Bush Gives Government Role to Faith Groups

President Bush on Monday created an office in the White House that would enable religious organizations to receive government funds to provide services to the poor and downtrodden.

Bush--calling the proposal among the “most important initiatives” of his new administration--plans to send to Capitol Hill today a legislative proposal that would increase funding for such services. Among other things, it would permit an estimated 80 million Americans--70% of all taxpayers--to deduct their charitable donations. These taxpayers do not claim the deduction now because they do not itemize deductions.

Some critics warned that the new policy would violate the doctrine of separation of church and state, but Bush brushed aside those concerns, saying: “As long as there are secular alternatives, faith-based charities should be able to compete for funding on an equal basis.”

Bush set up the new White House office for faith-based service to “clear away” bureaucratic obstacles between the independent sector and the five major federal agencies that are heavily involved in social services--Justice, Labor, Education, Housing and Urban Development, and Health and Human Services.

The White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives will be headed by professor John J. DiIulio Jr., a University of Pennsylvania social scientist who has written extensively on criminal justice. He will report directly to Bush.

In addition to DiIulio, the president also named former Indianapolis Mayor Steve Goldsmith, one of his campaign advisors, to the board of the Corporation for National Service, the parent agency for such community service organizations as AmeriCorps and Senior Corps. Bush said Goldsmith will continue to advise him on efforts to promote social service programs at the community level.

Among the many faith-based organizations that welcomed Bush’s initiative was Call to Renewal, a national network of Christian organizations that fights poverty. “The real issue here is not a church-state controversy,” said the Rev. Jim Wallis, head of the coalition.

“The real issue is developing the political will to overcome poverty and to rebuild shattered lives and neighborhoods. Creating partnerships that respect the pluralism of America and that honor the 1st Amendment does not mean separating faith from public life.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations also hailed Bush’s move.

“President Bush’s action will only help American Muslims, and other faith communities, better serve those in need,” said Nihad Awad, the council’s executive director.

Critics said they worried that the initiative would change the nature of charities--and that it would permit them to discriminate by hiring members of their own faith to distribute the services.

Under the initiative, said Rep. Robert C. Scott (D-Va.), a member of the Black Congressional Caucus, “a person can be told, ‘We don’t hire your kind,’ or ‘Certain religious beliefs need not apply.’ I don’t think a sponsor of a federally funded program should be able to discriminate based on religion for a federally funded job. You haven’t been able to do that since the civil rights acts of the 1960s.”

But most lawmakers on Capitol Hill applauded Bush’s proposal to involve churches, synagogues and mosques in delivering government services, saying that they wanted to reserve judgment until they see details of his plan. Republicans had the warmest words, while Democrats were more cautious.

“Community and faith-based organizations play a critical role in helping and providing services in our nation’s poorest communities,” said House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), who sponsored a community renewal bill last year to help poor neighborhoods and worked closely with President Clinton on the legislation. One provision of the bill allowed faith-based organizations to provide government-funded substance abuse services.

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), an Orthodox Jew, also praised the idea, although he made clear that it raises concerns about separation of church and state.

“Sen. Lieberman believes we can’t shut out or ignore any group or individual who can make a contribution in fixing holes in our social fabric,” said Dan Gerstein, a spokesman. “As a man of faith himself, he’s very interested in the idea of harnessing that force at the same time he’s sensitive to the concerns people have about the 1st Amendment.”

Bush told reporters that, having implemented similar faith-based initiatives as governor of Texas, he is familiar with warnings that the approach would erode the church-state doctrine. But, he said, such warnings are unfounded.

“I am convinced that our plan is constitutional, because . . . we will not fund a church or synagogue or a mosque, or any religion, but instead we’ll be funding programs that affect people in a positive way,” Bush said. “It is one of the great goals of my administration to invigorate the spirit of involvement and citizenship,” the president added during a morning ceremony in which he signed the executive order creating the new office.

Bush touted his plan to help faith-based organizations with charitable work during the recent presidential campaign. He has never said that the plan would solve all social ills but has said that he strongly believes such groups have a significant role to play. Eligibility requirements to qualify for federal funds have yet to be spelled out.

DiIulio, who will head the office, teaches politics, religion and civil society. He holds two master’s degrees, from the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University, and a PhD from Harvard. He has directed a faith-based program for youths and young adults that emphasizes literacy, jobs and avoiding violence. He also has written, edited or coauthored a dozen books on public policy, including one on the role of faith-based organizations.

At least one critic expressed concern that the initiative risks destroying the very purpose of charity.

“Government standards and excessive regulation intended to ensure accountability and quality care inevitably come attached to government grants and contracts,” said Michael Tanner, director of health and welfare studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, a Washington think tank.