The Agitator: As voters go to the polls and we await the returns of the mid-term elections, others are already hard at work strategizing, politickin' and prognosticating about the forthcoming 2008 presidential campaigns. Yesterday's release of the Pew Research Center's study tited "The Internet and Politics: No Revolution, Yet" is great food spiced with a a good dose of reality. According to the study, the jury is still out a dozen years after those early 1990s predictions of a 'golden era of politics' made possible by more citizen access and involvement via the internet.

Chronicle of Philanthropy: The results of this week's election were mostly a reflection of how voters felt about foreign policy and corruption in Washington.While those issues are of concern to people in the nonprofit world, other issues at stake on Tuesday will have a more direct impact on many types of nonprofit groups.

The change in leadership in the House of Representatives, and possibly the Senate, will improve the ability of some nonprofit groups with strong ties to Democrats, such as Independent Sector and OMB Watch, to influence Congress. However, other groups, such as the Council on Foundations, which recently appointed a former Republican congressman, Steve Gunderson, as its president, may suffer.

New York Times:  After the Nobels, the Pulitzers and the Oscars, why not a prize for African presidents?
Not just any presidents, of course.

Washington Post: Five conservative nonprofit organizations, including one run by prominent Republican Grover Norquist, "perpetrated a fraud" on taxpayers by selling their clout to lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Senate investigators said in a report issued today. The report includes previously unreleased e-mails between the now-disgraced lobbyist and officers of the nonprofit groups, showing that Abramoff routed money from his clients to the groups. In exchange the groups, among other things, produced ostensibly independent newspaper op-ed columns or press releases that favored the clients' positions.

The New York Times is three parts through a four-part examining how American religious organizations benefit from an increasingly accommodating government. For anyone working in philathropy, it's a must-read. Today's installment profiles a project in South Bend, Indiana sponsored by a Catholic religious group that will provide retirement homes for those with an average net worth of $1 million. It's created a bit of controversy with city fathers worried about the tax base. Notes writer Diana Henriques:

The conflict in South Bend echoes disputes from Alaska to Florida that raise the following issue: As religious organizations of all faiths stretch their concept of mission far beyond traditional worship, should their traditional tax exemptions expand as well? Increasingly, government at all levels is answering yes.

The property tax exemption is one of the oldest tax breaks granted to religious organizations, but it is not the only one. Lawmakers and judges have also approved what amounts to special tax treatment for religious organizations and some of their employees, including exemptions on personal-income and payroll taxes, and have made it easier for them to get tax-exempt construction loans for purely religious projects.

Like the exemptions from federal and state regulations that have proliferated for religious groups in recent years, these tax breaks are widely defended both as an acknowledgment of religion’s contributions to society and as a barrier to unjustified government limitations on the liberty that religious organizations enjoy under the First Amendment.

But in some communities like South Bend, tolerance of religious tax breaks is fraying as local governments struggle to provide basic services with limited resources.

Yesterday's article looked at employee rights (or the lack thereof) among employees of religious organizations. The first piece is an overview, and it focuses on the lack of government oversight for religious nonprofits, which are not required to file financial statements with the IRS. Great series and food for thought.

Free Market News: The recent spate of multi-billionaires putting their money where their issues are has not received universal approval. In a column in The American Prospect, former Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich decrys the fact that, as he puts it, "We depend on individual billionaires to do what government used to do. That's not a good thing."

New York Times:  More than 30 longtime supporters of the American Civil Liberties Union are calling for the ouster of the organization’s leadership, saying it has failed to adhere to the principles it demands of others and thus jeopardized the organization’s effectiveness.

  Senator Hillary Clinton 
  Originally uploaded by onPhilanthropy.

Any major gathering headed by a still-active former President is going to have its political side, and the Clinton Global Initiative is no exception. Although Bill Clinton clearly takes pains to frame this conference - and many of his activities - as post-electoral, the same can't be said of the attendees, whether they're from the United States or elsewhere.

Even as they discuss philanthropy as a change agent in partnership with business and government, many of the attendees as also keenly aware of their own political future; that said, the wide-ranging nature of the CGI (this is far from a Democratic Party outlet) creates some interesting moments. Here are a few:

• Laura Bush embraced Bill Clinton at the opening plenary, another episode in the growing relationship between the Clintons and the Bush family. Commentators like Arianna Huffington blasted Clinton for inviting the First Lady during a political season, but I can tell you that the talk in the hallways was update: the business guys especially like to see their major political figures cooperating.
• General Pervez Musharraf, the president of Pakistan, was clearly interested in sending a message to his restive nation back home, including hard-line Muslim group; he took pains to paint his country as the major force in driving the Cold War to its conclusion and interestingly, painted al Quaeda as nearly defunct in his region.
• Al Gore gave a passionate address on global warming, overwhelming his panel discussion on the environment. The once and possibly future Presidential candidate then warmly embraced President Clinton and Sir Richard Branson onstage - to a standing ovation from the crowd.
• British politics infused in recent weeks with stories of a Labour Party insurrection against PM Tony Blair, was well represented. this morning, London Mayor Ken Livingstone, a socialist, discussed environmentally-friendly cities and claimed that technology is no issue - "we have all the technology we need" - but that the political will is lacking. Yesterday, British Chancellor Gordon Brown, widely seen as leading the palace coup against Blair, spoke about international policy on Africa and sounded confident, in charge, and ready to assume the mantle of No. 10 Downing Street. noted the Independent: "It did not escape anyone at the Clinton Global Initiative conference that while it was Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, who attended last time, the invitation this year went to Mr Brown. There were chuckles when Mr Wolfensohn thanked him for speaking and added: "I hope this presages your ability to do this on a broader scale sometime soon."
• This morning, Senator Hillary Clinton led a fascinating panel on international women's issues - and clearly planted her flag as an international leader on poverty, perhaps an asset in her almost-inevitable Presidential campaign in 2008.

Still, some speakers pushed beyond politics. South African civil right leader Bishop Desmond Tutu recalled how his black countrymen, led by Nelson Mandela, changed the world by not engaging in a political vendetta, though surely they had the cause.

"We decided to embrace the perpetrators. To effect real change, you have to say you're sorry in public, and it's one of the most difficult things in public life, to say please forgive me."