each year, and a President who takes office on January 20 cannot possibly complete all the complex work necessary to create a budget by February. The new President will, of course, do his own amendments and adjustments to President Clinton’s budget. If Governor Bush becomes the next President, we can expect considerable changes in order to include the large tax cuts and other spending priorities he’s proposed. If Vice President Gore is the new President, the budget will probably not be that different nor the adjustments as dramatic. Especially in the case of a Bush Presidency, the continuing uncertainty and inability to move forward with the transition will likely cause difficulty in getting the new Presidential budget for FY 2002 accomplished. The new Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will have a big responsibility in accomplishing this work. Some possible names raised for appointment to the OMB Directorship by the Bush Administration are John R. Kasich of Ohio, the retiring House Budget Committee Chairman, and a key Bush economic advisor, Stanford economist John F. Cogan, who is presently with Stanford’s Hoover Institution for War, Revolution and Peace. And of course, the delay in making a smooth Presidential transition may also have some budget ramifications. Back to Top "Jobs v. Environment" More Myth than Reality, Study Finds States with strong economies also enjoy environmental health, but bad economies mean bad environmental records, according to a new study from the Institute for Southern Studies. The study examined 20 environmental and 20 economic indicators to produce the state-by-state rankings. The report draws primarily on publicly-available information collected by the federal government and secondary analyses of the data by nonprofit organizations. Environmental factors included toxic chemical pollution, air quality, energy consumption, and the risk of getting cancer from toxics released into the air. Among economic indicators, the study considered annual pay, households in poverty, workers in high-injury jobs, workplace protections and job growth in new business. Table: The Green and the Gold Back to Top Pesticide Label Disclosures Disputed The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently launched a "Read the Label First!" campaign to encourage safer use of pesticides. And while environmental and industry representatives now agree that public health officials and the general public are unable to get needed information about inert ingredients in pesticides, they still disagree on whether and how to disclose this additional information, the Bureau of National Affairs reported last week. Environmental groups sought guarantees that pesticide manufacturers would disclose inerts on product labels. Industry representatives fought such right-to-know protections, arguing that disclosure would divulge confidential business information. Industry even resisted a common-sense proposal that assumes disclosure and sets up a process to evaluate company confidentiality claims on a case-by-case basis. A similar system is currently in place and works well: under EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), chemical discharges and transfers are disclosed to the public unless companies substantiate claims that the information should be withheld. Under the TRI program, very few companies actually file confidentiality claims. The EPA's Inert Disclosure Stakeholder Workgroup, whose stated mission is to advise "the USEPA on considerations and potential measures to increase the availability to the public of information about inert ingredients," provides more information on its website. Back to Top EPA Seeks Public Input on Information Products Bulletin The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeks public comment on a new effort to inform the public on planned EPA analyses, data releases, environmental models, and products that affect a large segment of the country's population. EPA's Office of Environmental Information has launched an "Information Products Bulletin" that EPA will update twice a year. The Bulletin is a joint project of U.S. EPA and the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS). ECOS represents the interests of state environmental protection departments. The Bulletin will provide "pre-publication notification" of information products and point the public to ways to give input on those products. The deadline for the public to submit comments on the Bulletin is January 2, 2001. More information is contained in the EPA's Federal Register notice (a PDF version is also available) Back to Top FEC Approves Revised Rule on Coordinated Spending Between Nonprofits, Parties and Political Campaigns When a nonprofit spends money on flyers, newsletters or mass media ads that refer to federal candidates but do not urge either their election or their defeat, does it have to report the expenditure to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as a campaign contribution? The answer to that question depends on whether or not the communication was made in "cooperation, consultation or in concert with" a candidate's campaign, according to the Federal Election Campaign Act. The practical problem for nonprofits, candidates and the FEC has been to define exactly what amounts to coordination, so that nonprofit policy advocacy and grassroots lobbying remain unregulated, protected free speech. On November 30 the FEC approved revised regulations defining coordination between nonprofits and candidates that are intended to narrow the range of activities that are considered to be "coordination." FEC Chair David Wold said the new rule is "the price we have to pay" to avoid infringing on the first amendment rights of nonprofits. Congress is expected to approve the new regulations early next year. The changes were made in response to a series of court decisions that found the past definition of coordination to be overbroad, violating the first amendment rights of nonprofits