iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Vows To Expand Bush's Faith-Based Programs

First Posted: 07/09/08 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 01:35 PM ET

Obamaclap

** UPDATE BELOW: OBAMA CAMPAIGN REJECTS AP REPORT **

CHICAGO — Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and _ in a move sure to cause controversy _ support some ability to hire and fire based on faith.

Obama was unveiling his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday in Zanesville, Ohio, at Eastside Community Ministry, which provides food, clothes, youth ministry and other services.

"The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama was to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks obtained by The Associated Press. "We need all hands on deck."

Obama's announcement is part of a series of events leading up to Friday's Fourth of July holiday that are focused on American values.

The Democratic presidential candidate spent Monday talking about his vision of patriotism in the battleground state of Missouri. By twinning that with Tuesday's talk about faith in another battleground state, he was attempting to settle debate in two key areas where his beliefs have come under question while also trying to make inroads with constituencies that are traditionally loyal to Republicans and oppose Obama on other grounds.

But Obama's support for letting religious charities that receive federal funding consider religion in employment decisions could invite a protest from those in his own party who view such faith requirements as discrimination.

Obama does not support requiring religious tests for recipients of aid nor using federal money to proselytize, according to a campaign fact sheet. He also only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities, said a senior adviser to the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe the new policy.

Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized Obama's proposed expansion of a program he said has undermined civil rights and civil liberties.

"I am disappointed that any presidential candidate would want to continue a failed policy of the Bush administration," he said. "It ought to be shut down, not continued."

Bush supports broader freedoms for taxpayer-funded religious charities. But he never got Congress to go along so he has conducted the program through administrative actions and executive orders.

David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.

This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.

"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.

Obama proposes to elevate the program to a "moral center" of his administration, by renaming it the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and changing training from occasional huge conferences to empowering larger religious charities to mentor smaller ones in their communities.

Saying social service spending has been shortchanged under Bush, he also proposes a $500 million per year program to provide summer learning for 1 million poor children to help close achievement gaps with white and wealthier students. A campaign fact sheet said he would pay for it by better managing surplus federal properties, reducing growth in the federal travel budget and streamlining the federal procurement process.

Like Bush, Obama was arguing that religious organizations can and should play a bigger role in serving the poor and meeting other social needs. But while Bush argued that the strength of religious charities lies primarily in shared religious identity between workers and recipients, Obama was to tout the benefits of their "bottom-up" approach.

"Because they're so close to the people, they're well-placed to offer help," he was to say.

Kuo called Obama's approach smart, impressive and well thought-out but took a wait-and-see attitude about whether it would deliver.

"When it comes to promises to help the poor, promises are easy," said Kuo, who wrote a 2006 book describing his frustration at what he called Bush's lackluster enthusiasm for the program. "The question is commitment."

Obama also planned to talk bluntly about the genesis of his Christian faith in his work as a community organizer in Chicago, and its importance to him now.

"In time, I came to see faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he was to say.

UPDATE: An Obama campaign official told the Huffington Post that the AP's claims about Obama allowing hiring or firing based on faith are false. From a portion of Obama's speech today:

"Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don't believe this partnership will endanger that idea - so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them - or against the people you hire - on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs. And we'll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work."

The Politico, meanwhile, describes Obama's new plan not as an expansion of Bush's Faith-Based Initiative, but as an effort to tear down what Bush created and establish a new program with a new set of goals:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) slammed President Bush's faith-based program as "a photo-op" and a failure on Tuesday, and said he will scrap the office and create a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships that would be a "critical" part of his administration.


Obama, unveiling a plan to overhaul and expand Bush's faith-based program during remarks at a community ministry in Zanesville, Ohio, said the White House Office of Community and Faith-Based Initiatives - which Bush founded during his second week in office - "never fulfilled its promise." [...]

Reaching out to evangelicals who are non-plussed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Obama declared: "I still believe it's a good idea to have a partnership between the White House and grassroots groups, both faith-based and secular. But it has to be a real partnership - not a photo-op. That's what it will be when I'm President. I'll establish a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships."

