|
FEDERAL CHARITABLE CHOICE PROGRAMS
Items in the news: 2001-FEB to now
Sponsored link.
Items in the news:
 |
2001-FEB-25: USA: Wiccans and other Neopagans object to plan:
The Alternative Religions Educational Network (AREN) represents
various Wiccan and other Pagan/Neopagan individuals and groups. They
are seeking signatures for a petition to President Bush which protests the faith-based
initiatives program. They object to the government
routing tax revenue to fund potentially discriminatory social
programs: The petition says in part: "We are concerned that
the government will appear to be supporting ideologies and theologies
that are discriminatory and exclusionary. We are also concerned that
some secular organizations will be forced to cease services due to
lack of governmental funding. Such programs may be the only
non-religious choice in small communities, and their termination could
force some needy participants into a religious-based program with
which they may be uncomfortable..."
Their accompanying "Pagan Press Release on Faith Based
Initiative" mentions that modern-day Druids,
Wiccans and
other earth religious faith groups have been cited negatively by
government officials and the media:
"Many deem Wicca as a substandard religion without giving
clarifying reasons for why it would not qualify in the program...Like
many other faith groups, earth religious traditions have food panties,
prison ministries, and substance abuse programs in their community."
By mid-day on FEB-28, they had received over 2,100 signatures. 1 |
|
2001-MAR-1: USA: Continuing opposition to faith-based
initiatives: According to AANEWS for 2001-FEB-28: |
John J. DiIulio, the new director of the White House
Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, received a mixed
reception when he addressed the Jewish Council of Public
Affairs...Rabbi David Sapperstein of the Religious Action Center
for Reform Judaism told DiIulio that if federal dollars ended up
in the hands of groups which "targeted" Jews for
conversion to Christianity, the practice of spending public money on
such outreaches would be "corrupting," "sinful
and tyrannical."
Others, skeptical of DiIulio's claims that government funds would not
be used for religious proselytizing, pointed to a Texas anti-drug
program which had the special blessing of George W. Bush when he
was governor, that mixed rehabilitation with a hard-line sectarian
message. DiIulio denied that such funding would be possible at
the federal level. The faith-based program czar was also
challenged over the possibility that tax money would be used by hate
groups and fringe religious elements to fund their social service
programs. Richard Foltin of the American Jewish Committee...said
that he and others were "really concerned" that
grants would be made to religious groups which discriminate in hiring,
thus "putting up a sign, 'No Jew Need Apply' or 'No Catholic
Need Apply.' " He added that under the present funding
scheme, it would impossible to avoid grants for sectarian
organizations which "do have in mind the desire to oppress
people and push people into religious activity they don't want to be
involved in." 2
|
2001-MAR-7: USA: Muslim group demands apology from Jerry
Falwell: According to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR):
CAIR demanded an apology from Rev. Jerry Falwell, a well known
Fundamentalist Christian TV evangelist. They charged him with "bigotry."
According to CAIR's news release, Falwell was commenting on government
funding
of religious groups, saying: "I think the Moslem faith
teaches hate. I think there's clear evidence that the Islam [sic]
religion, wherever it has majority control -- and I can name a dozen
countries -- doesn't even allow people of other faiths to express
themselves or evangelize or to exist in their presence....I think that
when persons are clearly bigoted towards other persons in the human
family, they should be disqualified from funds. For that reason, Islam
should be out the door before they knock...And whenever Islam, God
forbid, ever gets a majority in the United States--like Iraq, Iran,
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Libya, all the Moslem countries--free expression
will disappear." CAIR Board Chairman Omar Ahmad sent a Fax to
Fallwell, saying in part: "The dissemination of distorted or
inaccurate information has a negative impact on the lives of ordinary
American Muslims and serves to mislead people of other faiths. In
fact, these offensive remarks are symptomatic of the very intolerance
that you claim Islam promotes. No faith would accept being excluded
from productive participation in our society based on such
falsehoods...Your destructive rhetoric could lead to discrimination
and even physical attacks against Muslims in North America."
