Items in the news: 1988 to 2001-FEB

1996: House: Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996: This was Bill H.R. 3734. Section 104 allows states to enter into contracts with charitable, religious or private organizations to deliver services under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act (TANF), Supplementary Security Income (SSI), food stamps and Medicaid programs. ₂

1996: Texas task force: Governor Bush (R-TX) created a Faith-Based Task Force in 1996-MAY. Its goal was to identify obstacles to government funding of religious groups, and to recommend how to implement such funding without excessive regulations. Many of the Task Force's recommendations were signed into Texas law by mid 1997.

1998: Senate: Charitable Choice Expansion Act: Senator John Ashcroft, (R-MO) introduced a version of this act in 1998, but never made it to the floor of the Senate. It would have greatly expanded the range of programs for which churches could obtain with government funding. 

1998: House: American Community Renewal Act:  Representatives J.C. Watts, (R-OK), and James Talent, (R-MO) introduced the American Community Renewal Act in 1998-MAY. It would amend the Internal Revenue Code to include tax breaks, regulatory schemes and federal grants for religious organizations to "stimulate the creation of new jobs, particularly for disadvantaged workers and long-term unemployed individuals, and to promote revitalization of economically distressed areas..." Robert Woodson, president of the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, said: "Faith-based institutions have demonstrated that they can transform the attitudes, values and behaviors of some of the most alienated and self-destructive people in our society, where conventional programs have failed. Therefore, even if one does not embrace religiosity, one can respect, appreciate and embrace the secular consequences of what they do. Supporting faith-based intervention can be justified on strategic, secular, practical political grounds because it works, and at much lower costs. Government should not be hostile to faith-based programs." ₁

1999: Senate: Charitable Choice Expansion Act: Senator John Ashcroft, (R-MO)  re-introduced the Charitable Choice Expansion Act of 1999 (S1113) on 1999 MAY-25. It said in part: "Neither the Federal Government nor a State or local government shall require a religious organization to alter its form of internal governance; or to remove religious art, icons, scripture, or other symbols; in order to be eligible to provide assistance under a program." 

	Senator Ashcroft said: "We have known for years that government solutions have failed miserably in moving people from dependency and despair to responsibility and independence. For years America's churches and charities have been leading the way in helping the poor achieve dignity and self-sufficiency. This is why I have been advocating that government should find ways to help these organizations unleash the cultural remedy our society so desperately needs."
	Carole Shields, president of People for the American Way wrote: "What you are proposing is a constitutional lose-lose situation... This proposal will go wrong either way - either it will undermine the Constitution by supporting the practice of religion or it will undermine the churches' freedom by imposing limitations on religious expression."
	Elliot Mincberg, executive vice president and legal direct or of PFAW stated: "Inevitably you run into a dilemma — you either have laws with absolutely no accountability, or regulations of churches or congressional regulation and control that will interfere with religious missions and programs. Charitable choice distracts from better ways of providing support to religious groups' involvement in social service programs, such as tax proposals that provide incentives for all nonprofit groups to run such programs."
	Joseph Conn, communications director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State stated: "We are concerned that the needy persons will find themselves in an extremely religious environment in order to receive social services. I think in the long run religious institutions would regret taking the public funds because of the government intrusion that ultimately follows the money." Referring to the freedom of churches to receive public money, and then discriminate against parts of the public in their hiring policies, he stated: "We believe public funds should never be used to support discrimination...This bill raises all kinds of delicate church- and-state issues." 2

2000: Presidential campaigns: Both the Democratic and Republican candidates for president in 2001 to 2004, George W. Bush and Al Gore, supported charitable-choice initiatives during their election campaigns. For Gore, this was a major departure from the historical Democratic Party position. George W Bush proposed an Office of Faith-Based Action to promote charitable choice. Gore's support is conditional on the clients are not forced into religious readings or prayers, and on there being an alternative secular program available in the community.

2000: House bill: Homeownership and Economic Development Act: As mentioned above, Representative Mark Souder (R-IN) introduced a charitable choice amendment to House bill The Homeownership and Economic Development Act of 2000. He said that the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] already has allowed religious groups to use federal funds to provide social services. His amendment would simply codify the practice. It would require the religious institution to provide services for all. Charitable Choice "would allow a Catholic priest to have his collar on if it is at a Catholic facility [and] would not require them to remove icons." The amendment was passed on 2000-APR-7. ₃

	At a panel which discussed church-state issues, Jimmy Allen, a Baptist preacher and former president of the Southern Baptist Convention expressed a concern that churches would give up their independence by accepting government funds. He said that religious groups should "create a climate of concern" about social problems that would force politicians to act.
	The Rev. James Thomas, of the Jefferson Street Missionary Baptist Church in Nashville TN said that charitable choice is not the answer to racism, poverty and other social problems: "It would not work. I don't trust the government in our church. The black church must be free to speak. The government did nothing for the black church during the civil rights movement and today they want to give us money and shut our mouths."
	Edward Dobson pastor of Calvary Church in Grand Rapids, MI, said charitable choice "sounds good [but] when on the dance floor, the government looks like an octopus." 4

2000-NOV: USA: Lawsuits against charitable choice programs: By early November, there were at least three active lawsuits in progress:

	Kentucky: Kentucky Baptist Homes for Children fired counselor Alicia Pedreira in 1998 because of her sexual orientation.
	Texas: A state welfare-to-work program is alleged to include Bible-based lectures.
	Wisconsin: The lawsuit involves Faith Works, a Milwaukee program that helps fathers with drug treatment and job training.

2001-JAN-29: Washington DC: President Bush unveiled charitable choice program: According to Evangelical Press News Service: President Bush issued a proposal to make up to 24 billion dollars in federal funding over the next ten years. He also:

	Created a White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.
	Appointed John J. Dilulio Jr., a political science professor from the University of Pennsylvania to administer the office.
	Instructed five Cabinet-level agencies to interface with religious organizations and to eliminate barriers "that make private groups hesitant to work with government."

The plan is to enlarge the scope of charitable choice. It is currently limited to a few programs in the Department of Health and Human Services. President Bush's plan "would expand the provision to allow religious charities to compete for more than 100 programs in the departments of labor (job training, for example), justice (community policing), education (after-school programs) and housing and urban development." ₅

President Bush said: "Compassion is the work of a nation, not just a government. Government will never be replaced by charities and community groups. Yet when we see social needs in America, my administration will look first to faith-based programs. We will not discriminate against them."

Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State commented: "George Bush does not understand the nature of either the church or the Constitution." He further said that Bush's proposal violates the "essential spirit" of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. He said that the plan is a "vast payback to the religious right for help in [his] election."

The American Jewish Congress expressed concern that while "funding religious agencies to provide public services as long as the actual programs themselves remain secular in nature may be appropriate and useful, it is quite another thing when religious teaching itself becomes the heart of the program and is the means whereby those services are provided." ₆