Recent rhetoric on faith-based plan goes beyond law

Hollman Report
By K. Hollyn Hollman

February 2004

The last few months have brought two major developments in the evolving story of President George W. Bush's faith-based initiatives. First, there have been increasingly specific announcements about billions of dollars going to faith-based providers of social services. Second, the president has made a renewed pitch to the public for support. In doing so, Bush has spoken in sweeping terms, describing the initiatives in ways that are in considerable tension with existing law — and even with the modest regulatory standards of his administration.

When the Bush plan failed to gain support in Congress, the administration issued a series of executive orders to implement its goals without legislation. The primary executive orders changing the rules for government funding of religious institutions were issued in December 2002. Since then many agencies have revised their regulations to clear the way for funding religious entities to the full extent of the so-called "equal treatment" order.

In the wake of these changes, the administration has announced billions of dollars in grants and contracts to religious organizations. These statements raise a number of red flags.

Bush's stated policy is merely to allow faith-based organizations to compete with secular organizations, but some announcements seem to indicate that the goal is to transfer funding from secular to faith-based recipients.

Religious liberty groups that worked to defeat the proposals in Congress now must spend tremendous time and effort trying to track the money. It is a cumbersome and difficult process. But with major changes in the relationship between the government and religious entities under way, don't citizens deserve to know who is getting their tax dollars and how they are using them?

Perhaps the money has been distributed to groups that take extreme care to avoid funding their religious activities with tax dollars. Perhaps it is a mixed bag. At this point it is still unclear where the money is going, but there are ample reasons to be concerned — including recent statements of the president himself.

In the past month, President Bush has made two high-profile speeches stressing his resolve to pursue the initiatives aggressively. In the State of the Union Address, Bush repeated the controversial claim that religious groups face unjust discrimination and suggested that he would continue to seek legislation to make his regulatory changes permanent. A few days earlier, the president made more extensive remarks at a predominantly African-American church in New Orleans. A full transcript of the speech is available on the White House website. This time, Bush not only ignored the civil rights and constitutional concerns that derailed the legislation on the Hill, he also seemed to encourage activity that is impermissible even under his administration's lax guidelines.

Bush began by praising faith-based organizations for addressing some of society's most difficult problems, noting that what seems impossible can be solved through salvation. He then invited greater participation of religious groups in government contracts, urging them to access billions of federal dollars and asserting that those who seek federal funds won't have to change their mission.

Of course, even the new regulations adopted in conformity with the executive orders prohibit the use of government funds to support "inherently religious" activities, such as worship, religious instruction and proselytization. Yet Bush never mentioned that thin remaining veil between church and state. Instead the president stated, "Faith-based programs are only effective because they do practice faith. It's important for our government to understand that. ...[F]aith-based programs only conform to one set of rules, and it's bigger than government rules. The inspiration is not from bureaucracy, and that's what's important for government policymakers to understand." He approvingly cited a story about a faith-based organization getting government money with "no strings attached." For those who argue that the initiative crosses the legal line, he seemed to be saying "bring on the litigation."

Worse, Bush dismissed constitutional concerns as a Washington debate and suggested that his critics fear faith. "The freedom of religion is a vital part of our country. But on the other hand, when people are able to deliver results, ... we're willing to fund programs that are capable of delivering results. We want to fund programs that save Americans, one soul at a time."

While the speech may be dismissed as political posturing in an election year, it was significant because Bush was also describing a policy that is still widely misunderstood. As others have noted, the administration's regulations leave much to be desired in terms of preventing government sponsorship of and interference in religion. Alarmingly, its rhetoric is even worse.