In less than 100 days, Obama has made good on a few of his
promises. One of them is to expand President Bush’s faith-based
initiatives office. Unfortunately, Obama’s latest attempt
to reach out to religious groups might may not work out so well
either — for them or him.
A few weeks ago, Obama expanded the White House Faith-Based
Initiatives Office — now the White House Office of Faith-Based
and Neighborhood Partnerships — by appointing a new Executive
Director and announcing their new direction with characteristic
sincerity and conviction at the annual National
Prayer Breakfast. “This work is important, because whether
it’s a secular group advising families facing foreclosure or
faith-based groups providing job-training to those who need work,
few are closer to what’s happening on our streets and in our
neighborhoods than these organizations.”
Immediately, some religious leaders and organizations applauded
these efforts. In an article on Christianity
Today’s
website, the authors said they saw “five encouraging signs”
about Obama’s revamped faith-based office and had only one major
concern. They liked the new director — a 26-year-old
Pentecostal minister with a master’s degree in public policy from
Princeton and thought Obama’s repeated use of the word
‘partnership’ was promising. The authors were pleased that Obama
shared many of the concerns of evangelicals like promoting
fatherhood initiatives, reducing poverty and making abortions
rare and raved that Obama’s new advisory council which includes
members like Jim Wallis and Pastor Joel Hunter was a “sign of
hope.”
Jim Wallis, long-time leader of the religious left and Sojourners
blogged about his excitement in being a part of the new group on
Huffington Post and leaders like Eboo Patel, founder and
executive director of the Interfaith Youth Core — and the only
Muslim on the advisory council — told NPR he also
enthusiastically backs Obama’s new initiative.
Still, before religious groups yell “Amen!” too loudly, there
appear to be some obvious and subtle hang-ups. First the subtle:
Democrats only provided
half of the $100 million funding the House version did
to faith-based organizations through the Compassion Capital Fund.
This is while Obama was supposedly “expanding” Bush’s faith-based
program. Though it may not be any consolation to religious
groups, that’s about what the Fund received
in fiscal year of 2008 under President Bush.
In a July speech last year, Obama said he would expand Bush’s
program by allocating $500 million per year for summer learning
camps. While some have said Obama’s new office is
better-funded, that funding wasn’t allocated under the stimulus
plan. It’s not clear how much more money funds the new office now
or when it will receive more funding and how much.
Now for the obvious: When Obama announced his new office, some
faith-based groups were quick to point out the hiring loophole
Obama left wide open. During the campaign, Obama explained
the difference between his faith-based initiatives office and
President Bush’s. “If you get a federal grant, you can’t use that
grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t
discriminate against them — or against the people you hire — on
the basis of their religion. However, when Obama opened his new
office, he did not confirm this remained his position
Liberal and religious groups took note. In a statement to Obama,
leaders of the Anti-Defamation League
said: “We are deeply troubled by the prospect that
taxpayer money will likely fund religious discrimination in
employment decisions involving the people who deliver faith-based
social services.”
Likewise, in the Christianity Today article referenced
above, the authors noted their one major concern about Obama’s
new approach to the office was the same. “[H]ow many ministries
will want to tell federal investigators that they engage in
“religious job discrimination,” if this is how the issue is
framed?…It is troubling that both of the “church-state experts”
the President appointed to the investigating council are
opponents of religious staffing by faith-based groups that
receive federal funds.”
What’s troubling is not as much that Obama may not let religious
groups receive federal funds and hire whomever they
please, but that churches think this arrangement is possible.
Even Obama admitted when he started his new office: “The
goal…will not be to favor one religious group over another — or
even religious groups over secular groups…. It will simply be
to work on behalf of those organizations that want to work on
behalf of our communities, and to do so without blurring the line
that our founders wisely drew between church and state.”
This crack in frame of the newly expanded faith-based office may
force faith-based groups to reconsider their role in the Obama
administration. Many argue there is little proof of the success
of federally subisized faith-based initiatives as a whole — for
example, after Hurricane Katrina, a White House report
applauded faith-based organizations for their response to
those who needed aid, but their success was “in spite of, not
because of, the government.”
Obama’s hiring gap may push the groups that receive these funds
to perform their religious calling to the fullest with whomever
they want to hire, no strings — or federal money — attached.
Especially since most religious organizations do not intend to
just meet the physical needs of the poor, the needy, the
fatherless, the homeless and feel compelled to try and meet their
spiritual needs too. This is usually done with staff who embrace
the same religious conviction as the organization.
In a recent CNN
piece, attorney David
Dietman explained what this could mean to churches. “If
adopted, ‘faith-based’ initiatives will open the door to the
federally mandated destruction of one of the few areas of civil
society that works, namely, the private religious and charitable
arena.”
Religious groups should not be upset by the guidelines Obama set.
Instead they should think twice about accepting federal funds.
Maybe this year, faith-based groups will have to operate more on
faith than finances, to the betterment of everyone who receives
their aid.