He asked Falwell to apologize for his offensive remarks and to open a
dialogue with Muslim representatives to gain accurate information
about Islam. 3 | |
2001-MAR-12: Faith-based initiative program delayed:
According to The Washington Post: Don Eberly, deputy director of the
recently created White House Office of Faith-Based and Community
Initiatives has decided to delay sending a bill to Congress that
would authorize large-scale routing of government funds to religious
institutions. They had expected opposition from groups that promote
the separation of church and state, but they "didn’t expect
a chorus of doubts from religious conservatives such as Pat Robertson,
Jerry Falwell, Richard Land, Michael Horowitz and even Marvin Olasky,
one of the program’s early architects. They worry that churches
would be corrupted by government regulations or that objectionable
sects would be rewarded." 4 There
have been concerns expressed by some conservative Christians that Islamic,
Pagan and Church of
Scientology groups might benefit from government funding. But the
most common objections appear to be directed at the possible funding
of Christian groups which teach beliefs that deviate from conservative
Christianity, such as the Unification Church. | |
2001-MAR-14: Faith-based initiative program on hold: The
Washington Post reported that Republican Senators, including Senator
Rick Santorum (R-PA) have decided to "wait several months to a
year" before introducing faith-based legislations. This will
give the Bush administration time to try to overcome the flaws in the
proposal. | |
2001-MAR-21: USA: Faith-based initiative bill
introduced to Congress: Representatives J.C. Watts (R-OK) and Tony Hall
(D-OH), have introduced a bill into the House of Representatives that
would allow the government to fund religious groups who run social
service programs. Also, it would allow "taxpayers
claiming the standard deduction to claim an extra deduction for
charitable contributions; it would allow people to donate money from
their individual retirement accounts to charity without paying taxes
on withdrawals; and it would allow restaurants to claim a deduction
for food donations...It also sets up something called individual
development accounts, in which banks, credit unions or community
groups would earn tax credits for matching up to $500 of a poor
person's savings." A corresponding bill has been introduced
into the Senate. It omits the charitable choice provision.
| |
2001-MAY-17: USA: Secular groups excluded
from funding: According to the Associated Press: "New
federal grants to prevent HIV and drug abuse are being offered
only to religious groups." Secular groups will be
excluded from funding. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans
United for the Separation of Church and State said: "It's
totally inconsistent with this administration's constant claim
that everybody should be on equal footing." $4 million
in grants are intended to support groups that work with young
people, particularly in black and Hispanic
communities, to address both drug abuse and HIV prevention. The
application form specifies that applicants must be "faith-based
organizations" or be working with such a group. Mark
Weber, a spokesman for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration of Health and Human Services
claims that religious groups are in the best position to reach
at-risk teens. "Faith-based organizations have access to
the young people we are trying to reach." This decision
is an obvious violation of the First Amendment of the U. S.
Constitution. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has
written that government funding must be "available to
both religious and secular beneficiaries on a nondiscriminatory
basis." James Skillen, president of the Center
for Public Justice assumed that President Bush was unaware
of the Administration's edict. Skillen said: "The
principles we're arguing for is there ought to be no
discrimination. [If the White House was on board with the
religious set-aside], that would shock me off my feet."
Connie Marshner of the conservative Free Congress Foundation
favored the set-aside: "For so long there's been so much
discrimination against faith-based organizations, I'd say it's a
leveling of the field."
| |
2001-JUL-17: House to vote on "Community Solutions Act:"
The House was scheduled to vote shortly on the "Community
Solutions Act," the first step in involving religious groups in
the operation of tax-funded social services. The issue has triggered a
coordinated opposition by large numbers of Atheist,
Agnostic,
Humanist, Freethinker and similar groups.
