[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 23 (Thursday, March 3, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E357-E365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  JOB TRAINING IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. ROBERT C. SCOTT

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, March 2, 2005

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union, had under consideration the bill (H.R. 27) 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:

  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I submit the following 
information regarding H.R. 27 for the Record.

                                                    March 2, 2005.

            The Real Democratic Record on Charitable Choice,

       Dear Colleague: I wanted to be sure you had a copy of the 
     Real Democratic Record on Charitable Choice. I hope this is 
     helpful as we debate H.R. 27, containing a vast expansion of 
     Charitable Choice to federally-funded job training programs 
     for the first time since 1965.


                      the 2004 democratic platform

       ``We honor the central place of faith in the lives of our 
     people. Like our Founders, we believe that our nation, our 
     communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and 
     richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy 
     it inspires. We will strengthen the role of faith-based 
     organizations in meeting challenges like homelessness, youth 
     violence, and other social problems. At the same time, we 
     will honor First Amendment protections and not allow public 
     funds to be used to proselytize or discriminate. Throughout 
     history, communities of faith have brought comfort to the 
     afflicted and shaped great movements for justice. We know 
     they will continue to do so, and we will always protect all 
     Americans' freedom to worship.''


         The Clinton Administration Record on Charitable Choice

       1996--The Clinton Administration submitted amendments as 
     part of its technical corrections package to Congress 
     regarding concerns over the constitutionality of Charitable 
     Choice provisions contained in welfare reform. They filed the 
     following comments with the amendment: ``[P]rovisions of sec. 
     104 and its legislative history could be read to be 
     inconsistent with the constitutional limits. . . . We 
     recommend amending sec. 104 to clarify that it does not 
     compel or allow States to provide TANF benefits through 
     pervasively sectarian organizations, either directly or 
     through vouchers redeemable with these organizations.'' 
     Congress did not act on those amendments.
       1998--The Clinton Administration issued a signing statement 
     placing limitations on the Charitable Choice provisions 
     contained in the Community Services Block Grant: ``The 
     Department of Justice advises, however, that the provision 
     that allows religiously affiliated organizations to be 
     providers under CSBG would be unconstitutional if and to the 
     extent it were construed to permit governmental funding of 
     ``pervasively sectarian'' organizations, as that term has 
     been defined by the courts. Accordingly, I construe the Act 
     as forbidding the funding of pervasively sectarian 
     organizations and as permitting Federal, State, and local 
     governments involved in disbursing CSBG funds to take into 
     account the structure and operations of a religious 
     organization in determining whether such an organization is 
     pervasively sectarian.''
       2000--The Clinton Administration issued a signing statement 
     placing limitations on the Charitable Choice provisions 
     contained in the reauthorization of the Substance Abuse 
     Mental Health Services Act (SAMHSA): ``The Department of 
     Justice advises, however, that this provision would be 
     unconstitutional to the extent that it were construed to 
     permit governmental funding of organizations that do not or 
     cannot separate their religious activities from their 
     substance abuse treatment and prevention activities that are 
     supported by SAMHSA aid. Accordingly, I construe the Act as 
     forbidding the funding of such organizations and as 
     permitting Federal, State, and local governments involved in 
     disbursing SAMHSA funds to take into account the structure 
     and operations of a religious organization in determining 
     whether such an organization is constitutionally and 
     statutorily eligible to receive funding.''
           Very truly yours,
                                        Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
     Member of Congress.
                                  ____

                                                February 28, 2005.
       Dear Representative: The undersigned organizations are 
     writing to urge you to vote against H.R. 27, the Job Training 
     Improvement Act, unless it is modified to address the 
     concerns outlined in this letter, and to oppose any effort to 
     expand the block grant authority in the bill along the lines 
     of the Administration's ``WIA Plus'' proposal.

[[Page E358]]

       H.R. 27 fails to make meaningful improvements to the 
     Workforce Investment Act (WIA) that would enhance the 
     training and career opportunities of unemployed workers. 
     Instead, the legislation would eliminate the dislocated 
     worker training program, undermine state rapid response 
     systems, end the federal-state labor exchange system, roll 
     back protections against religious discrimination in hiring 
     by job training providers, and potentially undermine the 
     stability of other important programs.
       In particular, we are concerned about the following 
     provisions in H.R. 27:


                            New Block Grant

       H.R. 27 consolidates into a single block grant the WIA 
     adult and dislocated worker programs with the Wagner-Peyser 
     employment service program and reemployment services for 
     unemployment insurance recipients. In doing so, it will 
     eliminate job training assistance specifically targeted to 
     workers dislocated by off shoring and other economic changes, 
     pit different types of workers against each other, and lead 
     to future funding reductions. The block grant also eliminates 
     the statewide job service, which provides a uniform statewide 
     system for matching employers and jobseekers, replacing it 
     with a multiplicity of localized programs that would have no 
     incentive or ability to cooperate and function as a 
     comprehensive labor exchange system. Eliminating the 
     employment service, which is financed with revenue from the 
     unemployment insurance (UI) trust fund, breaks the connection 
     between the unemployment insurance program and undermines the 
     UI ``work test,'' which ensures that UI recipients return to 
     work as quickly as possible.


                Infrastructure and Core Services Funding

       A principal criticism of WIA has been the substantial 
     decline in actual training compared to its predecessor, the 
     Job Training Partnership Act. While there are various reasons 
     for the reduction in training, including the sequence of 
     services requirement in current law, the use of WIA resources 
     by local boards and operators to build new one-stop 
     facilities and bureaucracies, without any limitation, has 
     contributed substantially to the decline in training. This is 
     despite the fact that many WIA partner programs also 
     contribute operating funds to one-stop operations.
       H.R. 27 gives governors even broader discretion to transfer 
     additional resources from the WIA partner programs to pay for 
     WIA infrastructure and core services costs--without any 
     assurance that more training would result. These programs 
     include the vocational rehabilitation program, veterans 
     employment programs, adult education, the Perkins post 
     secondary career and technical education programs, 
     unemployment insurance, trade adjustment assistance, 
     Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and, if they 
     are partners, employment and training programs under the food 
     stamp and housing programs, programs for individuals with 
     disabilities carried out by state agencies, including state 
     Medicaid agencies, and even child support enforcement. By 
     relying on funding transfers from these programs to 
     guarantee resources for WIA infrastructure and core 
     services, H.R. 27 will disrupt and weaken services 
     provided by these non-WIA programs, which also will face 
     substantial pressures for funding reductions in the next 
     few years.
       The infrastructure and related provisions start the 
     commingling of funds from these non-WIA programs. In doing 
     so, they transform the original one-stop idea of a better-
     coordinated workforce system into a mechanism for reducing 
     resources for and block granting these programs in the 
     future. A more effective and simple solution to ensuring 
     adequate training services would be to require that a certain 
     percentage of WIA funds be used for training as provided in 
     previous job training programs and to create a separate WIA 
     funding stream for one-stop operations, if necessary.


                     Personal Reemployment Accounts

       H.R. 27 includes permanent and unlimited authority for the 
     Secretary to conduct ``personal reemployment account'' (PRA) 
     demonstrations even though the Department of Labor recently 
     initiated a PRA demonstration without strong interest among 
     the states. Although nine states could have participated, 
     only seven are doing so.
       Since this demonstration already is in process, we see no 
     justification for this provision and can only surmise that it 
     is an attempt to implement PRAs more broadly, despite a lack 
     of Congressional support for a full-scale program in the 
     past.
       Unlike current WIA training programs, the PRAs would limit 
     the cost of training that an unemployment insurance recipient 
     can receive and would bar that individual from WIA training 
     services for a year after the PRA account is established. 
     This is the wrong way to go. With longterm unemployment at 
     historically high levels, there is a much greater need for 
     continued unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed 
     who have found it so difficult to become reemployed.


               Religious-Based Employment Discrimination

       H.R. 27 repeals longstanding civil rights protections that 
     prohibit religious-based employment discrimination by job 
     training providers. These protections have been included in 
     job training programs, which received bipartisan support, 
     since 1982. At no time have the civil rights provisions 
     prohibited religious organizations from effective 
     participation in federal job training programs. This rollback 
     of civil rights protections is especially incongruous in a 
     program designed to provide employment and career 
     opportunities in an evenhanded manner and should be rejected.


