[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 35 (Thursday, March 15, 2001)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E377-E378]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR FAITH BASED ORGANIZATIONS

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. ZOE LOFGREN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 15, 2001

  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend to my colleagues 
the following articles by Joan Ryan of the San Francisco Chronicle and 
Patty Fisher of the San Jose Mercury News. I found these articles to be 
thoughtful examinations of the complex question of federal support for 
faith-based groups.

                   [From the San Francisco Chronicle]

                        With a Hand on the Bible

                             (By Joan Ryan)

       Even as a Christian I felt uneasy when George W. Bush said 
     during his campaign that Jesus was the most influential 
     philosopher on his political beliefs.
       The feeling returned during Bush's inauguration when he 
     again wandered, either carelessly or purposefully, into the 
     dangerous ground between church and state.
       Inaugurations traditionally mention God in the context of a 
     higher power recognized by most of the world's religions. But 
     Bush's hand-picked pastors mentioned Jesus in both the 
     invocation and prayer. one pastor punctuated the point with 
     the unequivocal proclamation, ``Jesus the Christ (is) the 
     name that's above all other names.''
       Now comes news that Bush wants to disburse billions in 
     public funds to religious groups that provide social 
     services. The groups would compete for the money, and Bush's 
     new ``Office of Faith-Based and Community-Based Initiatives'' 
     would choose the recipients. All religions would be eligible, 
     Bush said.
       Everyone who believes that certain religious groups will be 
     getting significantly more of this money than others, say, 
     ``Amen.''
       Bush has already shown that he won't fund groups that don't 
     adhere to his particular set of moral beliefs. In his first 
     full workday as president, he announced he was yanking funds 
     to overseas organizations that use their own money to provide 
     abortions or abortion counseling. These organizations were 
     not breaking the laws of their countries or of ours. Bush's 
     decision was based solely on his own
       And Bush's call for a review of the FDA's approval of the 
     abortion pill, RU-486, was not based on science or health 
     but, again, his own brand of morality.
       This is the problem with blurring the line between church 
     and state, as Bush is doing. We begin to create a de facto 
     national religion based on the values of those in power. 
     These values might be perfectly respectable ones. They might 
     even have the power to transform lives, as Bush's religious 
     program in a Texas prison has. (Compared to non-participating 
     inmates, inmates in the two-year indoctrination in biblical 
     teachings and Christian behavior have shown a drastically 
     lower recidivism rate once released from prison.)
       It's difficult to argue that the world wouldn't be a better 
     place if everyone adhered to so-called Christian values.
       But who should interpret how those values will be applied 
     to public policy? Ralph Reed? Jesse Jackson? The pope? All 
     adhere to the same Bible, but each man's vision of government 
     based on the book's teachings would be vastly different--and 
     would feel like a tyranny to those who disagreed.
       The infusion of religion into government is at the very 
     heart of the revolution that created America. The colonists 
     rebelled not only against the Church of England but also 
     against the Puritanism and Calvinism that forced the 
     citizenry to conform to particular religious views of face 
     the government's wrath.
       What Bush risks doing is establishing the legitimacy of one 
     religion over all others, and this is just what our founding 
     fathers didn't want. Yet there hasn't been much of an outcry. 
     Perhaps people figure it's better to have a president who 
     thinks he's the national deacon than one who thought he was 
     the national Don Juan.
       All would agree that the president should be guided by high 
     morals. And one would hope that, if he is deeply religious, 
     he could harness the power of his faith for the public good. 
     But when Bush laid his hand on the Bible two Sundays ago, he 
     didn't promise to uphold the teachings of Jesus.
       He promised to uphold the Constitution of the United 
     States.