"The new name will reflect a new commitment," he continued. "This Council will not just be another name on the White House organization chart - it will be a critical part of my administration."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

** UPDATE BELOW: OBAMA CAMPAIGN REJECTS AP REPORT ** CHICAGO — Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's ...
** UPDATE BELOW: OBAMA CAMPAIGN REJECTS AP REPORT ** CHICAGO — Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's ...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,712
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (62 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MissingAmerica
10:58 AM on 07/08/2008
There's a big difference between faith and religion. I have a great deal of faith, but I want nothing to do with religion. As long as these programs are fair and promote faith in oneself and in the family of man, fine. But if it promotes the unconstitutional unity of church and state, or if it assists agencies which continue to give God such violent human traits, it just remains twisted and ignorant. I have FAITH that Obama knows the difference.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cilantro33309
Too informed to be a CONner!
07:25 AM on 07/05/2008
I really can't believe you people think Obama is "capitulating to the religious right". You obviously didn't read the whole article, or don't understand it.

I always thought reading comprehension was something liberals had up on the GOP. huh.

If you read it a couple times until you understand it, you will see that Obama:

***Plans to dismantle the current admin illegal funding of the religious right by removing the dubya created faith-based funding program.

***Obama will replace it with a program which will give federal dollars to churches, temples, and mosques which "can only be used on secular programs. And we'll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work."

Now, what is wrong with that?

****Obama Quote: "Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don't believe this partnership will endanger that idea - so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them - or against the people you hire - on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs. And we'll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work."

Please read before you post...
05:26 PM on 07/05/2008
Maybe you can explain to me why giving taxpayers' dollars to religious organizations doesn't absolutely violate the Constitution's article prohibiting the establishment of religion. I'm an agnostic and I'm appalled at the violence and intolerance in this world instigated by religions. Why should I have to support with my tax money something I find hurtful to my society?
05:14 AM on 07/06/2008
"Faith based" is ABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE.
Those tax-free reverends belong IN JAIL.
04:23 PM on 07/06/2008
Social programs don’t work and let us cancel them now or name one that works without big waste, fraud and abuse.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Retrofuturistic
see things as they really are
02:12 AM on 07/05/2008
Obama immediately capitulated to the religious right almost right after the first minute he was assumed to be the presumptive nominee. Talk about selling your soul....

The thing is, it wasn't necessary. Very disgusting. What else is he going to flip on?

He's better at falsifying who he is than Bush was....
savethecountry
We Could Build THE DREAM With Love
02:04 AM on 07/05/2008
After having read many of the comments here, I have a question: If Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was running successful programs in Atlanta to ameliorate poverty and increase opportunity for low-income youths, had a track record of not trying to recruit the people he helped into his church, met all of the other program guidelines as described by Obama, and applied for the funds, would you oppose that?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cilantro33309
Too informed to be a CONner!
07:10 AM on 07/05/2008
Excellent question, and my answer, as a die-hard atheist, is no I would not appose it. Many churches to wonderful things for the poor and there is a need for it.

The important thing here people is that Obama is saying "I'm going to kill dubya's blatant funding of the radical right and put a true community assistance program in its place".

How can you oppose that? Please, break down and THINK!
savethecountry
We Could Build THE DREAM With Love
01:52 AM on 07/05/2008
AS LONG AS THE TERMS DESCRIBED ABOVE ARE MET, I think Obama's replacing Bush's politically motivated and largely ineffective program with his own is a fine idea, and I'm an atheist.

I think it's a fine idea because churches have been -- or certainly should be -- closer to issues of poverty and inequality than most other institutions, public or private. Obama's plan certainly is consistent with his background as a community organizer. That is especially true in this nation's communities of color, where churches still often provide the only sanctuary for downtrodden people of color. From a practical standpoint, Catholic Charities is perhaps the best example of how this HAS worked.

Progressives need to be VERY careful here and not cut off their noses to spite their faces. The idea should be to reduce poverty and increase opportunity, shouldn't it? If churches, held FIRMLY to program guidelines, can do that, then who are we to bitch about it?

And politically it provides a rational, compassionate way to appeal to evangelical voters who haven't forgotten what Jesus said about helping people.
01:04 AM on 07/05/2008
So the rose-colored glasses are being ripped off the ObaManiac's faces and they find the light disturbingly frightening....nauseating even...

"Obama right or wrong" sign up sheets are to the left.

