President Bush clearly needs to work on his sermons. Last week, in a nimble display of conspicuous compassion, he made good on his campaign promise of more money and fewer hassles for faith-based organizations. The message sounds good, but the Devil, as always, may be in the details. Bush is embarking on a mission akin to Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, which funneled money not to government agencies but to local organizations that sometimes lacked the wherewithal to deliver the services they promised.
To a rainbow coalition of Christian, Jewish and other religious leaders, Bush announced the creation of a White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. In a second executive order, he directed Justice, Education and other federal agencies to help bridge the gap between government and the independent sector–and eliminate needless rules, allowing faith-based programs to hire only their own religious kind, or to display a cross or Star of David symbolizing religious commitment. The president will also ask Congress for a change in the tax code that would allow the majority of taxpayers, who do not itemize deductions, to deduct their charitable contributions.
Religious leaders generally welcomed Bush’s initiatives but wondered about the specifics. His tax proposal, for example, could provide a huge bonanza in contributions to all types of charities, but it is still not clear whether the administration will ask for additional funds to help expand programs run by faith-based organizations. A bigger question is whether Bush’s plan violates the separation of church and state. Barry Lynn of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State sees a future in which “the Methodists are fighting with the Presbyterians, who are fighting with the Unification Church, over what percentage of government money will go to their church.”
That scenario seems excessively apocalyptic. In most local communities–the level Bush is trying to energize–religious organizations that provide housing or help the poor from welfare to work are ecumenical endeavors. That’s because most religious congregations cannot–or will not–provide the money or staff or know-how to work directly with those in need. According to the National Congregations Study, a 1998 survey of all kinds of churches, temples and mosques, half of the congregations in the United States have 75 members or less, and the average number of volunteers in direct social work is only 10. Moreover, the median amount spent per congregation on direct assistance to the needy is $1,500 a year; overall, social programs attract an average of less than 3 percent of a congregation’s annual budget. For instance, the nation’s largest Presbyterian church–Peachtree Presbyterian of Atlanta–spends a healthy $600,000 on local social programs, nearly half of it for Habitat for Humanity. But that is out of an annual budget of $9.8 million.
Who, then, is likely to take advantage of the new GOP initiative? Not the big outfits like Catholic Charities or the Salvation Army, which are already amply funded by the government. Not Father Hritz or the folks at Peachtree, who are wary of government regulation. Better candidates are local ecumenical groups and programs like Prison Ministries, a Bush favorite, which already works in three states. “We have 10 more states who want us,” says founder Chuck Colson, “but we don’t have the money.” Among churches, says University of Arizona sociologist Mark Chaves, who directed the congregations study, “the likeliest takers are the black urban churches. They are the most willing and the least worried about church-state issues.” Bush is betting that religious groups won’t pocket government funds as some did in LBJ’s day. If you can’t trust faith-based folks, Bush seems to believe, who can you trust?
