The New York Times had a report today noting that the Bush campaign has gone out of its way to reach out to African-American pastors for political support. The Times suggested that it’s had some effect.
[The Rev. Walter Humphrey, pastor of two mostly black churches in Akron, Ohio, and Oakland, Calif.,] and about 20 other black pastors held a news conference in Oakland in August to endorse Mr. Bush. Later this month, he and others said, the campaign has arranged a meeting in Toledo, Ohio, of more than 150 black clergy members who support his re-election.
In a departure from typical Republican presidential campaigns, the Bush campaign is making a serious push for the allegiance of African-American clergy, while the Democrats are fighting back to motivate them to get their parishioners to the polls.
In a way, this is a little silly. Kerry’s support in the African-American community is rock solid. The NYT even noted that a recent survey showed “93 percent of blacks believed the president was not legitimately elected in 2000.” For every African-American pastor who endorses Bush, Kerry enjoys the support of at least 10. The reason the Times article ran is probably because it seemed odd to find any black clergy supporting Bush at all.
But the Times article didn’t note another, more interesting angle: some of the pastors’ motivations are at least somewhat suspect. Consider, for example, the Rev. Herbert Lusk.
A handful of prominent African-American ministers who supported Mr. Bush in the last election, like the Rev. Herbert Lusk II of Philadelphia, have pushed to make his case to their fellow pastors…. In June [Bishop Ernest Morris] was invited to his friend Mr. Lusk’s Philadelphia church for a visit from Mr. Bush.
“He is on a first-name basis with the president,” Mr. Morris said in an interview at his church after a recent service.
It’s worth noting, however, that before Rev. Lusk was on a first-name basis with the president, he has benefiting from a whole lot of money from the Bush administration.
During the Republican Party’s 2000 national convention, the Rev. Herbert H. Lusk II, heartily endorsed Bush for president in a satellite television uplink from his church. Since that time, Lusk has repeatedly advocated for Bush’s “faith-based” initiative that seeks to fund church-run social service programs.
[On June 23, 2004], as the president was preparing to speak at Lusk’s Greater Exodus Baptist Church on combating AIDS at home and abroad, the Associated Press reported that the church’s charitable operation, People For People, has been awarded a nearly $1-million “faith-based” grant. The article also noted that Lusk hopes President Bush’s “faith-based” agenda will help garner more black votes for the president’s re-election bid. Lusk told the AP that Bush “is worthy of the African-American vote.”
That’s the kind of detail that readers of the NYT article probably should know about. At a minimum, it suggests the White House is more than willing to use federal funds to reward clergy for their political support, which raises ethical and legal problems for the administration.
It’s one thing for Bush to impress individual pastors and earn their personal support; it’s another when clergy rally to help Bush after getting lucrative deals through the White House’s “faith-based” initiative.