|
“Ten
years ago, who
would have
believed we
would be
researching how
faith-based
groups serve the
community? We
hardly even knew
they existed!”
Two
internationally
known American
scholars of
nonprofit
organizations
were talking. I
just happened to
be nearby to
overhear it,
during a break
in a meeting on
how social
service
organizations
created by
religious
communities
embody and
maintain their
faith
inspiration.
Of course,
faith-based
organizations
were not absent
a decade ago nor
were they always
ignored, but
their extensive
service in our
society was not
well understood
and their vital
roles in
responding to
need was often
not seen. But
no one can
ignore or
overlook
religious social
services now.
The faith-based
initiative—a
signature
commitment of
the Bush
presidency that
has greatly
expanded action
started during
the previous
administration—has
brought them to
the foreground.
No new
presidency will
overlook service
rendered by
faith-based
organizations.
Care for
neighbors
sparked by
humanitarian or
religious
motivation is
characteristic
of American
society, as
noted long ago
by Alexis De
Tocqueville.
Our national
leaders have
counted on it
and celebrated
it. Presidents
have enlisted
it: JFK’s Peace
Corps, Bush 41’s
Thousand Points
of Light, Bill
Clinton’s
AmeriCorps. And
religious as
well as secular
nonprofits have
long been part
of the public
social safety
net. The
faith-based
initiative,
though, brought
and wrought two
great
innovations.
The first is
scale, or
prominence.
President Bush
put it this way
while still on
the campaign
trail in 1999:
when government
is responsible
to provide a
helping hand,
“we will look
first to
faith-based
organizations,
to charities,
and to community
groups.” These
groups—their
services, their
way of
assisting, their
passion,
location,
spirit—ought to
be central, not
marginal, in our
nation’s public
strategy of
responding to
need and
strengthening
neighborhoods
and families.
To that end, the
administration
has invested
much in training
that improves
the capacity and
impact of such
groups, and
enacted
legislation to
stimulate
greater private
giving to
charities. Such
action
strengthens
civil society
itself and its
compassionate
action
independent of
government.
It’s the other
focus that has
drawn the most
attention and
controversy:
working to
increase the
number of
grassroots
groups,
including
organizations
with an obvious
faith
motivation, that
receive
government funds
to provide
social
services. For
to enable
expanded
partnerships,
the Bush
administration
has set about
redesigning the
operational
rules of the
federal
government,
changing them to
accommodate the
distinctive
characteristics
of faith-based
and smaller
nonprofit
organizations.
This is the
second great
innovation:
rather than
require those
groups to
assimilate to
the government
style, the
government’s
style itself has
been modified.
An early report
from the White
House, “Unlevel
Playing Field,”
detailed fifteen
ways that
federal rules
unjustifiably,
and usually
unintentionally,
obstructed
partnerships
between federal
programs and the
faith-based and
secular
grassroots
organizations
that can be the
major, or only,
or best, sources
of uplift for
the distressed
and poor in many
places. The
Bush
administration
has undertaken a
determined
effort to
eliminate those
barriers and to
show, with pilot
programs, how
small groups can
be safely and
fruitfully
connected to big
government.
A vital part of
the rules
redesign has
been to push
back
secularizing
federal
requirements.
These changes
have generated
most of the
heated
opposition. Yet
they broadly
correspond to
the Supreme
Court’s shift
from strict
separationism to
a requirement of
equal treatment,
and constitute
the
implementation
and expansion of
the Charitable
Choice
principles
signed into law
by President
Clinton and
hailed by
Democratic
candidate Al
Gore in the 2000
election. Most
important:
forcing the
government to
respect the
religious
freedom
faith-based
organizations is
an essential way
to compel
governmental
respect for the
independence and
uniqueness of
its nonprofit
partners.
Unfinished
Revolution
The White House
Office of
Faith-Based and
Community
Initiatives
recently
released “The
Quiet
Revolution,” an
overview of
goals and
achievements.
There is much to
celebrate. For
example, the
Compassion
Capital Fund has
invested federal
dollars to
expand the
ability of
private groups
to operate
effective
programs.
Ready4Work is an
innovative pilot
program that
builds
partnerships
between
government
services, large
nonprofits, and
networks of
small
faith-based and
secular groups
to help
ex-prisoners
establish a new
way of life.
Through the
Access to
Recovery
program, many
states have
created
voucher-based
drug treatment
systems that
enable addicts
to choose among
secular and
faith-integrated
services to help
them kick, and
remain free of,
illegal drugs.
The PEPFAR
program—the
major US
commitment to
fighting the
AIDS epidemic in
Africa—relies on
indigenous
religious and
secular
grassroots
organizations so
that help will
come from
trusted
organizations
rooted in the
places of need.
To spearhead
such operational
change and
ensure that the
focus is on
better
government
results, not
mere political
agendas, eleven
federal
departments or
agencies and the
Corporation for
National and
Community
Service have
created their
own faith-based
offices.
Thirty-five
states, and some
100 cities, have
also created
specific offices
or positions to
evaluate
government
rules, devise
ways to better
utilize the
passion and
energy of
community
volunteers and
organizations,
and to create
bridges between
government
programs and
civil society
action.
Yet, change has
only just
begun. In many
inner cities,
it’s a handful
of
African-American
churches and a
scattering of
other programs
and institutions
that are beacons
of hope and
sources of
positive energy
and example.
Those leaders
and struggling
programs are
still mostly
neglected,
starved of
resources,
hardly touched
by the changes
made in
Washington and
state capitols.
Much additional
work, added
resources, a
firm political
commitment, and
new policymaking
creativity will
be needed to
effectively
connect the
vastness of
government to
those fragile
“neighborhood
healers.”
The Next
President . . .
The idea of
government
partnership with
civil society in
aid of the needy
is appealing and
popular. Making
it actually
happen, when
faith-based
organizations
comprise such a
large and vital
part of civil
society, has
proven
controversial to
some.
Deliberately
turning to
inner-city
congregations —
albeit as part
of a broad
strategy of
collaboration
with grassroots
groups;
promulgating
administrative
regulations that
explicitly
protect the
religious
identity of
grantee
organization s
— although the
religious
freedom of
beneficiaries is
also for the
first time
explicitly
protected;
defending the
freedom of
faith-based
organizations to
select staff
committed to the
their religious
identity — even
though this is a
freedom
protected in the
1964 Civil
Rights Act and
upheld by the
courts . . .
these and other
specific
measures have
met resistance
and sometimes
fierce
opposition.
Will the next
president have
the courage to
continue the
hard work of
forcing the
government to
create a
hospitable
environment for
faith-based
compassionate
action? Or will
he or she merely
invite
faith-based
organizations to
partner, while
permitting
backsliding to
secularizing
requirements?
The faith-based
initiative is
indeed at a
crossroads. The
way forward
requires a
vigorous
commitment to
genuine equal
opportunity, and
thus to
safeguarding the
religious
freedom of
faith-based
organizations.
--###--
Stanley Carlson-Thies
is the Director
of Social Policy
Studies at the
Center for
Public Justice.
He served with
the White House
Office of
Faith-Based &
Community
Initiatives from
its inception in
February 2001
until mid-May
2002.
|