                           WIA Plus Proposal

       The Administration has proposed giving Governors authority 
     to merge five additional programs into the WIA block grant. 
     The proposal would eliminate specialized assistance to 
     unemployed, disabled and homeless veterans, critical job 
     training services for workers under the Trade Adjustment 
     Assistance Act whose jobs have been outsourced or lost to 
     foreign competition, and specialized counseling and 
     customized help for people with disabilities through state 
     vocational rehabilitation agencies. These individuals would 
     have to compete with each other for a declining share of 
     resources without the protections and requirements under 
     current law. Furthermore, the proposal abrogates 
     accountability for the expenditure of federal taxpayer 
     dollars by eliminating program reporting requirements. We 
     strongly urge you to oppose any effort to adopt this 
     misguided plan.
       In summary, H.R. 27 strays far from the appropriate mission 
     for federal job training programs of enhancing training 
     opportunities for workers and providing skilled workers for 
     employers. We strongly urge you to oppose this legislation 
     unless amendments are adopted to delete the block grant, PRA 
     demonstration and religious-based discrimination provisions 
     and to modify the infrastructure provisions as recommended.
       American Association of People with Disabilities.
       American Civil Liberties Union.
       American Counseling Association.
       American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE).
       American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial 
     Organizations (AFL-CIO).
       American Federation of State, County and Municipal 
     Employees (AFSCME).
       American Federation of Teachers (AFT).
       American Humanist Association.
       American Jewish Congress.
       American Psychological Association.
       American RehabACTion Network.
       Americans for Democratic Action (ADA).
       Americans for Religious Liberty.
       Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU).
       Association for Career and Technical Education.
       Baptist Joint Committee.
       Brain Injury Association of America.
       Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainman.
       Campaign for America's Future.
       Center for Community Change.
       Communications Workers of America (CWA).
       Council of State Administrators for Vocational 
     Rehabilitation (CSAVR).
       Easter Seals.
       Equal Partners in Faith.
       Goodwill Industries.
       Institute for America's Future.
       Interfaith Alliance.
       International Association of Machinists and Aerospace 
     Workers.
       International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
       International Union of Painters and Allied Trades.
       National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good 
     Shepherd.
       National Alliance For Partnerships in Equity.
       National Association of State Directors of Career Technical 
     Education Consortium.
       National Association of State Head Injury Administrators.
       National Council of Jewish Women.
       National Education Association.
       National Employment Law Project.
       National Head Start Association.
       National Immigration Law Center.
       National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty.
       National League of Cities.
       National Organization for Women.
       National Rehabilitation Association (NRA).
       National WIC Association.
       National Women's Law Center.
       NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby.
       OMB Watch.
       Paralyzed Veterans of America.
       Patient Alliance for Neuroendocrineimmune Disorders; 
     Organization for Research and Advocacy.
       Plumbers and Pipe Fitters Union.
       Professional Employees Department, AFL-CIO.
       Protestants for the Common Good.
       Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
       The Arc of the U.S.
       United Cerebral Palsy.
       Unitarian Universalist Service Committee.
       United Auto Workers (UAW).
       United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries.
       United Mineworkers of America.
       United Steelworkers of America.
       USAction.
       Welfare Law Center.
       Wider Opportunities for Women.
       Women Employed.
       Women Work! The National Network for Women's Employment.
       YWCA USA.
       9to5, National Association of Working Women.

[[Page E359]]

     
                                  ____
                                American Humanist Association,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the American Humanist 
     Association, the oldest and largest Humanist organization in 
     the nation, I write in opposition to the Job Training 
     Improvement Act (H.R. 27). The Act is included in legislation 
     reauthorizing the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, the main 
     job training program in the United States.
       The Job Training Improvement Act eliminates the protection 
     against employment discrimination in federally funded job 
     training programs. If passed the measure would erode civil 
     rights protections in these programs that have been in place 
     since President Ronald Reagan signed the Job Training 
     Partnership Act into law in 1982.
       While the AHA supports job training, we urge you to oppose 
     this Act because it would further entrench a constitutionally 
     questionable faith-based initiative and would legally 
     sanction discrimination.
       An amendment to reinstate civil rights protections will be 
     offered on the floor by Representative Bobby Scott. We ask 
     you to support this amendment because it would alleviate the 
     civil rights rollback included in the bill.
       As Humanists we strive for religious freedom and equal 
     treatment regardless of one's beliefs or lack thereof. As 
     it's written, this legislation gives the freedom for faith-
     based organizations funded with taxpayer dollars to hire on 
     the basis of religious beliefs, opening the door to religious 
     and ideological employment criteria. Along with other 
     religious, civil rights, labor, education, health, and 
     advocacy organizations, the American Humanist Association 
     opposes H.R. 27.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Tony Hileman,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                The American Jewish Committee,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
       Dear Representative: I write on behalf of the American 
     Jewish Committee, the nation's oldest human relations 
     organization; with more than 150,000 members and supporters 
     represented by 33 chapters nationwide, to urge you to 
     support, if offered, the Scott-Van Hollen-Woolsey amendment 
     to H.R. 27, the Job Training Improvement Act of 2005. We 
     further urge that, absent the amendment, you vote to oppose 
     H.R. 27; without the amendment, the bill would repeal 
     longstanding civil rights protections designed to protect 
     workers in federally-funded job training programs from 
     religious discrimination.
       Beginning with the inception of the federal job-training 
     programs encompassed by the Job Training Partnership Act of 
     1982, religion-based employment discrimination has been 
     prohibited in federally funded job-training programs, 
     including programs operated by religious institutions. The 
     bipartisan Job Training Partnership Act, which included the 
     provision prohibiting religious discrimination that H.R. 27 
     would now make inapplicable to religious organizations, was 
     originally sponsored by Senator Dan Quayle (R-IN), reported 
     out of the Senate HELP Committee under Chairman Orrin Hatch 
     (R-UT) and signed into law by President Ronald Reagan. In 
     1998, the provision once again received strong bipartisan 
     support in both the House and the Senate when the Workforce 
     Investment Act combined earlier job-training programs and 
     recodified the original nondiscrimination provision included 
     in the 1982 law.
       The nondiscrimination provision that the Scott-Van Hollen-
     Woolsey amendment would reinstate has, over the past 23 
     years, allowed religious organizations to participate in 
     federally funded job-training programs while protecting 
     religious liberty and maintaining fundamental civil rights 
     standards. We are committed to maintaining and respecting the 
     autonomy of religious organizations, including their right to 
     look to religious standards when making employment decisions 
     for positions funded with private resources. But preserving 
     the autonomy of those institutions must not entail the 
     wholesale repeal of longstanding civil rights safeguards that 
     protect workers from religious discrimination in federally-
     funded positions.
           Respectfully,
                                                Richard T. Foltin,
     Legislative Director and Counsel.
                                  ____



                             National Council of Jewish Women,

                                Washington, DC, February 23, 2005.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the 90,000 members and 
     supporters of the National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW), I 
     am writing to you regarding the Job Training and Improvement 
     Act (H.R. 27) introduced by Rep. Howard McKeon (R-CA). This 
     legislation includes dangerous language that would repeal 
     longstanding civil rights protections designed to protect 
     against religious discrimination in employment in federally 
     funded job training programs. I urge you to support an 
     amendment that would strike this provision, or oppose the 
     bill if such an amendment is not included.
       Current federal law prohibits discrimination based on 
     religion in federally funded programs. This twenty-three year 
     old provision has worked well, allowing religious 
     organizations to provide essential government services while 
     maintaining their own sectarian identity and America's core 
     commitment to protecting both civil rights and religious 
     liberties. The language in H.R. 27 would remove these 
     existing civil rights protections and allow faith-based 
     groups to discriminate based on religion in their hiring 
     practices. While such discrimination may be appropriate in 
     some situations, such as hiring a rabbi, priest or imam, it 
     has no place in the hiring of providers of secular services 
     funded by taxpayer dollars. Faith-based organizations 
     receiving government funding must be held to the same civil 
     rights standards as other social service providers and doing 
     so has not prevented these groups from partnering with the 
     government to provide important services.
       NCJW joins scores of religious leaders, denominational 
     offices, and faith-based organizations in opposition to this 
     divisive and unnecessary legislation. I urge you to oppose 
     the Job Training and Improvement Act and uphold our nation's 
     commitment to eradicating employment discrimination.
       For over a century, NCJW has been at the forefront of 
     social change, raising its voice on important issues of 
     public policy. Inspired by our Jewish values, NCJW has been, 
     and continues to be, an advocate for the needs of women, 
     children, and families and a strong supporter of equal rights 
     and protections for everyone.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Marsha Atkind,
     President.
                                  ____



                                                    OMB Watch,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.

   Vote ``NO'' on WIA Reauthorization Unless Scott Amendment Passes! 
  Protect Civil Rights--Stop Federally Funded Religious Discrimination

     Re Scott Amendment to H.R. 27, the Jobs Training Improvement 
         Act.

