Lynda

Dumbya owes big time for the support he received during his campaign from
religious organizations. He and Read My Lips have a long history of
backroom deal making (spell that money laundering) with the Catholic Church
via D'Onofrio. It would appear that it is no payback time.

This is no different than the way he kissed up to women during the campaign
to get their votes with statements and evasions about abortion issues.

Heaven help those that don't belong to an "approved" religious group if he
manages to get this through Congress!

Lynda
If Ignorance Is Bliss Why Aren't More People Happy?

** AU REPORT ON 'FAITH-BASED' INITIATIVES
** The Dallas Morning News article on faith-based initiatives
** Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service article on faith-based initiatives
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 26, 2001
Americans United for Separation of Church and State

PRESIDENT BUSH AND 'FAITH-BASED' INITIATIVES
AU Report And Answers To Frequently Asked Questions

President George W. Bush has announced that the week of January 29, the
second full week of his presidency, will be devoted to building support for
"faith-based" government initiatives. As part of his approach, Bush
reportedly will be unveiling a new federal office of "faith-based action,"
along with the details of his administration's plans to fund religious
groups to provide social services.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has prepared this
document to provide background information on Bush's position on the issue,
his record in Texas and a preview of what will likely be discussed based on
the president's materials and speeches made available during the
presidential campaign.

"Bush intends to throw the massive weight of the federal government behind
religious groups and religious conversions," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn,
executive director of Americans United. The president appears to believe
that the government should use religion to solve all of the nation's social
problems. This approach strikes at the heart of the religious freedoms
guaranteed by the First Amendment."

Bush's Support For 'Charitable Choice'

During the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush was often vague about specific
positions on public policy. On faith-based initiatives (or "charitable
choice," as it is often called), Bush never vacillated in his enthusiastic
support.

Charitable choice originated with former-Sen. John Ashcroft (R-Mo.) during
the drafting of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. The concept altered existing
law to permit taxpayer-financed social service funding of houses of worship
in a few welfare programs.

This legislative approach represented a radical change. In the past,
government would contract with religious groups to provide services, but
safeguards were kept in place to protect the integrity of the groups and the
interests of taxpayers. Religious institutions would have to create separate
secular entities to deal with public funds. Charitable choice removed those
safeguards, allowing groups to evangelize while providing publicly financed
services. It also permits groups to discriminate in hiring on religious
grounds, despite financial support for the government.

Bush quickly became a fervent advocate of the policy, and as Texas'
governor, was among the nation's first chief executives to implement
charitable choice at the state level. Shortly after charitable choice became
law in Washington, D.C., Bush created a 16-member Governor's Advisory Task
Force on Faith-Based Community Service Groups, which issued a report calling
for a church-state partnership in the Lone Star State. Bush subsequently
issued an executive order directing state agencies to work with houses of
worship to provide social services while allowing them to maintain their
"unique ecclesiastical nature."

Expanding Existing Programs As President

As president, Bush intends to expand the charitable choice approach to
unprecedented levels, applying the principle to virtually all aspects of
government aid. (For specifics, see Bush's campaign website at
http://www.georgewbush.com/issues/armiescompassion.html

"In every instance when my administration sees a responsibility to help
people, we will look first to faith-based institutions, to charities and to
community groups that have shown their ability to save and change lives,"
Bush said on July 22, 1999, at a rally in Indianapolis.

According to news media reports, Bush proposes spending $8 billion during
his first year in office on tax incentives for charitable donations and in
direct support to charities and religious groups. (That figure may
ultimately be even higher. On Sept. 21, 2000, Bush wrote in USA Today that
he would allocate $80 billion over 10 years in tax incentives to help
churches provide services.) Bush has expressed concern that existing federal
funding mechanisms may not be efficient enough in distributing tax dollars
to religious ministries so he has promised a new government agency to make
things easier.

Bush has explained that the new agency, once in place, will remove barriers
that prevent additional funding of religious groups, coordinate federal
funding from multiple government agencies and encourage states to establish
their own faith-based offices to facilitate state funds going to religious
groups.

It is his position on this issue that serves as the single most serious
threat to church-state separation.