such as Public Citizen and the Christian Coalition. Under the new rules nonprofits will not be "coordinating" with a candidate unless the candidate or a political party has control over the content or strategy for distribution, is created at their request or is the result of substantial discussion or negotiation between the group and the candidate. Inquiries to a candidate to learn their position on policy issues are specifically exempted. A broad reading of the rule could extend its reach to grassroots lobbying and policy advocacy communications that are not intended to influence elections, because it could be assumed that incumbent members of Congress and other political leaders are often simultaneously candidates for federal office throughout their careers. Statements by FEC Commissioners indicate that they do not intend the new rule to cover this activity. However, if the rule is applied to grassroots lobbying communications, further litigation is likely. At press time, the FEC had not yet made the text of the rule available, but said that it would be available later this week -- at which time, OMB Watch's Nonprofit News will also post it. Back to Top Oregon "Takings" Measure Challenged in Court "http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/news_week.ssf?/news/oregonian/00/11/n5_suit30.frame"> Several lawsuits have been brought against an Oregon ballot measure -- passed on Nov. 7, 53 percent to 47 percent -- that directs the state and local governments to pay land owners when a regulation lowers the value of their property. A group of Oregon citizens -- including the wife of late Gov. Tom McCall, a leading proponent of land-use planning -- was the first to file suit against the initiative (Measure 7), charging that it amounts to a package of amendments when law allows just one. The state judge overseeing this challenge is expected to decide by Wednesday whether to block the measure from taking effect on Thursday, as scheduled, while he considers its constitutionality. Meanwhile, the League of Oregon Cities, joined by the Portland City Council, will also file a similar challenge against Measure 7. One argument the League will make is that Measure 7 represents a substantial revision to the state's constitution, which must be approved by the state legislature, not just a limited amendment. If implemented, Measure 7 could have devastating effects. Already, a number of cases are beginning to crop up. For example, the Jackson Creek Sand Co. is suing the Oregon city of Jacksonville and Jackson County for $50 million for refusing to allow the company to mine 18 million tons of aggregate. And protections for endangered salmon have also been put at risk. Back to Top Congressional Research Service on “Cyberwarfare” In a report dated November 15, 2000, Steven Hildreth of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) looks at issues of "cyberwarfare" and "cyberterrorism." Hildreth's report is primarily an overview of current concerns about "cyberwarfare" and U.S. policy for responding to these concerns. The report goes further, however, and also examines foreign perspectives, the issue of cyberterrorism, and gives some reported instances of cyberwarfare, focusing on cyberwarfare activities sponsored by nation-states, but it includes cyberterrorism that is aimed at achieving political objectives at the national level. While the report raises some useful questions about the meaning of these terms and the extent of the problem, it begins with a rather broad definition of "cyberwarfare" as, both those activities of "defending and attacking information and computer networks, . . . denying an adversary's ability to do the same, or even dominating the information environment on the battlefield" and "computer or network penetration, denial-of-service attacks on computers and networks, equipment sabotage through cyberspace, sensor jamming, and even manipulating trusted information sources to condition or control an adversary's thinking." In the Purpose section of the report, however, Hildreth notes that certain types of cyber attacks are more "likely [to be] . . . state-sponsored activities or cyberterrorism" which can "be referred to as hacking, cyber mischief, cyber hooliganism, personal or corporate theft, revenge, or espionage, or organized crime activities." These attacks include "unauthorized attempts to access computers, computer controlled systems, or networks," and can range from thrill-seeking to intending to "cause deliberate localized harm to computers or damage to a much larger infrastructure, such as a water supply or energy systems." This distinction is important because, as Hildreth notes, some, in and out of government, express concern about terrorists targeting power or communications grids – or chemical plants. Hildreth says, however, that Richard Clarke (National Security Council Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism) "has said several times [that] it does not appear that terrorist groups actually [are] planning to use the Internet for these kinds of activities." In spite of the comparatively low likelihood that a terrorist would use the Internet instead of other means to carry out an attack, Congress in 1999, made it a crime for government employees to disseminate industry-submitted reports describing what might happen in hypothetical worst-case chemical accidents at chemical plants. This information is considered public information, meaning that it is not categorized as classified information and therefore should not be withheld from the public. Congress, in effect, cut public access to public information at its source.