Faith-Based Charity Plan Needs Scrutiny

Certainly churches and religious groups have always preached charity.

And the vast majority have practiced what they preach.

Churches are generally willing to help out any way they can, with food, shelter, clothing, cash and, of course, spiritual advice and counseling.

And their efforts truly can and do change the lives of many every year. Simply put, they help people in ways the government can't.

Comes now President George W. Bush and a plan to funnel federal money into churches and faith-based charities to help them perform those worthwhile and sorely needed community services.

At first blush, this seems to be OK. It seems as if this would be a way for the government to get more bang for its tax buck.

Instead of a Washington bureaucracy trying to administer programs in Anytown, USA, just send a check to the First Anytown Church and let them take care of business.

There is no question in my mind that a local church will come closer to hitting its social target that will our federal government.

That part of the equation works for me. I fully understand why W is proposing this program.

It has merit, and the potential for better services at lower prices is real.

But there are also pitfalls and I think before any plan is put into place, there needs to be some serious scrutiny.

I think even some churches might be a little wary of a plan like this.

First of all, I think the plan has the potential to muzzle some churches when it comes to social issues.

No matter how ethical and principled you are, if you are accepting a big, fat government check, you are going to be less likely to be a critic.

You'd be biting the hand that feeds you, so to speak.

If churches - hungry for government funds - relinquish even a small measure of their moral authority in today's America, I think that would be a bad thing.

Also, one must wonder if government strings will be attached. Certainly the government isn't going to slather money on churches without restriction.

There will be restrictions. The question is whether those restrictions will limit church freedom.

And there is no question that government regulation will chase the money. Can the government enforce federal rules on ergonomics, health and safety and discrimination in the churches' programs?

If not, can churches exclude prospective employees for being the wrong gender, color or religion?

The First Amendment question doesn't loom as large for me as it does for others on this issue.

I don't believe the First Amendment prohibits religious institutions from receiving money from the government to fund social programs.

But W must be careful not to permit government-supported religious teaching.

Jobs Partnership of Washington County, Texas, is a charitable group receiving government funding. It has been hauled into court for admonishing students to "find employment through a relationship with Jesus Christ."

Certainly one could argue that crosses the line between charity and indoctrination, but who will draw that line? And how can that line be sharp enough to cover all eventualities?

I also think it would be difficult to decide which churches will receive the funds.

Surely the big, mainstream denominations in the United States will get their fair share. But what about the Moslems, the Buddhists, the Zoroastrianists or the Satanists, for that matter?

And would taxpayers put up with the government giving money to any of those religious groups?

One part of the W plan that I really like shouldn't cause anybody any problem.

He wants to allow taxpayers to claim a deduction for their charitable gifts whether they itemize or not.

That's a good idea. It might actually encourage charitable giving.

It will be interesting to see how W's plan shakes out.

I am not prepared to say that the whole plan is a bad idea and should be scrapped.

There certainly is merit in a plan to help faith-based groups deliver services. These groups are some of the very best service providers we have.

But I think there are some pretty serious issues that need to be addressed before we forge ahead.

And I think you may find that the churches and charities themselves will be raising at least some of those issues.