Drop your principles in the bucket and pick up the pencil and sign... Remember, the White House is ever so close.

Please steady your legs. It may help to close your eyes and repeat endlessly "the ends justify the means.... the ends justify the means..."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
exPatPatti
Eyes Wide Open
04:45 AM on 07/06/2008
You post the same exact same cut and pasted comment on every article. It's called ---t r o l l i n g. Find an idea and jump on it.
10:47 PM on 07/04/2008
I've been troubled by Obama's shift to the right, but this notion of federal support for churches is the last straw for me. My vote is now a protest vote for Nader. Too bad...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cilantro33309
Too informed to be a CONner!
08:03 PM on 07/04/2008
I really wish you whiners would just stop and read the freaking article until you understand it!!!

All Obama is planning is dismantling the funding of a GOP wolf-in-sheeps-clothing which the dubya admin used to fund the religious right. He then will take those same funds and actually GIVE IT TO THE POOR through a legitimate government group.

Best of all, he's using it to appeal to the GOP base. THINK, if you will, please. This is brilliant, and you would see that if you would stop whining for a moment.

Obama '08. He's the only answer.
01:05 AM on 07/05/2008
"Obama right or wrong" sign up sheets are to the left.

Drop your principles in the bucket and pick up the pencil and sign... Remember, the White House is ever so close.

Please steady your legs. It may help to close your eyes and repeat endlessly "the ends justify the means.... the ends justify the means..."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cilantro33309
Too informed to be a CONner!
07:04 AM on 07/05/2008
"Drop your principles in the bucket and pick up the pencil and sign... Remember, the White House is ever so close.

Please steady your legs. It may help to close your eyes and repeat endlessly "the ends justify the means.... the ends justify the means...""

adamNsteve, no decent liberal would sign such a thing. That's the GOP mantra.

Beside that, I sould then assume you have a problem with anything that funds anything faith-based? That's pretty cold, adam. I'm as atheist as they come, but I can recognise a good community organization and the need for it when I see it. And yes, too many of them are too underfunded. 500 million to help the poorest, or 500 billion to fight a couple wars we were lied into. Wow, thats "principled".
02:52 PM on 07/04/2008
Bush set a very bad precedent when he involved the US Govt in religion (faith based, whatever you want to call it to make it more palatable). Now, another noble believer, Barack, plans to do the same thing. The nightmare never ends with these do-good politicans.
02:07 PM on 07/04/2008
The way he has been talking lately it sounds like Obama may be another 4 years of Bush also....maybe more so than McCain. Who does he think he is kidding?? What a complete fraud he is. How can we believe this guy and all of his meaningless talk and pandering ?? His words are all we can go on...we sure can't go on any prior voting record because there isn't much of one.
photo
Marlyn
If I'm wrong, let me know.
02:05 PM on 07/04/2008
DEAL BREAKER!
02:30 PM on 07/04/2008
That is exactly how I feel--deal breaker. I'm really sad about it as I was so excited about his candidacy and voted for him in the primary. When he won the nomination I almost felt like crying. Now I feel like crying for other reasons--religious right and their agenda (anti education, anti women's rights, anti gay marriage,etc ) scares me more than any other people. I guess I just won't vote cause I could never vote for McCain. Maybe I'll go for green party.
PS: My family is evacuated from our house due to fire--very scary here in our town right now. We are with friends. We haven't burned up yet (sorry Christians) but it looks like our house will. Sad. I should have gotten more pictures but I couldn't get them all. Thanks for listening and if anyone has another candidate they want to promote I'm all ears...
PSS: Will have to change user name too!
photo
brighterside
Fall seven times, stand up eight
05:10 PM on 07/04/2008
I guess your one of those ignorant Americans that can't tell a true christian from a religious rightwinger.

Please don't put christians in the same scope as religious rightwingers. We aren't governed by a hateful, bigoted and racist philosophy.

