Value-based Programs

Value-based Programs
By David W. Kirkpatrick (4/07)

When President George W. Bush came to office in 2001 he established a program whereby religious based groups became eligible for public funding for programs assisting citizens in need, a proposal usually referred to as charitable choice or faith-based initiatives. As might be expected, this raised concern among those emphasizing what is often termed as "separation of church and state," a phrase not found in the Constitution. It was used by President Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a Baptist congregation in Danbury, CT in 1801, at a time when several states still had established churches. Nine colonies that had them at the time of the Revolution.

         Aside from the merits of the case, which constitute an ongoing debate, such programs did not originate with President Bush.

         For example:

         Question: When did Congress establish charitable choice as a federal initiative, whereby 350,000 religious congregations became eligible for public funding of their programs in such areas as counseling, job training, day-care programs and drug-rehabilitation, and what president signed the legislation into law?

         Answer: In 1996, as part of the welfare reform law, signed by President Bill Clinton. Bipartisan support for the measure in Congress also said they planned to include the provision in appropriate legislation thereafter.

         Question: Is public funding of charitable programs by religious groups a new practice?

         Answer: No. Joseph Viteritti, in Choosing Equality, notes studies indicating child and family service programs conducted by religious groups already received as much as 40% of their funding from government sources.

         Question: Who said, "I've seen the difference faith-based organizations make. I believe the lesson to the nation is clear; In those instances where the unique power of faith can help us meet the crushing social challenges that are otherwise not possible to meet...we must explore carefully tailored partnerships with our faith community."

         Answer: Then Vice-President Al Gore, May of 1999.

         Question: Who said, "I'm a supporter of these programs in which faith-based organizations help the government serve public purposes. If a drug addict or a prisoner or a homeless person can find inspiration and strength within himself to deal with his or her problem, then don't we all gain from that?"

         Answer: Sen. Joseph Leiberman, on ABC-TV's "Nightline," February 14, 2000.

         As Texas Governor, George W. Bush was one of the first to sign legislation making it possible for state agencies to fund welfare program run by faith-based groups.

         Faith or value-based programs are often more successful than those run by government precisely because they can use this approach while the government cannot. For example, the Victory Fellowship in Texas, which uses the Bible as part of their recovery program, was reported to have a 70% success rate with drug addicts. You would be hard pressed to find a professionally based government program that remotely approaches that record.

         By 2005, at least twenty governors had developed state initiatives to help religious groups gain better access to state and federal grants, including for programs serving schoolchildren, and advise them on what they can or cannot do with such grants..

         Americans are individually perhaps the most religious people in the western democracies. The great majority say they believe in God, large percentages belong to a church, and most of them attend church at least occasionally.

         Yet we are the only western democracy that continually battles over public displays or involvement of religion, religious values and the separation of church and state, although there isn't the slightest chance we will have an established church at either the state or national level. Even France, with its long anticleric history doesn't have the church-state hangups of the United States.

         And what's to fear? For centuries, England has had an established church, the Church of England, yet that nation is the founding source of our democracy. That we have unofficially become perhaps the most anti-religious western democracy is a sad commentary.

         Whether one is religious, an agnostic or an atheist, there can be no denying that most Americans regard religious values as important to their well being.

         If we are interested in results rather than rhetoric, in ideas rather than ideology, in vitality rather than violence, we must find away to resolve this dilemma.
                                                             # # # # #

         "Not surprisingly, community and religious groups have spectacularly better track records than government agencies in helping people turn their lives around...The reason is simple: changing attitudes and behavior is key to an enduring empowerment; and while that is difficult for government policies to achieve, it is part and parcel of a religious ministry.," p. 110, Clint Bolick, Transformation, Oakland, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies, 1998
                                                             # # # # #

======================

E-mail (tchrwrtr@aol.com)

To use this material, see the conditions at the top of the home page - DWK