(See the May 8 Watcher article). Back to Top Tech Help: The Great (E-mail Privacy) Debate E-mail messages are important not only to the intended recipients, but also increasingly to a growing number of third-parties, especially marketers, solicitors, and distributors of "junk mail." Technology now exists to check not only who is receiving particular e-mail messages, but also when a recipient has read and acted upon a message. This creates both a potentially useful capacity and a potentially harmful scenario for nonprofits. NPTalk takes a look under the hood of e-mail tracking. Subscribe to NPTalk Back to Top Your comments are always welcomed! Notes and Sidebars Whitehouse to Issue Report on Nonprofits Pursuant to a Whitehouse Memorandum dated October 22, 1999, the Interagency Task Force on Nonprofits and Government will release a report on its findings within the next two weeks, at which time OMB Watch will make it available. Dec. 8: Free Media Seminar "Government & Media: Perception & Reality" The Federal Communicators Network and the Senior Fellows Program of the Council for Excellence in Government announce the Second Annual "Government & Media: Perception & Reality" Media Seminar at the National Institutes of Health's Natcher Center in Bethesda, MD, December 8, 2000. This free daylong seminar is open to federal, state, local, and tribal government communicators and others who care about communicating good government. Students and professors of public administration and journalism from colleges and universities are also encouraged to attend. The focus of the seminar will be on building effective working relationships between government and the media, communicating government's accomplishments and restoring trust in government. This year will also explore the future of communications, especially in light of the growing role of e-gov and e-media. "Imagine e-Government Awards" Will Honor Innovation in Information Technology The Council for Excellence in Government and its Intergovernmental Technology Leadership Consortium have announced the creation of the Imagine e-Government Awards, to be presented in the Spring. The awards will recognize one adult and one high school student who suggest the most innovative ways for government to use information technology to serve and connect with the public. The two winners will be those individuals whose ideas best demonstrate public value, originality and feasibility. On line applications must be submitted and completed by January 15, 2001. Applications can be drafted on line prior to that date, and all applicants will be able to access their applications for editing and augmentation until the submission date. Questions can also be directed to Lucy Bisognano at 202.728.0418 UPDATE on NCLIS Report Draft As reported in the November 20 issue of the Watcher, the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science(NCLIS) is seeking public comments on its DRAFT Final Report, "A Comprehensive Assessment of Public Information Dissemination." The report is now available on the Commission website and discusses the future of NTIS and the Federal Depository Library Program, among other things. Written comments are requested by the close of business on Wednesday, December 6, but must be received not later than 9 a.m. Monday, December 11, 2000. Comments may be submitted to the Commission by mail at 1110 Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20005-3552, Attn: F. Woody Horton, Ph.D., by fax to 202-606-9203, or by e-mail to F. Woody Horton. NCLIS DRAFT Public Information Resources Reform Act of 2001 In addition, the NCLIS has also made the draft of the Public Information Resources Reform Act available for comment. Key provisions are summarized in 2 facts sheets (facts sheet 1 and 2) posted on the Commission website. Please note that this draft is for discussion and public review only, and is not necessarily the final position of the Commission. The Commissioners are continuing to review the document and will have the benefit of additional comments from the public before issuing the final report. Written comments are requested by the close of business on Wednesday, December 6, but must be received not later than 9 a.m. Monday, December 11, 2000. Comments may be submitted to the Commission by mail at 1110 Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20005-3552, Attn: F. Woody Horton, Ph.D., by fax to 202-606-9203, or by e-mail (whorton@nclis.gov). IG Community Conference, December 6-7 The Public Administration Forum (PAF) invites the IG Community to its Washington, DC, conference, "Issues, Problems and Solutions for the Federal IG Community." A two-part panel discussion on information security and handling computer-based data will be just one of the highlights included in two days of workshops, networking opportunities, and panel discussions offered for IG investigators, counsels, evaluators, resident agents in charge, and special agents in charge. PAF has more details on its website. Watch This Space: As reported here in the Watcher on October 9 and September 11, a set of policy recommendations to help the nonprofit sector is being developed by a group of over 25 nonprofit leaders for the next presidential administration. They will be posted on the OMB Watch website when they are drafted and comments on them from nonprofits will be appreciated. Call for Papers The Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) announces its Sixth Women's Policy Research Conference, "The Status of Women: Facing the Facts, Forging the Future," to be held June 8-9. IWPR is currently accepting paper and poster proposals that focus on policies that affect women and their families, and on the intersections between policymaking and research. Proposals are due by December 15, 2000 and applications are available online or by calling IWPR at 202.785.5100. Call for (More) Papers The National Science Foundation and the Great Cities Institute, University of Illinois at Chicago, in cooperation with the universities of the Great Cities Universities Consortium, request discussion papers for its "Foundations of Electronic Government in America's Cities: A Multi-Disciplinary Workshop," to be held March 8 and 9, 2001 in Chicago. The focus of this workshop is digital government in urban environments. Papers are due January 5 and further information is available online.