[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 69 (Friday, May 9, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E927]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         WORKFORCE REINVESTMENT AND ADULT EDUCATION ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. LYNN C. WOOLSEY

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 8, 2003

  The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1261) to enhance the workforce 
investment system of the Nation by strengthening one-stop career 
centers, providing for more effective governance arrangements, 
promoting access to a more comprehensive array of employment, training, 
and related services, establishing a targeted approach to serving 
youth, and improving performance accountability, and for other 
purposes:

  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 
1261, especially in regard to the provisions in Section 123, which 
allows discrimination when a faith-based group runs job-training 
programs.
  This provision sets a bad precedent for our Nation and I believe it 
does not belong in this bill. We should honor the separation between 
church and state set-forth by the Constitution. One of the most 
important rights we treasure in this country is the right to religious 
freedom. That's why I believe religion should continue to be a matter 
of personal choice and not something that is supported or dictated by 
the Federal Government.
  Mr. Chairman, I am concerned that this provision inappropriately 
blurs the separation between church and state by subsidizing faith-
based groups without requiring them to comply with federal non-
discrimination laws. This means they could allow refuse to hire people 
who disagree with the organizations religious views. Employers could 
use religion to make promotional decisions or as a litmus test for 
hiring and firing. We would be allowing federal dollars to fund 
discrimination and that is wrong!
  While proponents of this provision argue that they would be expanding 
opportunities for faith-based organizations, they would really be 
destroying a basic civil right protection that has existed in federal 
job training for 21 years. Religiously affiliated organizations 
currently participate in Federal job training programs with the non-
discrimination clause in place. Yet, lifting the discrimination 
prohibitions will do nothing more than encourage discriminatory 
practices within these organizations.
  Mr. Chairman, I am strongly against these Section 123 provisions and 
I encourage my colleagues to join me in opposing this flawed 
legislation.

                          ____________________