Return to Table of Contents

Faith-Based Initiative: Alive and Thriving

By Stanley Carlson-Thies

If you believe the media, you are sure that President George W. Bush’s initiative to expand federal support for faith-based and community programs that serve their neighbors is all but dead and buried. After all, Congress hasn’t adopted any faith-based bills yet, and the one bill still in play — the care Act, now waiting a House vote —only passed the Senate after faith-friendly language was first stripped out. So, no big new law giving money to churches and thus no faith-based initiative. That’s the story. But it’s wrong.

The truth is that the federal government, and many state and local governments, have had a change of heart over the past few years and are actively redesigning their programs and rules to become hospitable to faith-based organizations and to grassroots groups. These governments weren’t always hostile in the past; often they’ve worked with organizations like Lutheran Services of America, Jewish Federations, the Salvation Army, and Catholic Charities. Yet there’s been doubt about whether these relationships are legitimate and often put pressure on the groups to downplay their faith. What is new is greater respect for the faith of faith-based programs, clearer standards so religious groups don’t have to hide their commitments, and an active effort to recruit previously neglected groups.

Removing The Obstacles

All this is part of the President’s campaign to rally the armies of compassion. As he often emphasizes, government services have their place, and private groups like the Salvation Army and the Red Cross provide indispensable help. Yet much of the assistance that families and communities in distress count on is given by neighborhood healers — small programs, often faith-based. The faith-based initiative works to include such neglected groups in local assistance networks and to expand support for them.

Much of that expanded support should come from the private sector, not government. That’s why the President strongly backs the care Act, which would allow federal taxpayers who don’t itemize to take a tax deduction for their contributions to charities, and which includes tax changes to stimulate greater giving by businesses.

And some of the new support could come from government agencies. These agencies almost never deliver services like welfare-to-work training, drug treatment programs, after-school tutoring, and housing rehabilitation themselves. Instead, they pay private organizations to help their neighbors and neighborhoods. The question is which kinds of groups are permitted to get government funds to support their good works, and what kinds of strings are attached to the money. The faith-based initiative is removing the obstacles that have made it hard or sometimes impossible for groups with a strong religious character to win government funds to provide social services.

As you can imagine, many antireligious organizations have been up in arms about such changes. They claim the administration is bulldozing the wall of separation between church and state. Some Christian leaders have been worried, too, fearing that Christian ministries will become dependent on the government’s shekels and be unable to escape the government’s shackles.

As Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based & Community Initiatives, points out, the President isn’t attacking the Constitution at all. He’s only knocking down the wall that separates the poor from effective programs. The faith-based initiative simply tells government officials to make sure they give grants and contracts to the best programs, whether faith-based or secular. They have to stop discriminating against effective groups that name God in their mission statement or that offer voluntary prayer or Bible studies along with job training or budget help.

And, while Christian leaders must always be vigilant, Towey notes that the President has never suggested that ministries ought to grab federal dollars. Whether or not to seek government support is a decision for each ministry to make. What’s wrong, and unconstitutional, is for government officials unilaterally to exclude faith-based programs as being "too religious" to do any earthly good. These days, in thinking about the possibility of government support, Christian leaders should note that officials aren’t just putting out a welcome mat but are actually getting rid of rules and regulations that were biased against faith.

Capitol Hill has been tied in knots about the faith-based initiative. Opponents have spouted outlandish charges along with some legitimate concerns. Many supporters have been stalwart, but some haven’t been so well prepared to defend a policy of fair treatment for all. It’s as if, in order to keep religious groups we don’t like from gaining support, we’d rather have the federal government spend all of its money on services that are secular and even antireligious. Shouldn’t we instead redouble our efforts to develop programs that do so much good that they will win the competition for funds? And shouldn’t we thank God each time some group, whatever their mistaken beliefs, actually serves their neighbors in a genuinely helpful way?

