ing to get big jobs.” He said he was already negotiating for thernnext Secretary of State. But when a tape of this conversationrnwas given to the Washington Times, Steiner’s AIPAC presencernsuddenly evaporated. So did a few of the high appointmentsrnexpected from Clinton. But Jewish leaders werernunfazcd. They took their complaints to the press.rnThat restored their clout in a hurry. Within hours of beingrnnamed Secretary of State, Warren Christopher felt the need torncall Jewish leaders and ask them not to worry even thoughrnhe was not their preferred candidate. Clinton himself admittedrnhe had “a problem,” which he promised to resolvernwith sub-Cabinet appointments. The New York Times quotedrntransition aides as contending that “the real worry of thernJewish groups” was that “their monopoly on representing Jewishrnpositions is being broken.”rnIf “monopoly” means the absence of any countervailingrnplace for Arab interests in American politics, the word is fitting.rnDespite signs that an Arab-American lobby is finallyrncoming alive, it is hampered by limited funds and a relativelyrnsmall population base in the United States. It is also hamperedrnby a press with little interest in exploring all sides ofrnthe issues.rnAs a new administration took over in Washington, therernwere signs that Israel was shifting its position slightly. ThernKnesset voted to stop prosecuting citizens who contact thernPLO. But, more importantly, there has been no change inrnpolicy or staff at AIPAC. The big questions for peace prospectsrnin the Middle East remain whether AIPAC will relax its griprnon American foreign policy and whether the Clinton WhiternHouse will force the issue. The omens were not positive.rnAs Secretary Christopher sought to resolve an impasse betweenrnthe U.N. and Israel over its deportation of some 400rnsuspected Arab terrorists, AIPAC got 68 senators to sign a letterrnbacking Israel. The effect was immediate. Christopher approvedrna partial return of Arabs and agreed to veto any U.N.rnsanctions against Israel, at the risk of losing leverage withrnArab parties in the stalled peace talks.rnNor were the omens positive that renewed efforts to reformrnelection and lobby laws would dilute the power of suchrngroups as AIPAC and Hill & Knowlton to shape Americanrnforeign policy in semisecreey. The most likely plan to improverncampaign laws would have little or no effect on pro-IsraelrnPACs. And the leading proposal in Congress to tightenrncontrol of lobbying would not alter AIPAC’s status as a registeredrndomestic lobby or diminish H&K’s role as a foreignrnagent for hire.rnCoincidentally, the chief sponsor of lobbying reforms isrnSenator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who received morernpro-Israel money than any other member of Congress in thern1990 elections. crnTHE WISDOM OF THE PLANNED GIFTrnThere are many ways to give to educational and ctiaritable organizations such as The Rockford Institute, publisher of Chronicles: ArnMagazine of American Culture. Most people make direct gifts which result in a “charitable deduction” from their taxable income inrna given year. But there are other ways to give that can preserve income or assets for a donor and his beneficiaries, avoid capitalrngains and estate taxes, and benefit the Institute or other charities. These are often referred to as “planned gifts.”rnThe Rockford Institute’s Pooled Income Fund provides income to a donor or his beneficiary and can be initiated at the $5,000rnlevel or above. The amount in the fund can be increased each year, and the amount of income depends on the performance of thernpooled fund. This fund has both high income and growth-oriented investments, and the return is generally much higher than stockrndividends. The amount of charitable tax deduction for the gift depends on the fair market value of the assets contributed (there isrnno capital gains tax on stock contributions) and is related to the age of the donor or beneficiaries. There is no capital gains tax forrnthe donor on the increased value of the fund over time. Upon the death of the donor or beneficiary, the assets would bypass estaterntaxes and go to the institute.rnMichael Warder, Legacy Program, The Rockford Institute, 934 North Main Street, Rockford, XL 61103rnPlease send me general information on “Planned Giving” options.rnI I Please send me information on the Institute’s Pooled Income Fund.rnNAME_rnCITYrnADDRESS_rnSTATE_ Z1P_ PHONE_rnIf you have a specific asset, such as slocks, that you are considering for a contribution, and if you would like the Institute to evaluate the financial tax implications forrnyour gift, please include the following information:rnSS # SS #(SPOUSE)rnCOST OF ASSET_ ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE.rn28/CHRONICLESrnrnrn