Home » Take Action » Become a Student Activist » Case of the Month Archives » May 2001
Government-Funded Religion
Overview
The Case of the Month for May deals with the issue of government-funded religious initiatives that give tax dollars to religious-based social service programs. Shortly after he was elected, President George W. Bush unveiled a plan to allow churches, synagogues, and other religious institutions to compete for government funding of their social service programs. In February, the President established the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives to oversee the program, and named John J. DiIulio, Jr. as its first director.
Bush's plan raises questions about the separation of church and state, which is outlined in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and expressly forbids the intermingling of the two. The ACLU and other groups, including the Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the National Council of Jewish Women, believe the initiative blurs the line between church and state and creates avenues for government-funded discrimination in employment and services. (Since religious organizations are exempt from many civil rights laws, they are allowed to discriminate on the basis of their beliefs and teachings about race, religion, sexual orientation, gender and pregnancy status.)
The basic idea behind the White House Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, is to support religious groups already making a difference in their communities to do more. Unfortunately, it is not that simple. Howard Simon, Executive Director of the ACLU of Florida, explains that, while religiously-affiliated organizations make a vital contribution to social welfare, "the President's initiative is a dangerous intermingling of church and state that will allow tax dollars to be used for religious proselytizing, and allow the government to pick and choose which religious agencies will receive funding."
Currently, "faith-based" institutions do make use of federal monies, but only through separately incorporated, affiliated organizations that are accountable to the same anti-discrimination laws that govern hiring, unlike the churches or synagogues themselves. While the spin-off organizations can offer religious services along with their social programs, these cannot be required. Under the Bush plan, religious groups could compete for government funding directly without establishing separate organizations and without altering the religious core of their programming. Also problematic is the fact that this initiative would not require these organizations to hire trained and licensed counselors and therapists to provide their social services. While the spiritual guidance offered by ministers or rabbis might be useful for some recipients, it will not suffice for those who come with problems such as mental illness or drug addiction - they need professional help.
The President's plan is not entirely original. In 1996, John Ashcroft - the current Attorney General under Bush, though a Missouri senator back then - sponsored the so-called "Charitable Choice" Amendment to the welfare reform legislation that was working its way through Congress that year. For the first time, it permitted religious groups to garner federal funding for programs such as day-care, counseling, or job training. At the time, charitable choice was overshadowed by the issues surrounding the welfare package, though a number of states did pay attention and even began to implement similar legislation at the state level, Bush as governor of Texas among them. Now, as he expands the charitable choice idea with The White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, its constitutional dangers are coming to light.