       Dear Representative: OMB Watch strongly urges you to 
     support the Scott Amendment to H.R. 27, the Jobs Training 
     Improvement Act of 2005. The Scott Amendment will restore 
     civil rights protections to people wishing to be employed by 
     religious organizations participating in federally funded 
     programs.
       The need for the Scott Amendment is underscored by a 
     decision made by the Supreme Court in Chief Justice 
     Rehnquist's majority opinion in Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U.S. 
     589 (1988). The Court stated that although the Constitution 
     does not bar religious organizations from participating in 
     federal programs, it requires (1) that no one participating 
     in a federal program can ``discriminate on the basis of 
     religion'' and (2) that all federal programs must be carried 
     out in a ``lawful, secular manner.'' Id. at 609, 612.
       H.R. 27 seeks to codify discrimination in hiring for 
     federally funded positions by religious organizations. The 
     bill repeals longstanding civil rights protections designed 
     to protect workers against this kind of religious 
     discrimination. Since their inception in 1982, these job 
     training programs have included important civil rights 
     protections against employment discrimination based on 
     religious beliefs in programs that receive federal funding.
       The Scott Amendment will make H.R. 27 consistent with Bowen 
     v. Kendrick and President Reagan's original intent when he 
     signed the first Workforce Investment Act in 1988. This 
     twenty-one year old provision has been successfully 
     implemented since the inception of the job training program, 
     allowing religious organizations to provide essential 
     government services while maintaining a commitment to 
     protecting civil rights and religious liberty.

 Vote ``Yes'' on the Scott Amendment; Vote ``No'' on Final Passage if 
                       the Scott Amendment Fails

       Although religious employers have the right under Title VII 
     to apply religious tests to employees, the Constitution 
     requires that the direct receipt and administration of 
     federal funds remove that exemption. In addition, the federal 
     government has constitutional obligations reinforced by Bowen 
     v. Kendrick to refrain from religious discrimination. The 
     Scott Amendment will restore the civil rights provisions into 
     H.R. 27.
       For these reasons, OMB Watch encourages you to vote ``YES'' 
     on the Scott Amendment and ``NO'' on final passage if the 
     Scott Amendment fails. If you have any questions, please 
     contact Jennifer Lowe at 202-234-8494. Thank you for your 
     attention to this matter.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Gary Bass,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                  People for the American Way,

                                Washington, DC, February 24, 2005.
       Dear Member of Congress: On behalf of the over 675,000 
     members and supporters of People For the American Way, we are 
     writing to voice our opposition to the Job Training 
     Improvement Act (H.R. 27) as it would repeal longstanding 
     civil rights protections designed to protect workers against 
     religious discrimination in federally-funded job training 
     programs. We urge you not to eliminate the civil rights of 
     thousands of Americans by exempting religious organizations 
     from anti-discrimination requirements established over twenty 
     years ago. These critical requirements were signed into law 
     by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 under the Job Training 
     Partnership Act and were reaffirmed in 1998 during the 
     passage of the re-titled Workforce Investment Act (WIA). We 
     ask that you support the Scott amendment which would restore 
     this necessary protection. If Congress were to do otherwise, 
     it would be allowing direct federal funding of 
     discrimination. This is unacceptable.

[[Page E360]]

       Maintaining the separation between church and state is 
     fundamental to maintaining the religious freedoms of all 
     Americans. However, this can not be accomplished when 
     organizations receiving federal funds are allowed to deny 
     employment opportunities based upon an individual's religious 
     beliefs.
       There is no need to exempt religious organizations from 
     anti-discrimination laws in order to protect the religious 
     identity of that organization. Provisions already exist that 
     allow an organization that is the recipient of federal funds 
     to separate its religious content from the provision of 
     services through the creation an independent 501[c][3] 
     organization. This allows the religious organization to 
     maintain its religious identity without government 
     interference, while also providing needed services in the 
     community.
       Any exemption for religious organizations receiving federal 
     funds should not be permitted for it would undermine a half 
     century of public policy aimed at protecting individuals from 
     discrimination in the workplace, and further erode the 
     fundamental protections against discrimination based on one's 
     religion that are absolutely central to our democracy.
       We ask that you uphold the religious liberties of all 
     Americans and not allow federal funding of employment 
     discrimination under H.R. 27. Therefore, we strongly urge you 
     to support the Scott amendment, which may be offered on the 
     floor, to restore current law and continue to protect 
     critical civil rights protections within the Job Training 
     Improvement Act. Furthermore, we ask that you vote no on the 
     final passage of H.R. 27 if this amendment is not adopted. 
     Thank you.
           Sincerely,
     Ralph G. Neas,
                                                        President.
     Tanya Clay,
     Deputy Director of Public Policy.
                                  ____



                                    Presbyterian Church (USA),

                                    Washington, DC, March 1, 2005.
       Dear Representative: As you consider H.R. 27 and the issue 
     of Faith-Based Hiring, I would like to alert you that the 
     official policy of the Presbyterian Church (USA) is to oppose 
     the kind of discrimination that could arise in the name of 
     religion through the passage of this bill. Religious freedom 
     and liberty has been a key component of the beliefs held by 
     members of this historic denomination.
       On Charitable Choice/Faith Based Initiatives--The 1988 
     General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) ``has 
     recognized for many years that, apart from question of 
     constitutionality, the church faces serious issues related to 
     its own liberty of faith and action when it receives 
     government funds. The 1969 General Assembly noted the 
     distinction between ``church-controlled'' and ``church-
     related'' and urged that ``temporary or permanent community 
     agencies qualified to receive public funds be established at 
     church initiative to maintain such programs;'' and, ``if 
     church control was temporarily necessary for start up or 
     experimental programs, that any permanent program resulting . 
     . . be removed from church control and put under the control 
     of independent community-based bodies.'' Holding that ``in 
     the conduct of social services church agencies should accept 
     necessary and proper governmental regulation and supervision 
     . . .'' (Minutes, 1988, p. 559).
       Also, General Assembly policy has consistently and clearly 
     stated that government has the primary responsibility for 
     caring for the poor, along with the private sector: The 1997 
     General Assembly stated (and the 1999 General Assembly 
     reaffirmed), ``that while the church, voluntary 
     organizations, business, and government must work 
     cooperatively to address the needs of poor persons and 
     communities, the government must assume the primary role for 
     providing direct assistance for the poor'' (Minutes, 1997, 
     pp. 553). The General Assembly has noted that the private 
     sector is incapable of caring for the needy on its own. The 
     1996 General Assembly asserted that ``churches and charities, 
     including many Presbyterian congregations and related 
     organizations, have responded generously to growing hunger 
     but do not have the capacity to replace public programs'' 
     (Minutes, 1996, p. 784).
       As with all institutions and organizations, there will be 
     those who may hold a differing view from that of the parent 
     body. Congress may receive letters from organizations that 
     may cause confusion about where the official policy of the 
     Church is on this issue.
       The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church is the 
     highest governing body of the 216 year denomination. There 
     are approximately 11,500 congregations with 2.5 million 
     members. Please contact me if you have further questions.
                                      Rev. Elenora Giddings Ivory,
     Director, Washington Office.
                                  ____

                                           Religious Action Center


                                            of Reform Judaism,

                                Washington, DC, February 24, 2005.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the Union for Reform 
     Judaism, whose 900 congregations across North America 
     encompass 1.5 million Reform Jews, and the Central Conference 
     of American Rabbis (CCAR) whose membership includes over 1800 
     Reform rabbis, I strongly urge you to oppose the Job Training 
     and Improvement Act of 2005 (H.R. 27). H.R. 27 does not meet 
     the job training needs of either job seekers or employers and 
     would repeal civil rights laws by permitting government-
     funded faith-based job training programs to practice 
     religious discrimination in employment.
       H.R. 27 fails to make meaningful improvements to the 
     Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and would weaken the federal 
     government's job training programs. H.R. 27 consolidates 
     severa1 worker training programs into a single block grant 
     and gives states broad discretion in their use of funds. 
     Experience with block grants suggests that this wider 
     discretionary power is a precursor to federal funding cuts. 
     Under W1A, states and local governments have also been 
     allowed more discretion in the use of job training funding, 
     and states have used this discretion to fund new job training 
     facilities rather than focus on providing new services.
       The Job Training and Investment Act would also appeal civil 
     rights law by permitting government funded faith-based job 
     training programs to engage in religious discrimination when 
     making employment decisions. While the interrelated issues of 
     whether the Constitution permits federally funded religious 
     entities to discriminate in hiring on the basis of religion 
     and the legitimate need to recognize the religious autonomy 
     of churches, synagogues, and houses of worship are complex, 
     government-funded discrimination is deeply problematic on a 
     policy level. The notion that a job notice could be placed in 
     the newspaper seeking employees for a government-funded 
     social service program run by a Protestant church that reads 
     ``Jews, Catholics, Muslims need not apply'' or ``No unmarried 
     mothers will be hired'' is profoundly troubling. According to 
     an April 2001 Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life poll, 78 
     percent of Americans oppose allowing government-funded 
     religious organizations to hire only those who share their 
     religious beliefs.
       Religious institution can, and do, play a vital role in 
     helping provide employment services. However, the government 
     must ensure that religious organizations that accept 
     government funding are prohibited from practicing religious 
     discrimination.
       We urge you to address the real and distinct needs of 
     different types or workers and job seekers and to protect 
     longstanding civil rights by opposing the Job Training and 
     Improvement Act of 2005 (H.R. 27).
           Yours sincerely,
                                           Rabbi David Saperstein,
     Director and Counsel.
                                  ____



