When considering the flaws in Bush’s so-called “faith-based” initiative, it’s hard to know where to start. There’s the obvious inconsistency with the First Amendment, plus the fact that it would lead to federally-funded employment discrimination, plus the very real possibility that religion could be forced on those who receive benefits, plus the inevitable government regulation of religious ministries.
Unfortunately, Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, reminded us of yet another problem with Bush’s scheme in a recent online “Ask the White House” Q&A (brought to my attention by my friends at Americans United).
During the online chat, someone asked Towey, “Do you feel that Pagan faith based groups should be given the same considerations as any other group that seeks aid?”
It’s a fairly common concern. People sometimes like the idea of the government giving financial support to religious groups, because they picture the money going to ministries they like and agree with. It’s a different story when they begin to understand their tax dollars may go to faith traditions they find offensive.
Towey’s answer shows just how common this problem is.
“I haven’t run into a pagan faith-based group yet, much less a pagan group that cares for the poor!” Towey said. “Once you make it clear to any applicant that public money must go to public purposes and can’t be used to promote ideology, the fringe groups lose interest. Helping the poor is tough work and only those with loving hearts seem drawn to it.”
For three years, the Bush administration has claimed that the “faith-based” initiative was simply about creating an “even playing field” for religious ministries to compete with secular social service providers. Towey’s response demonstrates that the White House is more interested in funding the “right” religions than creating an even playing field.
After all, who is Towey to make judgments about which religions are “fringe”? How, exactly, will the White House work with Republicans on the Hill to write the law allowing only certain religions — the ones the GOP determines to have “loving hearts” — to receive funding from the government?
In fact, Towey’s offensive answer highlights an ongoing problem for Bush’s scheme.
Early on, before Bush was even inaugurated, the “faith-based” initiative was pitched as one that would treat all faith traditions equally. In a 1999 speech in Indianapolis, Bush said, “We will keep a commitment to pluralism [and] not discriminate for or against Methodist or Mormons or Muslims or good people with no faith at all.”
This ecumenical commitment to diversity soon disappeared. In March 2000, Bush was asked if tax dollars would be distributed to the Nation of Islam to provide publicly financed services through the “faith-based” initiative.
“I don’t see how we can allow public dollars to fund programs where spite and hate is the core of the message,” Bush said. “Louis Farrakhan preaches hate.”
This is similar in substance to Towey’s response to the online chat and is burdened by the same flaw. How will the federal government decide which religions “preach hate” and which having “loving hearts”? Seems to me this is exactly the kind of decision the First Amendment wanted to take away from the government.
Moreover, Stephen Goldsmith, the former Indianapolis mayor brought on by Bush to help implement his “faith-based” program, appeared on Face the Nation in 2001, shortly after Bush’s plan was unveiled, to tout the initiative.
During his appearance, Goldsmith was asked about funding the Nation of Islam. He replied, “I would say that you can’t discriminate on the basis of religion, but you can discriminate on the basis of the purposes of the organization. If the organization preaches hate or violence, it wouldn’t comply with the terms of the agreement.”
Recognizing a serious flaw in the plan, Bob Schieffer asked, “Who decides if they’re preaching hate or if they’re preaching love?” Goldsmith responded, “These are not easy questions. And they’re tough issues.”
Of course they’re not easy questions. Unfortunately, the White House is giving the wrong answers.
To hear Bush administration officials tell it, eventually we’ll find a list, prepared by the White House, of officially approved religious groups. Bush can write down the ones he likes, note the ones he doesn’t like, and his administration will distribute our tax dollars accordingly.
The White House is effectively admitting that it’s prepared to play favorites among America’s religions. For a scheme burdened by political and constitutional flaws, the administration’s position of discriminating against certain faith traditions may be the most offensive problem of all.