[[Page E378]]

     
                                  ____
          [From the San Jose (CA) Mercury News, Jan. 28, 2001]

God and George W. Bush Could Face a Fight, Even with Christians, if He 
                   Tries To Make Religion More Public

                           (By Patty fisher)

       I can think of only one topic that is controversial even 
     though almost all Americans agree on it.
       God.
       Of course, when it comes to God, about the only thing we 
     agree on is that God exists. And even proclaiming that 
     publicly makes us nervous.
       By many measures, the United States is one of the most 
     religious countries in the world. Not only do 94 percent of 
     those surveyed in a recent Harris poll believe in God, but 89 
     percent also believe in heaven. The country is also 
     overwhelmingly Christian, with 81 percent describing 
     themselves as Christians and even a greater number--86 
     percent--professing belief in the resurrection of Christ.
       A separate poll taken after the election by Public Agenda, 
     a non-partisan organization, found that 70 percent of 
     Americans want religion to be more influential in society. 
     Concerned about the moral decline in this country, 69 percent 
     of those surveyed said religion is the key to strengthening 
     family values and improving moral behavior.
       With those numbers, George W. Bush might expect little 
     opposition to his efforts to expand the presence of religion 
     in
       And yet, I suspect Bush is going to encounter stiff 
     opposition to any attempt to make religion more public during 
     his presidency. Not only from Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, 
     atheists and agnostics, but from Christians as well.
       I was raised a United Methodist and get to church almost 
     every Sunday. But as I watched a Methodist minister give the 
     benediction at the inauguration, calling on all who believe 
     in Jesus to say ``Amen,'' I cringed. My 11-year-old daughter, 
     who was watching with me, put my thoughts into words.
       ``What about the Jews who are watching?'' she said. ``What 
     about all the people who don't believe in Jesus? What are 
     they supposed to do?''
       A lot of them wrote letters of outrage to newspapers.
       One letter writer, Roy Gordon of San Jose, is Jewish and 
     grew up in England. He is disturbed by what seems to be a 
     trend away from the ecumenism that has made him feel 
     comfortable in this country.
       ``I respect President Bush's religious beliefs and expect 
     that they make him a better person and president, but they 
     are not mine nor are they those of a very large number of 
     other Americans,'' he wrote. ``This occasion was for the 
     whole nation, but I felt left out at the end.''
       Gordon went on to say: ``Respecting diversity does not end 
     with a few Cabinet secretaries; it is an inclusive attitude 
     that has to affect every aspect of our relationships with 
     each other.''
       Activist attorney Alan Dershowitz put it more bluntly in 
     the Los Angeles Times:
       ``The plain message conveyed by the new administration is 
     that Bush's America is a Christian nation, and that non-
     Christians are welcome into the tent so long as they agree to 
     accept their status as a tolerated minority rather than as 
     fully equally citizens.''
       I doubt that Bush intended to offend non-Christians at the 
     inauguration. In his speech, he made a point of mentioning 
     synagogues and mosques. But he appears not to understand an 
     important piece of Americans' complex attitude toward 
     religion, which is: Just do it--and please don't talk about 
     it.
       A majority of Americans think children should be raised 
     with a religious faith and want politicians to be religious, 
     according to the Public Agenda poll. But they really don't 
     think it's OK to discuss religion at work or at parties. A 
     majority would support a moment of silence in public schools, 
     but not a spoken prayer. More than 60 percent agree that 
     ``deeply religious people are being inconsiderate if they 
     always bring up religion when they deal with other people.'' 
     And nearly three-quarters of those polled said that 
     politicians who talk about their religious faith are ``just 
     saying what they think people want to hear.''
       When Bush talked on the campaign trail about how his faith 
     helped him stop drinking, I suspect he was not merely being a 
     fisher of votes. People whose lives are changed by faith like 
     to talk about it. Alcoholics Anonymous began in the Methodist 
     Church.
       But now that he is the president, he must be careful not to 
     push his faith on others. He must not make the mistake of 
     thinking that there is such a thing as the ``religious'' 
     position on an issue. Just because I call myself a Christian 
     doesn't mean I agree with Bush on abortion or the death 
     penalty.
       One reason religion is so much stronger in the United 
     States than in Europe, I suspect, is our tradition of 
     religious tolerance and separation of church and state. As 
     long as the state is not forcing a particular religious view, 
     faith flourishes.
       The president needs to remember that while 94 percent of 
     Americans believe in God, fewer than half voted for George W. 
     Bush. Americans will support his efforts to bring morality 
     back into public life, as long as he doesn't think he has God 
     on his side.

     

                          ____________________