                                      The Interfaith Alliance,

                                Washington, DC, February 28, 2005.
       Dear Members of Congress: I write to you today as the 
     president of The Interfaith Alliance, a nonpartisan, national 
     grassroots organization dedicated to promoting the positive 
     and healing role of religion in public life, to urge you to 
     support the amendment, offered by Representative Bobby Scott 
     (D-VA), to the Job Training Improvement Act/H.R. 27 that 
     would restore civil rights protections. If an amendment like 
     this fails, I urge you to oppose the Job Training Improvement 
     Act/H.R. 27 because it is an unjustified assault on religious 
     liberty and civil rights protections.
       Section 127, entitled ``Non-Discrimination'' exempts 
     religious organizations that receive Federal funds from the 
     prohibition of discrimination that is standard practice for 
     all other organizations that contract with the federal 
     government. Specifically, under the subsections entitled 
     ``Prohibition of Discrimination Regarding Participation, 
     Benefits and Employment,'' and ``Exemption for Religious 
     Organizations,'' the bill states, that standard 
     nondiscrimination policies ``shall not apply to a recipient 
     of financial assistance under this title that is a religious 
     corporation, association, educational institution, or 
     society, with respect to the employment of individuals of a 
     particular religion . . .''
       This provision represents a dramatic shift in government 
     policy towards religion as it repeals longstanding civil 
     rights protections which have traditionally protected people 
     of faith and goodwill from religious employment 
     discrimination in federally funded job-training programs.
       Since its inception in 1982, when it was called the Job 
     Training Partnership Act (JTPA), this program has been the 
     largest Federal employment training program in the nation, 
     serving dislocated workers, homeless individuals, 
     economically disadvantaged adults, youths and older workers. 
     When signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, this program 
     contained the very language protecting against religious 
     discrimination that H.R. 27 seeks to repeal.
       As an organization comprised of 150,000 people of faith and 
     goodwill spanning over 70 faith traditions, I urge you to 
     support the Scott amendment to the Job Training Improvement 
     Act/H.R. 27 that would restore civil rights protections. If 
     an amendment like this fails, I urge you to oppose the Job 
     Training Improvement Act/H.R. 27 because it is an unjustified 
     assault on religious liberty and civil rights protections.
       America's unemployed citizens and those who wish to train 
     them should not be subjected to a religious test under a 
     Federal program. If you need further information on our 
     position on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact 
     Kim Baldwin, Director of

[[Page E361]]

     Public Policy and Voter Education, at 202-639-6370.
           Sincerely,
                                         Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy,
     President, The Interfaith Alliance.
                                  ____

         Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, 
           Washington Office for Advocacy,
                                                   Washington, DC.
     To: Members of the House of Representatives.

       Dear Representative: I write on behalf of over 1,000 
     congregations that make up the Unitarian Universalist 
     Association of Congregations (UUA). Unitarian Universalists 
     have a long and proud history of opposing the convergence of 
     religion and state in ways that compromise both entities. I 
     write today to urge you to oppose provisions in H.R. 27, The 
     Job Training Improvement Act that would do just that.
       We ask you to oppose religious discrimination in employment 
     procedures included in Section 128 of H.R. 27. If Section 128 
     were included as written, The Jobs Improvement Act would 
     allow religious organizations receiving government funds to 
     discriminate on the basis of religion when hiring employees 
     for taxpayer-funded positions. This would jeopardize both 
     civil rights and religious freedom. We urge you to support 
     the amendment offered on the floor by Representative Scott 
     that would restore protections contained in current law that 
     guard the freedom of religious belief and expression to all 
     people seeking employment of federally funded positions.
       While The Unitarian Universalist Association affirms the 
     critical role of faith as a source of healing in our society, 
     we strongly believe that all legally qualified social service 
     providers should be considered for employment without the 
     imposition of religious tests or proscription. By accepting 
     government funds, houses of worship are--and should remain 
     subject to government oversight, as well as government 
     regulation, including compliance reviews, audits, and 
     upholding the protections against civil rights violations 
     such as religious discrimination.
       If an amendment restoring current law by requiring 
     federally funded religious organizations to comply with civil 
     rights protections is not passed on the floor, we urge you to 
     oppose H.R. 27, the Job Training Improvement Act as written. 
     The protection of the religious expression of people of all 
     faiths is the responsibility all Americans, including 
     religious organizations such as ours and legislators such as 
     yourself. We ask for your vote against religious 
     discrimination in the workplace in order to protect the civil 
     rights and religious freedom of all people and remain true to 
     one of the core principles of our nation's commitment to 
     liberty for all.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Rob Keithan,
     Director.
                                  ____

         National Association for the Advancement of Colored 
           People, Washington Bureau,
                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
     Members,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Re Support the Scott Amendment to H.R. 27, the Job Training 
         Improvement Act of 2005, which would restore protections 
         against discrimination in current law.

       Dear Representative: On behalf of the National Association 
     for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the nation's 
     oldest, largest and most widely recognized grassroots civil 
     rights organization, I urge you, in the strongest terms 
     possible to support the amendment being offered by 
     Congressman Bobby Scott to H.R. 27 that would retain the 
     civil rights protections when using federal funds in the 
     current law. If the bill's existing language becomes law, 
     civil rights protections that have been in place for decades 
     will be eliminated and the result will be federally funded 
     discrimination. Given the importance of this issue to the 
     NAACP and our membership, I would also urge you to vote 
     against final passage of the bill should the Scott amendment 
     fail.
       Because of our Nation's sorry history of bigotry, for 
     decades it has been illegal to discriminate in employment and 
     make hiring decisions based on race or religion. The only 
     exception is faith-based organizations that are exempted from 
     anti-discrimination provisions in programs using their own 
     money; although until now they had to adhere to basic civil 
     rights laws when using federal monies to support a program.
       There should be no question that Faith Based institutions 
     should, like all other recipients of federal funds, adhere to 
     basic civil rights laws when using federal funds. It is a 
     fundamental American principle that no citizen should have to 
     pass someone else's racial, ethnic or religious test to 
     qualify for a taxpayer-funded job and has been the law 
     since 1982 when our federally-funded national job training 
     programs were consolidated under the Job Training 
     Partnership Act. H.R. 27 would eliminate the protections 
     and advancements in the current law, provisions which have 
     never been controversial.
       Congressman Scott's amendment would restore protections 
     against religious discrimination in hiring for jobs funded 
     through the Job Training Improvement Act. This amendment is 
     consistent with the civil rights laws passed of the mid-
     1960's and with the basic principles of our Constitution and 
     would reassert traditional and well-established employment 
     rights, civil rights and anti-discrimination protections.
       Make no mistake; enactment of this provision will not make 
     it easier for faith-based organizations to get federal 
     contracts; they still need to apply, compete, and are subject 
     to audit. Any program that can get funded under this bill can 
     get funded anyway; Faith based organizations must simply 
     comply with decades-old civil rights laws; they must not 
     discriminate in hiring.
       While there can be no question as to the invaluable role 
     that faith-based organizations have played and continue to 
     play in meeting many of the needs facing our nation today, it 
     is also true that there are a few organizations which may, 
     unfortunately, use religious discrimination as a shield for 
     racial or gender discrimination. Thus I urge you, again in 
     the strongest terms possible, to support Congressman Scott's 
     amendment and ensure that tax dollars are not being used to 
     support discrimination in any form.
       Should you have any questions or comments on the NAACP 
     position, I hope that you will feel free to contact me at 
     (202) 463-2940. The NAACP considers this to be a very 
     important civil rights vote, and your position will be 
     relayed to our national membership.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Hilary Shelton,
     Director.
                                  ____

              American Federation of State, County, and Municipal 
                                                        Employees,