American Atheists forged a
coalition of 78 such organizations to fight this bill. 5 | |
2001-JUL-18: House vote postponed: The vote was briefly
delayed because of opposition from Democrats and moderate Republicans
who are concerned about ways in which religious groups would use
federal funds. Most are concerned that the bill would allow religious
groups to proselytize and engage in discriminatory hiring practices.
As currently written, the bill exempts religious organizations from
state and local discrimination laws. Several moderate Republicans and
many Democrats refused to vote for the bill if the exemption is
retained. Several conservative Republican refuse to vote for the bill
if the exemption is removed. According to the Washington Post: "Sponsors
argue that they have included several constitutional safeguards and
are simply reaffirming a 1964 law that lets religious organizations
make hiring decisions based on their beliefs. 'This is not about
discrimination,' said Rep. Tony Hall (Ohio), the chief Democratic
sponsor of the bill. But opponents such as Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.)
argued that the 1964 law applied to churches and other entities using
private, not public, funds and that it was focused specifically on
religious officials. 'If you're hiring someone to ladle out soup or
clean up the kitchen you can't say only Catholics or people who adhere
to our views on abortion," Nadler said. "This is as egregious a
violation of church and state as I've ever seen.' " 6 | |
2001-JUL-19: House passes charitable choice bill: The "Community
Solutions Act," H.R. 7 was passed by a vote of 233 to 198. If
passed by the Senate and signed into law by the president, it would
have given religious group immunity from municipal and state civil-rights
laws. Money
could be transferred from taxpayers to churches, who then can turn
around and discriminate in hiring against those same taxpayers
on the basis of religion, race, sex, sexual orientation, or any
other criteria that they wish. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) asked: "Why
does a Jewish lunch program need to hire only Jews to serve the
soup? Why does a Baptist church need to hire only Baptists to
distribute blankets? Did the Good Samaritan ask the person in need if
he were gay, or believed in a certain religion?" | |
2001-JUL-29: Senator Lieberman plans to introduce legislation:
Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) announced during the week of JUL-22
that he will shortly introduce legislation into the Senate that would
fund faith-based programs. However, his bill will require groups who
receive funds to follow municipal and state anti-discrimination and
civil rights legislation. President Bush met with Senators Joe
Lieberman and Rick Santorum (R-PA) on JUL-28 to discuss a Senate bill.
Reuter's reported that the President "was open to changing part of
the House bill (H.R. 7) that would have allowed religious groups to
circumvent local and state laws barring discrimination in their hiring
practices." Senator Lieberman, an Orthodox Jew, and former
vice-presidential nominee commented after the meeting: "I believe
that we should take out of the Senate bill the language in the House
bill that seems to override any anti-discrimination statutes adopted
by state and local governments. I mentioned it [to President Bush] and
he expressed a total openness to consider the removal of that
provision in the Senate legislation." | |
2001-AUG-3: House bill contained $47 billion in additional
funding: Unnoticed in the recent House debate was a clause that
would give Cabinet secretaries the power to convert up to $47 billion
in funds into vouchers which participants could then use for either
secular or religion-based social services. A social service agency,
and not the government, could then decide whether to finance a
given religious institution. A Capitol Hill aide said: "They got
this one right by us. This provision went in during the mark-up
session, and they circulated copies just 24-hours before the debate on
HR 7, and we didn't see it coming." A spokesperson in the office
of Rep. C. Bobby Scott (D-WV) said that while lawmakers were
focusing on the wider issues of faith-based funding, "This
provision was totally overlooked." | |
2001-AUG-5: Texas: Head of social services agency states that
he will discriminate in employment: According to American
Atheists, the "executive director of a church-affiliate social
services agency in Tarrant County, Texas says that despite the fact
that his program receives federal money, he will discriminate in
hiring gays, Atheists or others who did not meet his Christian
standards. 'It's not appropriate to have an atheist in here,' Randy
Clinton told the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram newspaper this past week. 'There are ways to find out whether they are believers or not.' He
operates the Community Enrichment Center, started by the Richland
Hills Church of Christ." | |
2001-AUG-17: DC: Head of the Office of Faith-based and
Community Initiatives will resign: The Washington Post newspaper
and Cox News Service have reported that John DiIulio will resign. He
is a University of Pennsylvania professor, who heads President Bush's
controversial White House Office of Faith-based and Community
Initiatives. | |
2002-JAN-8: WI: Court orders end to grants to faith-based
programs: U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb issued a ruling that
the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development must end
subsidies to Faith Works. The latter is a Milwaukee religious
social outreach aimed an evangelizing recovering addicts. During the
year 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush had praised the group
as an example of why the government should fund religion-based social
programs. He said: "The intent is to help people and to recognized
that a faith-based program will help people...I am confident that we
can maintain separation of church and state." The court disagreed.
