[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 73 (Thursday, June 6, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E977]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             WELFARE REAUTHORIZATION AND CHARITABLE CHOICE

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. CHET EDWARDS

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 5, 2002

  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress, I believe that we 
have a responsibility to continue to review and revise legislation that 
adapts and improves upon program successes and the ever-changing needs 
of American citizens. That is why I support H.R. 4737, the Personal 
Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2002. This 
legislation reauthorizes the 1996 welfare reform program, a program 
that works to move welfare recipients from the dependency of these 
programs to self-sufficiency.
  However, while I support this welfare reauthorization, I do not 
support a provision included in the original 1996 legislation and again 
included in this reauthorization. This provision is known as Charitable 
Choice, and in my opinion, the wrong solution to a real problem. Under 
current law, faith-based groups may already accept federal dollars 
under three conditions: they cannot be pervasively sectarian, they 
cannot proselytize, and they cannot discriminate on the basis of 
religion in their employment practices.
  Charitable Choice changes those conditions. Charitable Choice makes 
it possible for the government to subsidize churches and other 
thoroughly religious entities that provide social services. This 
proposal will provide tax dollars to religious groups and open the door 
to government review of church activities.
  For many years the law has permitted groups that are affiliated with 
religious bodies (e.g. Catholic Charities and Lutheran Social Services, 
Jewish Federations) to receive tax funds to provide secular social 
services. But Charitable Choice represents a radical and misguided 
revision of the law. Indeed, many ministers believe that Charitable 
Choice will do great harm to religion.
  Because regulation always follows tax funds, Charitable Choice opens 
the door to invasive government monitoring, regulation and accounting 
of churches, clergy, and other leaders of the church. For these 
reasons, people like Freddy Garcia, who runs the highly successful 
Victory Fellowship ministry for drug addicts in San Antonio, has said, 
``I don't want any grants. I'm a church . . . All I want is for the 
government to leave me alone.''
  Also, because there is limited money in the public purse and 
thousands of religious groups in our country, Charitable Choice will 
force the government to pick and choose which religions it funds. 
Churches may have to compete for government grants before elected 
legislators. ``The best way I know of to destroy religion is to have 
all the churches fighting over a big pot of money, `` says Rev. J. 
Brent Walker, general counsel of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public 
Affairs.
  Charitable Choice will generate serious problems that have not been 
seen on a large scale in this country in over 200 years--outright 
religious infighting, intolerance and discrimination.
  If we allow government to fund and become involved in religion, it 
will harm religion, not help it. It is people of faith who must point 
out that church-state separation does not mean keeping people of faith 
from being involved in government but rather it means keeping 
government from being involved in religion.
  I will continue to work with my colleagues to provide a welfare 
program that helps the needs of all American citizens, without 
compromising religious freedom and liberty. I would hope that we, as 
Members of Congress, remember our obligations to uphold the principles 
of the Constitution and create legislation, which represents the core 
and steadfast beliefs of the United States.

                          ____________________