                                                      AFL-CIO,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
       Dear Representative: I am writing on behalf of the 1.4 
     million members of the American Federation of State, County 
     and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) to urge you to vote against 
     H.R. 27, the ``Job Training Improvement Act of 2005'' and to 
     oppose any effort to expand the block grant authority in the 
     bill along the lines of the Administration's ``WIA Plus'' 
     proposal.
       H.R. 27 fails to make improvements necessary to enhance the 
     training and career opportunities of unemployed workers. 
     Instead, the legislation completely eliminates the dislocated 
     worker training program, undermines state rapid response 
     systems, ends the federal-state labor exchange system, rolls 
     back protections against religious discrimination in hiring 
     by job training providers, and potentially undermines the 
     stability of other important related programs. It also 
     threatens the unemployment insurance-employment service 
     partnership that has served the nation well for over 70 
     years.
       We are especially concerned that H.R. 27 terminates the 
     U.S. Employment Service (ES) system by folding it into a 
     block grant with the WIA dislocated worker and adult training 
     programs. Funded from the federal Unemployment Insurance 
     Trust Fund, the ES has been a key part of the unemployment 
     insurance (UI) system since its inception. Through state 
     employment service agencies, the ES has administered the UI 
     ``work test'' to determine whether UI claimants are actively 
     seeking work in order to be eligible for UI benefits.
       It is highly doubtful that local one-stop centers with 
     multiple mandates could address the reemployment needs of UI 
     claimants and the mandates of the UI law effectively. In 
     addition, shifting the UI work test to one-stop centers, 
     which private companies can operate, would privatize an 
     important eligibility function for the UI program and set the 
     stage for privatizing the administration of UI benefits. This 
     is especially troubling in light of the importance of 
     preserving the confidentiality of employer wage records.
       Eliminating the Employment Service also advances a major 
     objective of the Administration: the devolution of the 
     federal unemployment insurance to the states, in effect 
     ending this critical countercyclical program as a national 
     system. Legislation to reduce the Federal Unemployment Tax 
     (FUTA) by 75% over several years and turn the financing of UI 
     operations back to the states has languished in Congress. 
     H.R. 27 accomplishes one phase of this larger plan.
       Block granting the dislocated and adult worker training 
     programs with the ES eliminates the distinct objectives of 
     each of these programs. Specifically, it ends targeted job 
     training assistance for workers dislocated by off-shoring and 
     other economic changes, pits different types of workers 
     against each other, and it will lead to future funding 
     reductions. It also replaces the current uniform statewide 
     job service that matches employers and job seekers with a 
     multiplicity of local programs that will have no incentive or 
     ability to cooperate as a comprehensive labor exchange 
     system.
       AFSCME also strongly opposes provisions in H.R. 27 that 
     give governors broad discretion to transfer resources from 
     the WIA ``partner programs'' to pay for WIA infrastructure 
     and core services costs.
       By relying on funding transfers from these programs to 
     guarantee resources for WIA infrastructure and core services, 
     H.R. 27 will disrupt and weaken services provided by these 
     non-WIA programs, which also will face substantial pressures 
     for funding reductions in the next few years.
       The infrastructure and related provisions begin the 
     commingling of funds from these non-WIA programs and lay the 
     foundation for future block granting of these programs. Any 
     doubts that this is the long term objective should be 
     dispelled by the Administration's current request to modify 
     H.R. 27 to give governors authority to add up to five 
     additional ``partner programs'' to the block

[[Page E362]]

     grant created in the legislation (``WIA Plus''). These 
     programs include vocational rehabilitation, trade adjustment 
     assistance, veterans employment and training programs, adult 
     education and food stamp employment and training programs.
       In addition to the block grant strategy in the legislation, 
     H.R. 27 includes new demonstration authority for the 
     Department of Labor to operate ``personal reemployment 
     account'' (PRA) demonstrations. The PRAs would cap the cost 
     of training that unemployment insurance recipients can 
     receive and bar them from receiving free WIA services for a 
     year after the PRA account is established. They represent a 
     further contraction in the assistance the federal government 
     provides workers, and, since the Labor Department already is 
     running an experiment in seven states, they are entirely 
     unnecessary.
       Finally, the proposed PRAs or vouchers are complemented by 
     the repeal of longstanding civil rights protections that 
     prohibit religious-based employment discrimination by job 
     training providers. This rollback of civil rights 
     protections, designed to advance direct government funding of 
     pervasively religious institutions, overturns decades of 
     consensus on the need for nondiscriminatory treatment in job 
     training programs and should be rejected. We understand that 
     Rep. Bobby Scott intends to offer an amendment that would 
     restore to the bill the existing civil rights protections. We 
     urge you to support this amendment.
       In summary, H.R. 27 is a radical and partisan departure 
     from previous workforce policy. It transforms the original 
     one-stop idea of a better-coordinated workforce system into a 
     mechanism for reducing resources and block granting programs 
     in the future. It would undermine the role of Congress in 
     national workforce policy, erode accountability for the 
     expenditure of workforce funds, and retreat from important 
     civil rights protections that have enjoyed bipartisan support 
     for over 25 years. AFSCME strongly urges you to vote against 
     H.R. 27.
           Sincerely,
                                              Charles M. Loveless,
     Director of Legislation.
                                  ____

         American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial 
           Organizations,
                                Washington, DC, February 17, 2005.
     Honorable John Boehner,
     Chairman, House Committee on Education and the Workforce, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Boehner: On Thursday, February 17, the House 
     Education and Workforce Committee will consider H.R. 27 to 
     reauthorize the Workforce Investment Act. The AFL-CIO urges 
     you to vote against this legislation, because it is a step 
     backward in securing needed training and employment programs 
     for our nation's unemployed and disadvantaged workers.
       Good jobs that support families are the foundation of a 
     strong economy and a strong nation, and creating and 
     sustaining good jobs is the number one priority for 
     Americans. Effective and meaningful job training programs and 
     income support for jobless workers combined with job search 
     assistance are key components of a comprehensive jobs 
     strategy. H.R. 27 does nothing to create and sustain good 
     jobs in America. At the same time it consolidates, block 
     grants and cuts the funding for Workforce Investment Act 
     programs designed to help unemployed workers and 
     disadvantaged adults.
       In particular, we are concerned about the following 
     provisions in H.R. 27:


                 elimination of the employment service

       The AFL-CIO opposes repeal of the Wagner-Peyser Act, called 
     for under H.R. 27. Repealing the Wagner-Peyser Act eliminates 
     the 60-year-old United States Employment Service (ES), a 
     federal-state partnership that maintains a nationwide, free, 
     publicly administered labor exchange matching job seekers and 
     employers. It is also the first step toward dismantling the 
     critical and historic federal role in the nation's 
     unemployment insurance (UI) system, turning it over entirely 
     to the states. Repealing the Wagner-Peyser Act and block 
     granting ES funds will reduce, privatize and voucherize free 
     public labor exchange programs.


                            wia block grant

       H.R. 27 consolidates into a single block grant the WIA 
     adult and dislocated worker programs with the Wagner-Peyser 
     Employment Service program and reemployment services for 
     unemployment insurance recipients. In doing so, it destroys 
     both the dislocated worker program, which has provided 
     assistance to experienced workers permanently dislocated from 
     their jobs, and the statewide job service, which provides a 
     uniform statewide system for matching employers and 
     jobseekers. The block grant will pit different types of 
     workers against each other for assistance and lead to future 
     funding reductions.


                         infrastructure funding

       H.R. 27 gives Governors broad discretion to transfer 
     additional resources from the WIA partner programs to pay for 
     WIA infrastructure and WIA core services costs--without any 
     assurance that more training would result. By relying on 
     funding transfers from these programs, H.R. 27, guarantees 
     WIA one-stop funding at the expense of disrupting and 
     weakening services provided by these non-WIA programs. A more 
     effective and simple solution to ensuring adequate training 
     services would be to require that a certain percentage of WIA 
     funds be used for training as provided in previous job 
     training programs and to create a separate WIA funding stream 
     for one-stop operations, if necessary.


                     personal reemployment accounts

       H.R. 27 includes a demonstration program for the Secretary 
     to conduct ``Personal Reemployment Account'' (PRA) 
     demonstrations even though the Department of Labor recently 
     initiated a PRA demonstration without strong interest among 
     the states. Unlike current WIA training programs, the PRAs 
     would limit the cost of training that an unemployment 
     insurance recipient can receive and would bar that individual 
     from WIA training services for a year after the PRA account 
     is established. This is the wrong way to go. With long-term 
     unemployment at historically high levels, there is a much 
     greater need for continued unemployment benefits for the 
     long-term unemployed who have found it so difficult to become 
     reemployed.


               religious-based employment discrimination

       We are particularly concerned that this legislation would 
     remove key civil rights protections against religious 
     discrimination in publicly-funded programs. H.R. 27 repeals 
     longstanding civil rights protections that prohibit 
     religious-based employment discrimination by job training 
     providers.


                                funding

       Since taking office, President Bush has made real cuts in 
     job training and assistance programs to help unemployed and 
     underemployed workers, including Workforce Investment Act 
     programs for adults and dislocated workers and the Employment 
     Service. In inflation-adjusted dollars, these proposed cuts 
     total almost $1.9 billion.
       If implemented, the Bush WIA block grant proposals will cut 
     $284 million in real dollars from WIA and Employment Service 
     programs. If implemented, the new ``WIA Plus'' block grant 
     proposal will cut $354 million in real dollars from current 
     TAA, Vocational Rehabilitation, Adult Education, Veterans 
     Training and Food Stamp Employment and Training Programs. The 
     Bush block grant proposals will mean a total of $638 million 
     in real cuts for existing programs.