Judge Crabb stated that the program's emphasis on religion violated
the constitutional requirement of state-church separation. She found
that staff members spent about 20% of their time "addressing
questions of faith or spirituality." They had a policy that "Commitment
to Christian beliefs and values is a hiring condition for counseling
staff." Staff church attendance was "expected." One role
of the staff is to "counsel participants to develop a personal
relationship." Faith Works' Standards of Practice document states
that: ""We are a Christian faith-based treatment center. This means
all staff is to serve as Jesus served ... We are serving the Lord in
an evangelistic outreach and will respect the Holy Spirit's ability to
work in person's life whether staff or resident. We need to be mature
in our faith and work habits in order to be truly able to be witnesses
to the Lord and His Grace." Judge Crabb noted that a former
Executive Director of Faith Works stated that "the majority of
Faith Works clients are not in a practicing faith when they enter the
program but most graduates have some sort of relationship with God
when they leave ...discussion about spiritual matters occurs during
mandatory meetings..." She ruled that: "I conclude that the
Faith Works program indoctrinates its participants in religion,
primarily through its counselors. Simply because a state-funded
program engaged in indoctrination does not mean that the program's
funding is unconstitutional. To determine whether the religious
activities of Faith Works constitute governmental indoctrination, it
must be determined whether the activities are supported by
unrestricted, direct state funding..." 7,8 | |
2002-FEB: New faith-base initiative bill introduced to
Senate: Senators Lieberman (D-CT) and Santorum (R-PA) introduced
what they called their "compromise"
Charity Aid, Recovery & Empowerment (CARE) bill
containing President Bush's faith-based initiative. Although it left
out the controversial "charitable choice" provision of the
House bill, it still would have had to be reconciled with that bill.
The Rev. Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance said: "Religious
charities and ministries play a significant role in delivering
social services to the needy. Religious leaders have formed
partnerships with local government entities to develop effective
ways for communities to address social problems. Yet religious
institutions have been able to retain their unique identity while
contributing to the betterment of the community. If we end up with
charitable choice, government has ultimately become entangled with
religion and compromised the very freedoms and integrity that have
allowed religion to flourish in our nation." The bill failed to
pass. 10 | |
2002-AUG-31: Legislation bogged down; Bush administration tries
another route:Although the House passed faith based
legislation in 2001, the Senate version became bogged down. The
sticking point is whether religious groups should be able to obtain
government funding and then discriminate against potential employees
on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc.. "...the White House Office of Faith-Based and
Community Initiatives is pursuing a new agenda that does not depend on
the consent of Congress, starting with the development of proposals to
change a host of federal regulations to lower the barriers encountered
by religious groups in dealing with the federal government." The
Office is conducting seminars during the fall and winter months to
train more than 5,000 religious groups how best to disguise their
religious basis when applying for
government funds under the present legislation. They will recommend
that religious groups create separate affiliate programs with
non-religious names (like "renewal centers") in order to disguise the
nature of the funding application. James Towey who heads the Office
said: said yesterday, "If you run into an official who's an
armchair First Amendment person [and] if you're 'John's Shelter,' you
can go after the money but if you're 'St. John's Shelter,' you can't."