My Mom is a proponent of women's rights and has been busily been fighting against these perceptions that have tainted the christian community. We are not all rightwingers and to say so is nothing but an insult.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
hank48188
09:17 PM on 07/04/2008
Good for You, glad you woke up.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Retrofuturistic
see things as they really are
02:06 AM on 07/05/2008
BIG deal breaker. I'm with ya.
01:19 PM on 07/04/2008
I have come to the conclusion that I must not be the left leaning liberal I thought I was because I am disappointed in the close-minded views of most of the bloggers in response to what they precieve as Obama's change of positions/moving to the center. Obama has never been what the far left wanted him to be - he has always spoken of change for unity, reconciliation and working together ("no red states or blue states, just the United states of America"). I voiced my objection to Obama's FISA decision (and joined the group on mybarackobama.com.), but it is not a deal breaker for me and I am impressed by Obama's response to us and his willingness to hear and respond to those supporters who disagree with him.

If you don't want to see nonsecular services provided by as many church based service groups, get out and start some neighborhood service groups. Obama described his initiative as Faith-based and NEIGHBORHOOD based. Churches are available because service is a core part of their ministries - not because they want to convert someone, but because, as Obama has pointed out, if you are a believer in following the teachings of whatever your church is - you are called to serve others. As Obama said, we need everyone involved in changing this country. Try to envision where you fit in to the call to sacrifice and serve. Obama has described many opportunities and we need them all.
02:58 PM on 07/04/2008
There seem to be some number of people who supported Obama before they really thought out what their preconditions of support would be. Now that he isn't taking the full set of canonical leftist/progressive/"liberal" stances, they're throwing tantrums. I don't know where these expectations came from. Obama never said "support me, give me money, and I will pander to you".
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KaAp
01:09 AM on 07/05/2008
You seem to be missing the point entirely ... Faith based groups can do whatever they want to work towards ameliorating poverty -- that in itself is not bad --- all the power to them and to any neighborhood, community, state, national or international group who seeks to feed the hungry and eliminate poverty ... BUT faith based groups ought not get federal funding ...
There was a time before ketchup was made a vegetable where the government provided social services to and for the people without faith based groups getting involved ... Bush further eroded the separation between church and state with his office of faith based initiatives ... I do not care if the religious group is left, or right, my tax dollars ought not be used to support any religious groups agenda ... separation of church and state.
I would love to see more federal dollars used to eliminate poverty, hunger, illiteracy etc ... but used without religious groups as an intermediary ... All the power to churches and their mission of service without federal money ...
And a church may have a mission of service but to say a church is without religious subjectivities is kind of ludicrous and it is wrong to use federal money for anything involved with any church ...
photo
brighterside
Fall seven times, stand up eight
05:17 AM on 07/05/2008
Well what if the guidelines are met in which they have to operate as a secular program or their funding disappears or be disqualified? And what if they meet those requirements just like what the constitution states and they honor the separation of church and state?

So are you going to discriminate against someone who wants to start a secular program because his a Christian?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Okieborn
Equal Rights For All !
01:12 PM on 07/04/2008
What happened to the Sen. Obama that wanted the American Citizenry to "TRUST him ??
I worked very hard for Sen. Obama as did millions of others !!
FIRST BUSH/ MCCAIN FISA partnership now Bush Faith Based Partnership.
Sen. Obama you Sir "LIED TO AMERICA, !!!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elmoor
11:33 PM on 07/04/2008
If you had read 'Audacity of Hope'-- and it's not too late-- you will see a detailed outline of his vision for America. The same vision he's always had and that he expressed in the primary and that he is expressing now.

Nobody lied. But maybe someone didn't do their homework to really understand where this guy is coming from.
11:43 AM on 07/04/2008
Here is what I see.

Obama is going to give suport to organizations, food programs, shelter programs already set up. The funds will be provided to ONLY the secular portion of the community service. And yes, churches have done this for generations.

Community service,food distribution is already set up, no need to start from scrach. Homeless shelters, job services are up and running. I don't see that funding existing systems, that work well, is an issue. In additon, most community / religous programs are staffed with vollenters ( as in no gov payroll). As long as the funds are used as intended by use only for secular ventures. I don't see a problem.

BTW, I am an athiest and can see the good that many religious organization contribute to our social structure. Blood drives and food collection are programs I contribute to, even though they are faith based. This is the easiest way for me to have my donations get to the people they are intended to help.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Geauterre
Writer, Author, Commentator and Humorist.
09:07 AM on 07/04/2008
Oy!