                         ``wia plus'' proposals

       Though not part of HR 27, at present, the Bush 
     Administration has proposed a ``WIA Plus'' initiative that 
     would allow Governors to merge five additional programs into 
     the WIA block grant: Trade Adjustment Assistance; Vocational 
     Rehabilitation; Food Stamps Employment and Training Programs; 
     Adult Education and Veterans Employment and Training 
     Programs.
       The legislation allows the Governor to: Ignore the 
     requirements of each statute authorizing these programs. 
     Treat individuals in different parts of the state 
     differently. Consolidate reporting so that no information or 
     tracking is provided on the nature and extent of services to 
     special groups.
       The ``WIA Plus'' proposal should be opposed because it: 
     Bypasses existing public administration requirements 
     permitting these programs to be contracted out. Eliminates 
     the obligation to provide long-term training and income 
     support to workers whose jobs have been outsourced or lost to 
     foreign trade. Eliminates job training and other workforce 
     assistance to unemployed, disabled and homeless veterans and 
     eliminates state veterans employment specialists and disabled 
     veterans employment specialists. Eliminates the specialized 
     counseling and customized help for the disabled provided 
     through state vocational rehabilitation agencies. Forces 
     those in need to compete for a declining share of resources. 
     Contains no assurance that individuals will receive the same 
     quality of service.
       For all of these reasons the AFL-CIO urges you to vote 
     against H.R. 27 and oppose any amendments that would 
     implement the Bush Administration's ``WIA Plus'' program.
           Sincerely,
                                                   William Samuel,
     Director, Department of Legislation.
                                  ____



                                        Human Rights Campaign,

                                    Washington, DC, March 2, 2005.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the more than 600,000 
     members of The Human Rights Campaign, we urge support for the 
     Scott Amendment to the Job Training Improvement Act (HR 27) 
     in order to protect workers against religious discrimination 
     in federally-funded job training programs. This Amendment 
     would restore current law and continue to protect critical 
     civil rights protections thus preventing the alteration of a 
     non discrimination policy that has been in place since it was 
     signed into law by President Ronald Reagan. Passing this bill 
     without such amendment will result in religious organizations 
     being able to use Federal money to discriminate based on 
     religion under this Act even when engaging in purely secular 
     job training endeavors.
       Absent the adoption of a civil rights amendment on the 
     House floor, we urge you to vote ``No'' on final passage of 
     H.R. 27.
       The 1998 Workforce Investment Act consolidated earlier job-
     training programs and simply recodified the nondiscrimination 
     provision included in the original Job Training Partnership 
     Act of 1982. The 1998 legislation, which included this 
     nondiscrimination provision, received strong bipartisan 
     support from both the House and Senate at the time of its 
     passage in the 105th Congress. Since its inclusion in the 
     1982 JTPA, it has enjoyed bipartisan support. This twenty-one 
     year old

[[Page E363]]

     provision has worked well since the inception of this 
     program, allowing religious organizations to provide 
     government-funded services while maintaining America's 
     bedrock commitment to protecting both civil rights and 
     religious liberty.
       In general, we do not object to faith-based organizations 
     providing employment-related services or other social 
     services provided that public funds are not used to 
     discriminate. However as the Nation's largest gay, lesbian, 
     bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, we 
     summarily oppose using Federal funds to discriminate on any 
     basis, including religion, which we have witnessed used as a 
     proxy for sexual orientation and gender identity 
     discrimination.
       We strongly urge you to support the Scott Amendment and 
     oppose the unjustified rollback of civil rights protections 
     currently found in H.R. 27. We believe that tax payers should 
     never fund discrimination and urge your support in efforts to 
     restore these important protections.
       As always, should you have any questions please do not 
     hesitate to contact Shelley Simpson at 202-216-1586.
           Sincerely,
     David M. Smith,
       Vice President for Policy & Strategy.
     Christopher Labonte,
       Legislative Director.
                                  ____

                                             The Coalition Against


                                     Religious Discrimination,

                                                February 23, 2005.
       Dear Representative: We, the undersigned religious, civil 
     rights, labor, education, health and advocacy organizations 
     are writing to urge you to support Scott amendment to restore 
     critical civil rights protections to the Job Training 
     Improvement Act (H.R. 27), in order to protect workers 
     against religious discrimination in federally-funded job 
     training programs. Since their inception in 1982, these job-
     training programs have included important civil rights 
     protections against employment discrimination based on 
     religion in programs that receive federal funds. Absent the 
     adoption of a civil rights amendment on the House floor, we 
     urge you to vote ``No'' on final passage of H.R. 27.
       The 1998 Workforce Investment Act consolidated these 
     earlier job-training programs and simply recodified the 
     nondiscrimination provision included in the original Job 
     Training Partnership Act of 1982. The 1998 legislation, which 
     included this nondiscrimination provision, received strong 
     bipartisan support from both the House and Senate at the time 
     of its passage in the 105th Congress. Since its inclusion in 
     the 1982 JTPA, it has enjoyed bipartisan support. The 
     original Job Training Partnership Act was sponsored by then 
     Senator Dan Quayle, and was reported out of the Senate Labor 
     and Human Resources Committee then chaired by Senator Orrin 
     Hatch. Finally, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the 
     Job Training Partnership Act, which contains the very same 
     civil rights provision that H.R. 27 now seeks to repeal as it 
     applies to religious organizations. This 23 year old 
     provision has worked well since the inception of this 
     program, allowing religious organizations to provide 
     government-funded services while maintaining America's 
     bedrock commitment to protecting both civil rights and 
     religious liberty.
       We strongly urge you to support the Scott civil rights 
     amendment to H.R. 27 to restore current civil rights law and 
     to oppose the unjustified and unnecessary assault in H.R. 27 
     on our nation's commitment to eradicating employment 
     discrimination in government-funded jobs.
           Sincerely,
       AFL-CIO.
       American Association of University Women.
       American Civil Liberties Union.
       American Counseling Association.
       American Federation of State, County and Municipal 
     Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO.
       American Federation of Teachers.
       American Humanist Association.
       American Jewish Committee.
       American Jewish Congress.
       Americans for Religious Liberty.
       Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
       Anti-Defamation League.
       Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs.
       Central Conference of American Rabbis.
       Episcopal Church, USA.
       Equal Partners in Faith.
       Frances Kissling, Catholics for a Free Choice.
       General Board of Church and Society of The United Methodist 
     Church.
       Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of America.
       Human Rights Campaign.
       Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.
       Legal Momentum (formerly NOW Legal Defense).
       NAACP.
       National Association of Social Workers.
       National Council of Jewish Women.
       National Education Association.
       National Head Start Association.
       National PTA.
       OMB Watch.
       People For the American Way.
       Presbyterian Church (USA), Washington Office.
       Service Employees International Union SEIU, AFL-CIO.
       Texas Faith Network.
       Texas Freedom Network.
       The Interfaith Alliance.
       The Secular Coalition for America.
       Union for Reform Judaism.
       Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.
       United Auto Workers.
       United Church of Christ Justice & Witness Ministries.
       Women of Reform Judaism.
                                  ____



                                      Baptist Joint Committee,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
       Dear Representative: This week you will be asked to 
     consider the Job Training and Improvement Act (H.R. 27). We 
     write to request your support for the Scott amendment to 
     restore critical civil rights protections. Without the 
     adoption of this amendment, we urge you to reject this 
     legislation because it would allow religious employment 
     discrimination in positions funded with federal dollars.
       Some religious organizations qualify for an exemption to 
     the ban on religious discrimination in Title VII of the Civil 
     Rights Act of 1964. We support Title VII's exemption for 
     churches and other religious organizations. This exemption, 
     when applied to privately funded activities and enterprises, 
     appropriately protects the church's autonomy and its ability 
     to perform its mission. Courts have interpreted this 
     exemption not only to apply to clergy, but also to all of the 
     religious organization's employees including support staff, 
     and not only to religious affiliations, but also to religious 
     beliefs and practices. While we support this exemption, we 
     oppose its application in a publicly funded context.
       Without the Scott civil rights amendment, H.R. 27 would 
     allow tax-funded employment discrimination on the basis of 
     religion. Allowing government to subsidize religious 
     discrimination with tax dollars is arguably unconstitutional, 
     and in any case, an unconscionable advancement of religion 
     that simultaneously turns back the clock on civil rights.
       Religion has flourished in this country since its founding 
     precisely because the institutional spheres of church and 
     state have operated separately. This type of legislation 
     violates the separation of church and state and, therefore, 
     threatens religion. We ask you to oppose H.R. 27 and provide 
     protections from religious employment discrimination in 
     federally funded job training programs.
           Sincerely,
     K. Hollyn Hollman.
                                  ____



                                   African American Ministers,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Member of Congress: As pastors and leaders of 
     predominately African American congregations across the 
     country, we urge you to protect the civil rights and 
     religious freedom of all Americans and oppose the 
     discriminatory provisions in the Job Training Improvement Act 
     (H.R. 27). African American religious leaders and activists 
     have worked tirelessly over the past decades to ensure civil 
     rights protections. However, this bill would repeal these 
     longstanding civil rights protections designed to protect 
     workers against religious discrimination in federally-funded 
     job training programs.
       We believe that maintaining the separation between church 
     and state is fundamental to maintaining the religious 
     freedoms of all Americans. Therefore, as leaders of our 
     respective congregations, we cannot compromise our principles 
     by supporting legislation that allows religiously-affiliated 
     organizations, to discriminate with Federal taxpayers' 
     dollars. The role of the church is to promote our religious 
     teachings, and this should not be confused with religious 
     intolerance or discrimination.
       Since 1982, anti-discrimination requirements have been 
     included in the Job Training Partnership Act, re-titled the 
     Workforce Investment Act in 1998. It is important to 
     recognize that religiously affiliated organizations have not 
     requested an exemption. Furthermore, there is no need to 
     exempt religious organizations from these anti-discrimination 
     laws. Houses of worship can create independent 501(c)(3) 
     organizations in order to separate religious content from the 
     provision of services. This allows our religious 
     organizations to maintain their religious identity without 
     government interference, while also providing needed services 
     in the community.
       Not only is the exemption in H.R. 27 unnecessary, it is 
     also detrimental to the fundamental protections against 
     discrimination based on one's religion that are absolutely 
     central to our democracy. The current language in H.R. 27 
     does not protect the civil rights cherished in our 
     communities, but instead encourages federally-funded 
     discrimination.
       For these reasons, we ask that you prevent unnecessary and 
     unacceptable religious discrimination and show your 
     commitment to upholding critical civil rights protections 
     within H.R. 27.
           Sincerely,
                                        Reverend Timothy McDonald.