"Bush is proposing an unprecedented program of government funding of
religion, involving literally billions in taxpayer dollars," said Americans
United's Lynn. "His plan for social services would essentially merge church
and state into a single bureaucracy that would dispense religion alongside
government aid."

The Effect Of Bush's Changes

The practical effects of Bush's proposals would be sweeping and dramatic.
Under his plan, Bush would distribute federal tax dollars to religious
groups to provide a plethora of social services now being provided by
government agencies or secular groups. He wants religious groups to provide
services in areas including after-school programs for children, job
training, drug treatment, prison rehabilitation programs and abstinence
programs.

In other words, Bush intends to use tax dollars, houses of worship and his
office of faith-based action to create church-state "partnerships" at an
unparalleled level. In the process, the president literally hopes to change
the lives of millions of Americans. As Bush wrote in the foreword to Marvin
Olasky's Compassionate Conservatism, a 2000 book about expanding charitable
choice, "Government can do certain things very well, but it cannot put hope
in our hearts or a sense of purpose in our lives. That requires churches and
synagogues and mosques and charities."

Church-state experts describe the new faith-based government agency as part
of a misguided and dangerous approach to public policy. "The Constitution
requires a separation between religion and government, not a government
agency designed to unite the two," said AU's Lynn. "The very existence of a
federal office whose sole purpose is to give tax dollars to religious groups
is in irreparable conflict with the First Amendment."

Americans United Responds To Frequently Asked Questions

* How will the needy people who receive assistance from the religious groups
be affected by Bush's approach?

The religious freedom of beneficiaries would be threatened. Those in need
could be subjected to religious indoctrination when they are sent to a
religious organization to obtain their government benefits. Religious
organizations are able to combine the government services with various forms
of religious indoctrination, such as religious teaching or the excessive
display of religious icons or symbols.

All of this amounts to a serious violation of religious liberty. Imagine the
discomfort of a Roman Catholic family referred to Louis Farrakhan's Nation
of Islam for help, or a Hindu directed to a Mormon temple to get assistance.

In many communities, Bush's policies will put the poor in an impossible
position. They will either submit to religious coercion or go without food,
shelter or other needed services to which they are legally entitled. Placing
people in need in this kind of position is wrong. In theory, charitable
choice is supposed to offer secular alternatives, but as a practical matter,
those alternatives are not always available to those in need.

* Will Bush's policy lead to federally funded employment discrimination?

Absolutely. When religious groups receive tax dollars through charitable
choice, they are free to discriminate on religious grounds in hiring.
Allowing religious groups to take tax aid and still discriminate will be a
central part of the plan implemented by Bush's new government agency. A
religious group will be able to receive public tax dollars to pay for a job,
but still be free to hang up a sign that says "Jews And Catholics Need Not
Apply."

Just imagine: your money pays for a job that you can't have because of your
religious beliefs. That's not compassionate conservatism; that's outrageous.

Under Bush's plan, it will be perfectly legal. Taxpayer money should never
be used to subsidize any type of discrimination.

* Isn't Bush concerned about the faith-based initiative conflicting with the
First Amendment?

Bush is apparently aware of the constitutional difficulties surrounding
expansive public funding of ministries to provide government services, yet
he seems to have little use for church-state separation.

For example, in a July campaign speech, Bush brushed aside legal
difficulties. "I'm told by the legal experts that my initiative will pass
constitutional muster," Bush said. "We will send money to fund services. But
the money does not go to fund the religious programs within the
institution."

This is a distinction without a difference. In most cases, the services
being provided are explicitly religious. Thus, there is no way to fund
religious programs without also funding religion.

* If Bush believes religion is the key to changing lives, why doesn't he
admit he wants to fund religious services?

It's a half-hearted attempt to make this effort seem legal. But just as
importantly, it exposes a serious flaw in Bush's approach to this policy.

On the one hand, the president openly acknowledges that public funds cannot
go to finance religion. On the other hand, Bush believes adamantly that it
is religion that has the power to "change lives," which is why he thinks
religious ministries deserve government support. Complicating matters, Bush
believes the groups should get public funds without strings. In a December
1996 speech in San Antonio, Bush said Christian ministers will provide
public services with tax dollars "on their terms, not ours."

