"Obama Goes After Evangelicals"

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) plans to slam President Bush’s faith-based program as “a photo op” and a failure on Tuesday, and says he would scrap the office and create a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships that would be a “critical” part of his administration.

Obama, unveiling a plan to overhaul and expand Bush’s faith-based program during remarks at a community ministry in Zanesville, Ohio, said the White House Office of Community and Faith-Based Initiatives — which Bush founded during his second week in office — “never fulfilled its promise.”

“Support for social services to the poor and the needy have been consistently underfunded,” Obama says in prepared remarks. “Rather than promoting the cause of all faith-based organizations, former officials in the Office have described how it was used to promote partisan interests. As a result, the smaller congregations and community groups that were supposed to be empowered ended up getting short-changed.”

Obama was referring to accusations by John J. DiIulio Jr., the office’s first director, and David Kuo, his former deputy, that White House support for the program was driven more by swing-state politics than by compassion for the needy.

The White House views the office as one of the cornerstone's of Bush's legacy, making Obama's vow a very personal one.

Reaching out to evangelicals who are nonplussed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Obama declared: “I still believe it’s a good idea to have a partnership between the White House and grass-roots groups, both faith-based and secular. But it has to be a real partnership — not a photo op. That’s what it will be when I’m president. I’ll establish a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.”

“The new name will reflect a new commitment,” he continued. “This Council will not just be another name on the White House organization chart — it will be a critical part of my administration.”

Anticipating criticism from the left, Obama said: “I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don’t believe this partnership will endanger that idea — so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, 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. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples and mosques can only be used on secular programs. And we’ll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work.”

The Obama campaign released plans saying his new President's Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, working within the White House, “will work to engage faith-based organizations and help them abide by the principles that federal funds cannot be used to proselytize, that they should not discriminate in providing their services, and they should be held to the same standards of accountability as other federal grant recipients.”

No one familiar with the history of the past century can doubt that private charities, particularly those maintained by persons motivated by their faith to perform charitable acts, are more effective in addressing social needs than federal programs. Therefore, the sponsors of HR 7, the Community Solutions Act, are correct to believe that expanding the role of voluntary, religious-based organizations will benefit society. However, this noble goal will not be accomplished by providing federal taxpayer funds to these organizations. Instead, federal funding will transform these organizations into adjuncts of the federal government and reduce voluntary giving on the part of the people. In so doing, HR 7 will transform the majority of private charities into carbon copies of failed federal welfare programs.

Providing federal funds to religious organizations gives the organizations an incentive to make obedience to federal bureaucrats their number-one priority. Religious entities may even change the religious character of their programs in order to please their new federal paymaster. Faith-based organizations may find federal funding diminishes their private support as people who currently voluntarily support religious organizations assume they ``gave at the (tax) office'' and will thus reduce their levels of private giving. Thus, religious organizations will become increasingly dependent on federal funds for support. Since ``he who pays the piper calls the tune'' federal bureaucrats and Congress will then control the content of ``faith-based'' programs.

We have seen how federal funding corrupts charity in our time. Since the Great Society, many organizations which once were devoted to helping the poor have instead become lobbyists for ever-expanding government, since a bigger welfare state means more power for their organizations. Furthermore, many charitable organizations have devoted resources to partisan politics as part of coalitions dedicated to expanding federal control over the American people.

Accepting federal funds will corrupt religious institutions in a fundamental manner. Religious institutions provide charity services because they are commanded to by their faith. However, when religious organizations accept federal funding promoting the faith may take a back seat to fulfilling the secular goals of politicians and bureaucrats.

Some supporters of this measure have attempted to invoke the legacy of the founding fathers in support of this legislation. Of course, the founders recognized the importance of religion in a free society, but not as an adjunct of the state. Instead, the founders hoped a religious people would resist any attempts by the state to encroach on the proper social authority of the church. The Founding Fathers would have been horrified by any proposal to put churches on the federal dole, as this threatens liberty by subordinating churches to the state.

In 2000, the promise of federally funded faith based initiatives by George W. Bush garnered great support from the evangelicals. Apparently Senator Barack Obama is counting on his expansion and reform of President Bush's faith based initiative to woo evangelicals to him and why not, if it worked for Bush it can work for Obama. The $64,000 question is, should the federal government and American taxpayers give money to churches and mosques for charitable work? In my opinion, faith based initiatives violate the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state. Congressman Ron Paul has also pointed out other social detriments of the faith based initiative but to win an election, a politician has to do what he has to do.

tags: barack obama  faith based initiatives  2008  politics  takebackamerica  bush  president  obama  us  america  separation of church and state  

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit