White House continues to defend faith-based plan

By The Associated Press

04.27.01

Printer-friendly page

John DiIulio

WASHINGTON — Under pressure from conservatives, a White House official said yesterday that even the most religious programs should be allowed to compete for all types of government funds.

That includes direct grants as well as vouchers used by participants to pick a program, said John DiIulio, director of the White House Office on Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.

"It can't be only one or the other," he said in an interview.

Last month, DiIulio argued that programs in which the religious and secular elements cannot be separated should only be eligible for vouchers.

It was DiIulio's attempt to respond to liberal critics who fear that President Bush's plan amounts to government funding of religion.

That got DiIulio in trouble with conservatives who argue that some of the most effective programs use religion as an integral part of their curriculum and should not be excluded.

Soon, conservatives were pressuring him to change his mind, said Marvin Olasky, who advised Bush on this issue during his presidential campaign.

"I think there was a lot of discussion and I believe John developed greater understanding," said Olasky, a senior fellow at the Acton Institute. "It's been a learning experience for all of us, and I believe he's learned and I'm grateful."

Olasky cites a program that uses Biblical teachings to develop budgeting techniques as an example of how religion cannot be divorced from all programs.

Other religious-based programs act more like their secular equivalents, offering training or classes during part of the day and Bible study or religious counseling during other parts.

"So many of these very effective groups cannot and will not segment their practice that way," he said.

Yesterday, DiIulio said it was "more appropriate" for these pervasively religious programs to be paid for with vouchers, but if they want to apply for direct grants, "fine."

He added that his initial position may have been misunderstood. In a speech last month, he said that a program that "cannot separate out and privately fund its inherently religious activities can still receive government support, but only via individual vouchers."

Also yesterday, DiIulio appeared for the first time before Congress, where he was questioned by Democrats who lodged a series of objections to his plan.

At issue is "charitable choice," which allows religious groups to compete for government money without divorcing the religious nature of their programs.

Charitable choice is already law for welfare and two other federal programs, approved with relatively little public attention. Now President Bush proposes expanding it to programs across government, and it's come under fire from groups across the religious and political spectrum.

Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., a longtime opponent of charitable choice, asked whether unpaid volunteers working at a government-funded program would be permitted to proselytize with the program's participants.

DiIulio responded at length but never answered the question.

After the hearing, Scott said it was obvious that volunteers would be allowed to preach religion.

"Of course they can," he said. "That's the whole point of charitable choice."

Scott also asked whether churches would be allowed to designate taxpayer-funded workers as "ministerial" employees and therefore skirt all anti-discrimination laws, including those involving race and gender.

DiIulio said he did not know and would respond later.

DiIulio noted that a Philadelphia study found most church programs don't discriminate anyway, but Scott said that wasn't good enough.

"Trust but verify," he said. "I trust them, but I like the discrimination laws on the books."

Related

White House must build faith-based initiatives on common ground
By Charles Haynes Current congressional debates and public-opinion polls reveal that the more the people learn about the president's faith-based initiative, the more skeptical they are about it.  05.13.01

Senate, House mull charitable-choice debate
Religious, political leaders examine whether offering more federal dollars to religious groups offends First Amendment.  06.08.01