9 | |
2002-DEC-12: President issues
executive order implementing face-based initiative: President
Bush signed an executive order which, according to the Interfaith
Alliance, implements "key pieces of his faith-based
initiative...[It] not only usurps congressional power but lands as a
slap in the face for religious organizations who have struggled to
do good work for the needy in their community without government
manipulation. Particularly damaging is the component of today’s plan
that would allow religious employers to demonstrate discrimination
in their hiring.....To promote an ideology that allows
federal employers to discriminate in their hiring practices is to
turn back the clock on the civil rights protections on which so many
Americans rely." 11 | |
2003-APR-9: Senate passes Charity
Aid, Recovery & Empowerment Act: The Senate passed the
Charity Aid, Recovery & Empowerment Act of 2003, (S.476),
referred to as the CARE bill. It originally contained President
Bush's faith-based initiative program, but ended up stripped of its
controversial components. The Interfaith Alliance commented:
"With a 95-5 vote, the Senate passed the ....CARE...Act without two
of its key provisions - an expansion of 'charitable choice' and
'equal treatment' language, which would allow the government to
directly fund the social service programs of houses of worship
despite the fact that such entities are permitted by law to
discriminate in hiring based on religious adherence. The 'equal
treatment for non-governmental organizations' provision would have
also allowed houses of worship to conduct taxpayer-funded social
service programs in locations inundated with religious icons, texts
and sacred scripture and exempted those religious institutions from
diversity requirements applied to the board of directors of
competing secular charities. The legislation is now primarily a tax
bill that, through tax credits and other incentives, can increase
much needed charitable giving to secular and sectarian charities."
12 | |
September 2003: Housing and Urban Development frees up funds
for faith-based programs: The White House reported that: "Final
regulations were issued for HUD, which involved over $8 billion in
housing programs, and at HHS, which covered nearly $20 billion in
social service programs, a portion of which are competitive grants.
In addition to these regulations now in place, regulations proposed
by the Departments of Labor, Education, and Veterans Affairs, are
expected to be finalized within two months.
The White House statement also reported that: "President Bush also has
taken steps to protect the religious liberty and hiring rights of
faith-based Federal contractors." This apparently means that
faith-based organization can take public money raised from taxation
of people of all races, genders, sexual orientations, religions,
etc., give grants to religious organizations, and then allow those
groups to discriminate in hiring on the basis of race, gender,
sexual orientation, religion, etc.
15 | |
2003-NOV-5: Study finds faith-based
programs relatively ineffective: Much of the support for the
president's Charitable Choice initiative was based on the
assumption that faith-based organizations can deliver social
services more effectively than secular organizations. That
assumption was called into question by a study headed by Sheila
Kennedy of Indiana University- Perdue. They examined the
effectiveness of charitable-choice type programs in three states.
They determined that "faith-based job training and
placement services are somewhat less effective than those of secular
organizations" and that "congregational leaders lack the
constitutional knowledge and competence to assure constitutionally
appropriate program implementation."13
Ms Kennedy commented: "We found that states did not
monitor constitutional violations and did little to educate
contractor about constitutional compliance...We also found that
congregational leaders had little familiarity with applicable
constitutional constraints." 14 | |
2004-JAN-15: President orders faith-based funding be made
easier to obtain: The White House announced that: "At the President's direction, the Department of Justice took action to
finalize regulations that implement President Bush's policy of
ending discrimination against faith-based charities in the Federal
grants process. Today's action by DOJ applies to $3.7 billion in
Federal program funds, primarily those programs operated by the
Office of Justice Programs, including those to support victims of
crime, the prevention of child victimization, and safe schools." 15 | |
2004-JUL-26: Department of Health &
Human Services defines "charitable choice:" HHS defines "Charitable
Choice" as resting on four principles:
 |
A Level Playing Field.