                             Board Members

       Rev. Wendell Anthony, Fellowship Chapel United Church of 
     Christ, Detroit, MI.
       Rev. Dr. FLoyd W. Davis, High Street Baptist Church, 
     Roanoke, VA.
       Elder Kevin A. Ford, St. Paul UCGC, Chicago, IL.
       Rev. Julius C. Hope, New Grace Missionary Baptist Church, 
     Highland Park, MI.
       Rev. Dr. Arnold W. Howard, Enon Baptist Church, Baltimore, 
     MD.

[[Page E364]]

       Rev. Leonard B. Jackson, First A.M.E. Church, Los Angeles, 
     CA.
       Rev. Dr. Clarence Pemberton, Jr., The New Hope Baptist 
     Church, Philadelphia, PA.
       Rev. James B. Sampson, First New Zion Missionary Baptist 
     Church, Jacksonville, FL.
       Rev. L. Charles Stovall, Camp Wisdom UMC, Dallas, TX.
       Rev. Dr. Rolen Womack, Jr., Progressive Baptist Church, 
     Milwaukee, WI.
       Rev. Albert Love, Love In Action Ministries, 5410 Skyview 
     Drive, SW., Atlanta, GA.
       Rev. Robert Shine, Berachah Baptist Church, 2043 Eastburn 
     Ave., Philadelphia, PA.
                                  ____



                               American Civil Liberties Union,

                                Washington, DC, February 25, 2005.
     Re the Job Training Improvement Act (H.R. 27) Creates an 
         Unconstitutional Loophole Allowing Government-Funded 
         Religious Discrimination.

       Dear Representative: The American Civil Liberties Union 
     strongly urges you to support the Scott amendment to the Job 
     Training Improvement Act (H.R. 27) to restore current law and 
     to continue to defend critical civil rights protections 
     designed to protect employees against religious 
     discrimination in federally-funded job training programs. 
     Since their inception in 1982, these federally-funded job 
     training programs have included important civil rights 
     protections against employment discrimination. H.R. 27 will 
     create an unconstitutional loophole to the enforcement of 
     this longstanding prohibition against government-funded 
     religious discrimination in Federal job training programs.


     H.R. 27 Changes Longstanding Civil Rights Law That Was Never 
                             Controversial

       H.R. 27 explicitly authorizes federally-funded religious 
     organizations receiving funds from the Act's job training 
     programs to discriminate against their employees based on 
     religion. Current law prohibits participants in Federal job 
     training programs from discriminating based on race, color, 
     religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or political 
     affiliation or belief. 29 U.S.C. 2938 (a)(2). H.R. 27 would 
     allow taxpayer dollars to fund religious organizations that 
     discriminate against their employees in the delivery of 
     federally-funded services.
       The civil rights provision barring federally-funded 
     religious discrimination has never been controversial. In 
     fact, the provision was first included in the Federal job 
     training legislation that then-Senator Dan Quayle sponsored, 
     which passed through a committee chaired by Senator Orrin 
     Hatch, and was signed by President Ronald Reagan. Throughout 
     its 21-year history, the civil rights provision has not been 
     an obstacle to the participation of religiously-affiliated 
     organizations in Federal job training programs. In fact, many 
     religiously-affiliated organizations participate in the 
     programs and comply with the same civil rights provision that 
     apply to everyone else.


  There Is Little Support for the Anti-Civil Rights Provision in the 
                                 Senate

       In the 108th Congress, the Senate passed its version of the 
     faith-based initiative after stripping out any provisions 
     that could have created any special advantages for federally-
     funded religious organizations. The sponsors of the 
     legislation realized that a majority of the Senate supported 
     the eradication of religious discrimination in federally-
     funded employment positions--and did not want to roll-back 
     any civil rights protections. The civil rights community 
     joins a significant portion of the religious community in 
     urging the House to make the same decision to oppose Federal 
     taxpayer support for religious discrimination by federally-
     funded employers.


H.R. 27 Would Reverse the Government's Long Standing Protection Against 
                    Federally Funded Discrimination

       H.R. 27 attacks the very core of civil rights protections 
     historically supported by the federal government. More than 
     60 years ago, one of the first success of the modern civil 
     rights movement was a decision by President Franklin 
     Roosevelt to bar federal contractors from discriminating 
     based on race, religion, or national origin. From that first 
     presidential decision through the Supreme Court's decision 
     allowing the Federal government to deny special tax 
     advantages to Bob Jones University, which claimed a religious 
     right to retain the tax benefits while pursuing racist 
     practices, the Federal government has made the eradication of 
     federally funded discrimination among its highest priorities.
       In Bob Jones Univ. v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983), 
     the Supreme Court held that Federal government could deny a 
     religiously-run university tax benefits because the 
     university imposed a racially discriminatory anti-
     miscegenation policy. Id. at 605. The Court decided that the 
     Federal government's compelling interest in eradicating 
     racial discrimination in education superceded any burden on 
     the university's religious exercise of enforcing a 
     religiously-motivated ban on students interracial dating. Id. 
     at 604.
       H.R. 27 would allow a religious organization, such as Bob 
     Jones University, that discriminates based on religion, to 
     participate in Federal job training programs. In a disturbing 
     result, Bob Jones University could be denied tax benefits 
     because of its racist policies toward its students, but could 
     receive Federal job training money under H.R. 27 to 
     discriminate against employees working in the Federal job 
     training program--simply because the employees do not meet 
     Bob Jones University's religious tests. Moreover, in the many 
     religious organizations in which most, if not all, of the 
     adherents are of a single race, the result of federally-
     funded religious discrimination will effectively be federal 
     funds going to the employment of persons of a single race.
       The Federal government clearly has a compelling interest in 
     applying the Workforce Investment Act's current civil rights 
     provision to everyone receiving federal funds--including 
     religious organizations seeking to discriminate on the basis 
     of religion in hiring persons to work in Federal job training 
     programs. H.R. 27 is inconsistent with the leading Supreme 
     Court case on the use of federal funds by religious 
     organizations that discriminate.
       There is no meaningful difference between the government 
     prohibiting tax benefits to organizations that discriminate 
     based on race and the Workforce Investment Act's statutory 
     prohibition on discrimination based on religion in Federal 
     job training programs. In fact, the United States itself--
     during the current Administration--squarely rejected the 
     proposition that intentional religious discrimination gets 
     less protection under the Equal Protection Clause than 
     intentional racial discrimination. In its October 26, 2001 
     brief defending the religion prong of Title VII from an 
     Eleventh Amendment attack, the United States stated that 
     ``[c]ontrary to Defendant's contention that the Supreme Court 
     has `distinguished claims involving differential treatment on 
     the basis of race and speech from those involving religion,' 
     there can be no doubt that the Equal Protection Clause 
     subjects State governments engaging in intentional 
     discrimination on the basis of religion to strict scrutiny.'' 
     Brief of Intervenor United States in Endres v. Indiana State 
     Police (N.D. Ind. Oct. 26,2001) (brief is available on 
     www.usdoi.gov). Congress should not now take the position 
     that it cannot or will not enforce a civil rights ban on 
     federal funds going to an organization claiming a right to 
     discriminate based on religion when the Supreme Court 
     specifically authorized the United States to enforce a civil 
     rights ban on federal tax benefits going to an organization 
     making a directly analogous religious exercise claim to 
     discriminate based on race. Thus, the sponsors' statement 
     that the Congress has no duty to fully enforce the 
     nondiscrimination statute is contrary to law--and abandons 
     one of the seminal decisions in civil rights, namely Bob 
     Jones Univ.