Despite the logjam in Congress, the faith-based initiative has been making important progress. For one thing, Congress during the Clinton years adopted the faith-friendly language called Charitable Choice four separate times. When state and local officials spend federal funds to buy welfare services, drug treatment help, and some other services, they are supposed to be using new, faith-friendly rules. Slowly they have been changing their practices. According to research by Amy Sherman, in a sample of seven states spread across the nation, just between the years 2000 and 2002, the number of government contracts with faith-based social services jumped from 54 to 485, and the value of the contracts grew from $7.5 million to more than $88 million.

Since his inauguration, President Bush has been pressing federal officials to change their own overly restrictive ways. That is why he created Centers for Faith-Based & Community Initiatives in seven major federal agencies, giving faith groups and small community programs an advocate right inside the federal bureaucracies. These Centers and the White House faith-based office have held information and training conferences around the country, drawing as many as 1,500 community and faith leaders at a time.

And because it is the President’s responsibility to use the taxpayers’ money wisely and to make sure federal programs are as effective as they can be, he has directed the heads of federal agencies to take a close look at whether they wrongly exclude faith-based and community groups. Agencies now get graded on whether they are eliminating obstacles to faith and community groups, and not just on how well they use computers or how efficiently they purchase supplies. In December 2002, in an executive order, the President told federal officials (and state and local officials who use federal funds) that they must follow new rules that honor the religious character of faith-based groups and the religious liberty of people who seek help.

The President recently took another courageous step, issuing a clear statement defending the freedom of religious groups to take faith into account when they hire and fire employees (the White House Office of Faith-Based & Community Initiatives, "Protecting the Civil Rights and Religious Liberty of Faith-Based Organizations"). The loudest and most effective criticism of the faith-based initiative has been the bogus charge that it amounts to nothing more than government-funded job discrimination, overturning precious civil rights gains. But as the new statement points out, the basic federal civil rights law itself authorizes religious groups to consider the faith of prospective employees (discrimination on the grounds of race or national origin and the like is forbidden). The problem is that some federal programs have required religious groups to forfeit this freedom in return for government money. The President is determined to protect and extend the precious and essential religious staffing freedom. It’s the critics who want to upend civil rights law, making it always illegal for faith-based groups to maintain their employment standards if they accept federal support for their good works.

The Faith-Based Initiative And You

Is the faith-based initiative a good idea, or is the government tempting ministries into a bad deal by making it easier for them to compete for grants? Here’s a matter for fervent prayer, careful planning, and learning from experienced groups. Unwary organizations can get into trouble. But prepared ministries usually find the structure and discipline required to be an effective competitor for government money — and the money itself — to be welcome supports for their outreach to hurting families.

When Amy Sherman and a colleague recently asked nearly 400 leaders of faith-based service groups what their experience of government funding was, the results might surprise you. Many of these groups were very new to government money; some of them were churches; many of them operated small programs. Yet, 89 percent said that taking the government dollars did not threaten the faith basis of their organization; more than two-thirds said the required paperwork wasn’t much of a burden; 90 percent didn’t anticipate any drop in private donations due to receiving government money. And a full 92 percent of these faith leaders had such a positive experience that they expected to apply for more government money in the future.

Of course, ministry leaders must be vigilant, but not timid. When government officials change overly restrictive policies and ask faith-based organizations to become partners in fighting social ills, shouldn’t we thank God that a new door to expanded service has opened? And if, after prayerful and careful consideration, a church or a ministry decides not to walk through that door, shouldn’t we at least regard it as a reminder from God to examine ourselves to see if we really are loving our neighbors as ourselves, as Jesus commanded (Mark 12:28–34)?

Stanley Carlson-Thies, Ph.D., currently serves as director of the Civitas Program in Faith and Public Affairs, a Pew Charitable Trusts-funded program for Ph.D. students, operated jointly by The Center for Public Justice, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Brookings Institution, Washington D.C.