This creates a paradox. Bush cannot change people's lives by funding
religious ministries and maintain the façade that tax dollars aren't
financing religion. If Bush intends to change lives by funding religion,
he's violating the Constitution in the process. Unfortunately for his
administration, Bush can't have it both ways.

* Will all religious groups be eligible for funding under Bush's plan?

Apparently not. Initially, Bush said all groups would be able to receive
government funds. In his 1999 speech in Indianapolis, Bush insisted that
services provided by ministries be "non-sectarian" and 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."

However, in the spring of 2000, Bush was asked if tax dollars would be
distributed to the Nation of Islam to provide publicly financed services. "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 on March 2. "Louis Farrakhan
preaches hate."

These comments suggest that there are problems with the policy to which Bush
has not prepared solutions. Legal experts already question whether public
funding of multiple religious groups is legal, but Bush would run into an
immediate constitutional quagmire if he selects some faith traditions for
public support, while excluding others.

* How will the religious institutions be affected by Bush's efforts?

Bush's plan threatens the independence of the religious institutions. The
government regulates activities that it subsidizes, since it is obliged to
make certain that taxpayer funds are properly spent. Once churches, temples,
mosques and synagogues are being financed by the public, some of their
freedom will be placed in jeopardy by the almost certain regulation to
follow.

Furthermore, many houses of worship already do a fine job operating soup
kitchens and homeless shelters with voluntary contributions. Many houses of
worship believe that they are called by their religious faith to provide
these services. Participation in these programs and the tendency of people
in the pews to "dig a little deeper" to help fund them may draw congregants
more fully into the lives of their churches. Inevitably these contributions
from church members will diminish if religious institutions start receiving
public dollars to provide services. In the long run, charitable choice will
make religious institutions dependent on the government for money and lessen
church vitality.

* * * * *
"There's nothing compassionate about Bush's legally dubious scheme,"
concluded AU's Lynn. "Contributions to religious groups must come from
supporters voluntarily, not be forced by the government. Bush's faith-based
initiative is a constitutional nightmare and a disastrous step in the wrong
direction."

Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington,
D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization represents 60,000 members and allied
houses of worship in all 50 states.

------------------------------------------------------------
The Dallas Morning News
January 26, 2001, Friday

Bush to roll out faith-based initiatives, prescription drug plan next week

By G. Robert Hillman

WASHINGTON -- President Bush, working down his list of campaign promises,
will offer Congress next week his proposals to aid faith-based charities and
his plan to help the elderly meet the high costs of prescription drugs,
aides said Thursday.
As a prelude, the new president and first lady Laura Bush had dinner
Thursday night in eighboring Hyattsville, Md., with the Rev. Theodore
McCarrick, the Catholic archbishop of Washington who has been elevated to
cardinal.

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, who previewed next week's agenda,
noted that Bush had made his faith-based initiatives a cornerstone of his
campaign and was determined to offer his proposals to Congress early in his
administration.

"There are more ways to help people," Fleischer said, calling Bush's
initiatives the next step in welfare reform.

"Faith-based solutions are one way to help those people make a better life."

During the campaign, the former Texas governor vowed to rally the "armies of
compassion" to help deliver social services.

He has proposed to allow taxpayers who do not itemize to deduct their
charitable contributions, at a cost in lost revenue of about $6.3 billion a
year.

Additionally, he has called for another $1.7 billion in charitable grants
and the creation of an Office of Faith-Based Action.

"The president made a series of promises during the campaign, and he's going
to honor them," Fleischer said. "There will be weeks where we have a strong
focus on an issue. There will be weeks where there will be several issues
discussed."

Also next week, Fleischer said the president plans to address one of the
more contentious campaign issues: prescription drug benefits for the
elderly.

The initial proposals to change the 35-year-old Medicare health-care program
for the elderly would involve only Bush's stop-gap program to provide poor
seniors with some relief for the high costs of their prescription drugs,
Fleischer said.

Even before the president formally offered his faith-based initiatives,
however, critics continue to question whether they might violate the
separation of church and state provision of the Constitution.

"The Constitution created a separation between religion and government, not
a massive new bureaucracy designed to unite the two," said the Rev. Barry
Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and
State.

Responding, the president told reporters in a brief question-and-answer
session in the Cabinet Room that he was confident his proposals would meet
constitutional muster.