So here's a bit more from that Rocky Mountain News story on the faith-based initiative conference in Colorado. The following excerpt from the story refers to Jay Hein, the new director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives:
Even if Democrats gain control of Congress in November, [Jay] Hein said, the program that started in 2001 shouldn't become vulnerable. He pointed out that President Clinton signed charitable-giving provisions into law and former Vice President Al Gore is among leading Democrats who have gone out of their way to endorse the concept.
There are some important differences between the way the Clinton-Gore administration handled these issues and the way the Bush administration has done so. For example, the Clinton administration was more careful about the needed separation between privately funded religious activities and government-funded activities. And, although Al Gore did indeed endorse charitable choice as a candidate for president, we never got a chance to learn how he would have implemented it.
As for a potential Democratic Congress, one area where I would expect there to be a sharp difference relates to recent House efforts to alter longstanding non-discrimination provisions in various social service programs. The House of Representatives has passed legislation that would amend some of these provisions so as to allow religious groups to discriminate on the basis of religion when hiring and firing for state-subsidized job positions. I would expect a Democratically controlled Congress to put a halt to that effort.
It is important to note that the issue of whether religious groups should be able to discriminate on the basis of religion with respect to jobs they fund themselves is not in play --both parties agree on that. The difference is over the issue of whether religious groups should be able to discriminate on the basis of religion vis-a-vis government-funded jobs.
As I've written elsewhere, these prohibitions on discrimination on the basis of religion or creed are part of a tradition begun during the early New Deal period of implementing "a policy of equal opportunity in employment and training financed by federal funds." Presidents Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon took various actions to extend this basic policy. For example, in 1961 President Kennedy established a presidential committee on equal employment opportunity and observed: "It is the plain and positive obligation of the United States Government to promote and ensure equal opportunity for all qualified persons, without regard to race, creed, color, or national origin, employed or seeking employment with the Federal Government and on government contracts." In 1965, President Johnson signed an executive order generally requiring all government contracting agencies to include in every government contract a requirement that the contractor not discriminate against any employee on the basis of "race, color, religion, or national origin."
In 2002, however, President Bush issued an executive order that amended this 1965 order to allow religious organizations that are government contractors and subcontractors to make religion-based decisions with regard to federally funded jobs. Further, the Bush administration policy (pdf) has been to "support changes to laws that currently prevent religious organizations that participate in [government-funded] programs from taking religion into account when hiring."
In recent years, the House has carried forward this policy. For example, House has passed legislation that would amend longstanding non-discrimination protections in programs like Head Start in order to allow religious groups to place religious tests on government-funded jobs.
Again, I'd expect things to be different on this issue if Democrats do indeed take control of the House. And, make no mistake, that would be a change that both sides of this debate would consider significant.
Comments