                      H.R. 27 Is Unconstitutional

       H.R. 27 abets unconstitutional employment discrimination 
     based on religion. Its exemption of religious organizations 
     from the prohibition on religious discrimination in the 
     program is contrary to constitutional law and will open the 
     door to government-funded discrimination.
       Proponents of allowing religious organizations to use 
     Federal funds to discriminate against their employees argue 
     that their position is consistent with a provision in Title 
     VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that generally permits 
     religious organizations to prefer members of their own 
     religion when making employment decisions. However, that 
     provision does not consider whether federally-funded 
     religious groups can discriminate with federal taxpayer 
     dollars. Moreover, although the Supreme Court upheld the 
     constitutionality of the religious organization exemption in 
     Title VII, Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. Amos, 483 U.S. 
     327, 336-39 (1987), the Court has never considered whether it 
     is unconstitutional for a religious organization to 
     discriminate based on religion when making employment 
     decisions in programs that the government finances to provide 
     governmental services.
       Several courts have considered whether a religious 
     organization can retain its Title VII exemption after receipt 
     of indirect Federal funds, e.g., Siegel v. Truett-McConnell 
     College, Inc., 13 F. Supp.2d 1335, 1344 (N.D. Ga. 1994) 
     (clarifying that its decision permitting a religious 
     university to invoke the Title VII exemption is because the 
     government aid is directed to the students rather than the 
     employer), but only one federal court has decided the 
     constitutionality of retaining the Title VII exemption after 
     receipt of direct Federal funds, Dodge v. Salvation Army, 
     1989 WL 53857 (S.D. Miss. 1989). In that decision, the court 
     held that the religious employer's claim of its Title VII 
     exemption for a position ``substantially, if not 
     exclusively'' funded with government money was 
     unconstitutional because it had ``a primary effect of 
     advancing religion and creating excessive government 
     entanglement.'' Id. The analysis applied by the court in 
     Dodge should apply with equal force to the Workforce 
     Investment Act programs that would provide direct Federal 
     funds to religious organizations.
       In addition to causing the Establishment Clause violation 
     cited by the court in Dodge, H.R. 27 would also subject the 
     government and any religious employer invoking the right to 
     discriminate with Federal dollars to liability for violation 
     of constitutional rights under the Free Exercise Clause and 
     the Equal Protection Clause. Although mere receipt of 
     government funds is insufficient to trigger constitutional 
     obligations on private

[[Page E365]]

     persons, a close nexus between the government and the private 
     person's activity can result in the courts treating the 
     private person as a state actor. Rendell-Baker v. Kohn, 457 
     U.S. 830 (1982).
       It is beyond question that the government itself cannot 
     prefer members of a particular religion to work in a 
     federally-funded program. The Equal Protection Clause 
     subjects governments engaging in intentional discrimination 
     on the basis of religion to strict scrutiny. E.g., United 
     States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114, 125 n.9 (1979); City of 
     New Orleans v. Dukes, 427 U.S. 297, 303 (1976). No government 
     could itself engage in the religious discrimination in 
     employment accommodated and encouraged by the proposed rule's 
     employment provision. Thus, the government would be in 
     violation of the Free Exercise Clause and the Equal 
     Protection Clause for knowingly funding religious 
     discrimination.
       Of course, a private organization is not subject to the 
     requirements of the Free Exercise Clause and the Equal 
     Protection Clause unless the organization is considered a 
     state actor for a specific purpose. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 
     42, 52 (1988). The Supreme Court recently outlined the 
     conditions necessary to establish that there is a sufficient 
     nexus between the government and the private person to find 
     that the private person is a state actor for purposes of 
     compliance with constitutional requirements on certain 
     decisions made by participants in the government program:
       [S]tate action may be found if, though only if, there is 
     such a `close nexus between the State and the challenged 
     action' that seemingly private behavior `may be fairly 
     treated as that of the State itself.' . . . We have, for 
     example, held that a challenged activity may be state action 
     when it results from the State's exercise of `coercive 
     power,' when the state provides `significant encouragement, 
     either overt or covert,' or when a private actor operates as 
     a `willful participant
     in joint activity with the State or its
     agents' . . .

     Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic 
     Association, 121 S. Ct. 924, (2001) (citations omitted).
       The extraordinary role that the current Administration--and 
     the sponsors of H.R. 27--have taken in accommodating, 
     fostering, and encouraging religious organizations to 
     discriminate based on religion when hiring for federally-
     funded programs creates the nexus for constitutional duties 
     to be imposed on the provider, in addition to the 
     requirements already placed on government itself. The clear 
     intent of the change in the civil rights provision in the 
     Workforce Investment Act is to encourage certain providers 
     receiving federal funds to discriminate based on religion.
       The H.R. 27 provision allowing government-funded religious 
     discrimination is part of a growing pattern of congressional, 
     presidential, and regulatory actions taken specifically for 
     the purpose of accommodating, fostering, and encouraging 
     federally-funded private organizations to discriminate in 
     ways that would unquestionably be unconstitutional if engaged 
     in by the federal government itself. For example, in December 
     of last year, President Bush signed Executive Order 13279, 
     which amended an earlier executive order, which had provided 
     more than 60 years of protection against discrimination based 
     on religion by federal contractors. The Bush Order provides 
     an exemption for religious organizations contracting with the 
     government to discriminate in employment based on religion. 
     In addition, the federal government is simultaneously 
     proposing regulations to allow religious organizations to 
     discriminate based on religion in employment for federal 
     programs involving substance abuse counseling, welfare 
     reform, housing, and veterans benefits.
       Although religious employers enjoy an exemption from Title 
     VII allowing them to apply religious tests when hiring for 
     positions funded with their own money, the Constitution 
     requires that direct receipt and administration of federal 
     funds removes that exemption. In addition, the federal 
     government itself has constitutional obligations to refrain 
     from religious discrimination or from establishing a 
     religion. H.R. 27 fails to meet any of those constitutional 
     mandates.
       For these reasons, the ACLU strongly urges you to support 
     the Scott amendment to H.R. 27. Thank you for your attention 
     to this matter, and please do not hesitate to call Terri 
     Schroeder at 202-675-2324 if you have any questions regarding 
     this issue.
           Sincerely,
     Laura W. Murphy,
       Director.
     Terri A. Schroeder,
       Senior Lobbyist.
                                  ____

                                   Americans United for Separation


                                          of Church and State,

                                Washington, DC, February 24, 2005.
       Dear Representative: Americans United for Separation of 
     Church and State strongly urges you to support the Scott 
     amendment to the Job Training Improvement Act (H.R. 27). The 
     Scott amendment would restore longstanding civil rights 
     protections in the Workforce Investment Act (``WIA''), which 
     guards workers against discrimination in WIA-funded job 
     training programs. Absent adoption of the Scott Amendment on 
     the House floor, Americans United strongly urges you to vote 
     ``No'' on final passage of H.R. 27.
       Americans United represents more than 75,000 individual 
     members throughout the fifty states, as well as cooperating 
     houses of worship and other religious bodies committed to the 
     preservation of religious liberty. The civil rights rollback 
     contained in H.R. 27 would allow religious organizations 
     operating government-funded programs under WIA to 
     discriminate in employment on the basis of religion, 
     religious practice, or religious beliefs. H.R. 27 thus has 
     serious implications for the protection of civil rights and 
     religious liberty, and must be opposed.
       Section 128 of H.R. 27, entitled ``Non-Discrimination,'' 
     exempts religious organizations that receive Federal funds 
     from the prohibition against discrimination on the basis of 
     religion that is standard practice for all other 
     organizations receiving funding under WIA. Since its 
     inception in 1982, when it was called the Job Training 
     Partnership Act (``JTPA''), this program has served as the 
     largest federal employment training service in the nation, 
     serving dislocated workers, homeless individuals, 
     economically disadvantaged adults, youth and older workers. 
     When signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, this program 
     contained the very language protecting against religious 
     discrimination that H.R. 27 seeks to repeal as to religious 
     organizations.
       The 1998 WIA consolidated these earlier job-training 
     programs and simply recodified the nondiscrimination 
     provision included in the original JTPA. The 1998 
     legislation, which included this nondiscrimination provision, 
     received strong bipartisan support from both the House and 
     Senate at the time of its passage in the 105th Congress. The 
     original JTPA was sponsored by then-Senator Dan Quayle, and 
     was reported out of the Senate Labor and Human Resources 
     Committee then chaired by Senator Orrin Hatch. Since its 
     inclusion in the 1982 JTPA, it has enjoyed bipartisan 
     support. This 23-year-old provision has worked well since the 
     inception of this program, allowing religious organizations 
     to provide government-funded services while maintaining 
     America's bedrock commitment to protecting both civil rights 
     and religious liberty.
       Americans United strongly urges you to support the Scott 
     amendment and to oppose the unjustified and unnecessary 
     assault in H.R. 27 on our nation's longstanding commitment to 
     eradicating employment discrimination in government-funded 
     jobs. If you have any questions about H.R. 27 or would like 
     further information on any other issue of importance to 
     Americans United, please do not hesitate to contact Aaron D. 
     Schuham, Legislative Director, at (202) 466-3234, extension 
     240.
           Sincerely,
                                               Rev. Barry W. Lynn,
     Executive Director.

                          ____________________