Faith-based providers are eligible to compete for funds on the
same basis as any other providers, neither excluded nor included
because they are religious, too religious or of the wrong
religion. |
|
Respect for Allies. The
religious character of faith-based providers is protected by
allowing them to retain control over the definition,
development, practice, and expression of their religious
beliefs. Neither federal nor state government can require a
religious provider to alter its form of internal governance or
remove religious art, icons, scripture or other symbols in order
to be a program participant. |
|
Protecting Clients. In
regard to rendering assistance, religious organization shall not
discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion, a
religious belief, or refusal to actively participate in a
religious practice. If an individual objects to the religious
character of a program, a secular alternative must be provided. |
|
Church-State Separation.
All government funds must be used to fulfill the public social
service goals, and no direct government funding can be diverted
to inherently religious activities such as worship, sectarian
instruction, and proselytization. |
Not mentioned is a fifth principle:
|
Discrimination: Faith-based
providers can discriminate in their hiring selections on the
basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc., even
though these factors do not impact on the individual's ability
to perform the tasks assigned to them. 16 |
| |
2006-OCT: Faith-based Initiative exposed:
Congress' General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a disturbing report on
President Bush's Faith-based Initiative program. In mid-October, David
Kuo's book "Tempting Faith: An Insider Story of Political Seduction"
was published. 17 It exposes
corruption within the program. More details. |
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above
essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
-
AREN's web site is at: http://aren.org
-
The American Atheists' web site is at
http://www.atheists.org/
-
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has a web site
at: http://www.cair-net.org/
-
Dana Milbank & Thomas B. Edsall, "Faith initiative may be
revised," The Washington Post, 2001-MAR-11.
-
"As House prepares for vote on HR7 faith tax, 'The Day That Counts'
arrives," AANEWS, 2001-NOV-17
-
Juliet Eilperin, "Faith initiative hits snag in House: GPO moderates'
bias concerns postpone vote," Washington Post, at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/
-
"Freedom From Religion Foundation v. McCallum, at:
http://pacer.wiwd.uscourts.gov/bcgi-bin/ You need software to read these files. It can be obtained free from:
-
"District Court orders end to state funding of faith-based program:
Wisconsin 'Faith Works' received more than $600,000 in tax money," AANEWS,
2002-JAN-9.
-
" 'Faith-Based' Initiative to Get Push; Bush to Implement Parts of
Proposal," Washington Post, at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
-
"Lieberman-Santorum Faith-based Initiative Bill is 'Compromise',"
The Interfaith Alliance, 2002-FEB-8, at:
http://www.interfaithalliance.org/
-
"Interfaith Leader Criticizes President’s Executive Order
Promoting Government-Funded Discrimination," The Interfaith
Alliance, 2002-DEC-12, at:
http://www.interfaithalliance.org/
-
"Senate Rejects President's Controversial Faith-Based Provisions;
The Interfaith Alliance Commends Compromise Bill," The Interfaith
Alliance, 2003-APR-09, at:
http://www.interfaithalliance.org/
-
Shella Suess Kennedy et al., "Faith-based social service
provision under charitable choice: A study of implementation in three
states," Indiana University, at:
http://ccr.urbancenter.iupui.edu/
-
"Report conflicts with Bush policies on faith-based initiatives,"
Center for Urban Policy and the Environment, 2003-NOV-5, at:
http://ccr.urbancenter.iupui.edu/
-
"Fact Sheet: Progress in Helping Americans Most in Need Through
Faith-Based and Community Initiatives," The White House,
2004-JAN-15, at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/
-
"What is Charitable Choice?," Department of Health and Human
Services, 2004-JUL-26, at:
http://www.hhs.gov/fbci/choice.html
-
David Kuo, Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction, Free Press, (2006-OCT).
Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com
online book store Six reviewers on the Amazon.com web site gave this book a rating of 29 stars out of a possible maximum of 30 -- an
unusually high rating.
Copyright © 2000 to 2006 by Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance
Originally written: 2000-DEC-23
Latest update: 2006-OCT-18
Author: B.A. Robinson 
|
| |
Page Translator: