"Re:Ukraine - isn't this what the core funding is for? Isn't this why it is important to have ongoing Annual Campaigns - so that we DON'T need an "emergency campaign" every time there is a crisis? Maybe - just maybe - we could have some consistency of message here. Maybe our system should have said we do NOT need an emergency campaign because your dollars given with love and devotion each year ensure that things like this are taken care of.And I appreciate the suggestion, the admonition and the sarcasm. Of course, this Commentator would be correct were we living in 1984 when core allocations for Overseas needs were over 50% of the aggregate annual campaigns, or even a decade later when those allocations had fallen to 40%. But, today? Come on. Aggregate core allocations today are at levels those who created the national system would not have believed -- they have fallen below 15%. At most federations, the core allocation has become an after-thought, an example of "send 'em what's left over." In too many instances, the overseas allocation to meet core needs is less than the individual federation's JFNA Dues. It certainly is not 1984 any more.
But, yes, let's always assume the worst, because what fun is there in defending our mission."
The circumstances in the Ukraine today can't be dismissed with a shrug and a "...things like this are (or should be) taken care of" through our annual communal allocations -- and that's because the Anonymous writer and you and I have stood back in silence and watched as those allocations have dropped precipitously to the point where additional funding in times of crisis are required. Or, maybe I'm wrong. This is certainly a topic worthy of continental debate. But, let me ask my Anonymous friend: "of what federation are you a member? What is its allocation to the core of JA, JDC and World ORT?" I would love to hear more from you.
Rwexler
Posts
10 comments:
My sense is that we are 'kicking a dead horse.' Federation support for 'overseas' is almost non-existant. They still raise money on the back of Israel, etc., but as you point out the end result of $ sent is probably less than 1/3 of what it once was. It is time to stop 'kicking the dead horse' - it is time to develop a new system that is responsive and that works. Or, turn overseas support from American Jewry totally over to the JBF which has become, as it tagline says, 'Your Voice In Israel.'
Why do we raise extra funds in other emergencies like Katrina, like the tsunami, like flooding in a community that destroys synagogues, etc? Shouldn't the Red Cross annual campaign or the local Jewish federation annual campaign be sufficient? Of course not. We always need to respond to emergencies with ADDITIONAL funds since annual campaigns (core dollars) are needed for ongoing regular needs, not things that have to be done because of unusual circumstances and events.
JNF not JBF (sorry)
Are overseas needs the same as they used to be? Are worldwide Jewish communities the same? Do we need an emergency campaign just because there is a crisis or should we actually evaluate the need for more funds before we launch? Is there adequate wealth in the Ukranian Jewish community to take care of itself? One can believe deeply in Jewish peoplehood and have a serious commitment to world Jewry and still ask these questions.
To anonymous 11:36..
Ahhh - those are the questions that the old UJA/CJF z'l system would have asked and dealt with.
There are no bad questions. Yours deserve both debate and answers -- even if these are answers that you don't wish to accept. At JFNA, as you know if you have been a reader, questions have been viewed as heresy.
There are no bad questions. Yours deserve both debate and answers -- even if these are answers that you don't wish to accept. At JFNA, as you know if you have been a reader, questions have been viewed as heresy.
Great that you welcome questions, but these kind of serious questions have led many to conclude that overseas and core allocations don't need today to be at historic levels. They've also led to a lot of questions about the effectiveness of JAFI. Therefore, you can't conclude that folks and federations don't care anymore just just because support for historic allocations has changed.
So, here's more from me: ask JDC if our dollars are covering the current situation in Ukraine. My guess is that they will say yes, because that is what their messaging has been. They did not ask for a spearate campaign; they spoke of what they are doing on the ground and that this is possible because of what they were doing on the ground BEFORE this crisis. Our system needs to be stronger on its essential message - the Annual Campaign makes all this possible, and if allocations are dwindling, this needs to be the strong argument to each federation, not an attack on JFNA. As I understand it (and I am from a large federation that has not reduced its allocations), JFNA was reluctant to acceed to this "demand" from some federations to open this box; they should have stood their ground. They should have used this as an opportunity to admonish the federations that have squelched on their promises; this is precisley why we need a continental system with accountability from the federations. It is time that the federations stop behaving like petulant children on the one hand, and heavy-handed bullies on the other. JFNA is not solely at fault here; I know that is not popular to say on this blog, but the fault lies not in the stars; it lies in oursleves.
Dear Anonymous,
It's always good to learn from you, whoever you are.
I'm not surprised by any of your Comment above and, in particular, the suggestion that "JFNA was reluctant to accede to..." the creation of what is no more than a Mailbox. Thus, no goal, no leadership and a flimsy message -- three things JFNA is particularly good at.
What could be more sad than that those federations which have maintained their core allocations, i including mine, sit silently rather than using the Ukraine needs to demand that those federations which continue to use the core allocation as an ATM, to step up
Post a Comment