Charity Gets a Seat Near the Oval Office

President Bush’s ambitious charity-tax proposals win praise, but his faith-based plans stir controversy

President Bush last week made good on his campaign promise to make

promoting philanthropy — and encouraging religious-oriented organizations to play a big role in the delivery of social services — a centerpiece of his administration.

But by pushing the most wide-ranging agenda for charity ever offered by an American president, Mr. Bush also stirred lots of controversy, with many nonprofit leaders divided and at odds even with one another over many of the new president’s goals.

Mr. Bush won praise for proposals that would encourage charitable giving by offering new and expanded tax breaks to individuals and corporations. But some nonprofit leaders were nervous or even furious over the president’s proposals to encourage greater involvement by faith-based groups in the delivery of welfare and other services because they think the result would be to diminish both government and charity — leaving some of them with the delicate task of simultaneously praising and condemning Mr. Bush.

Still other leaders, prepared to be highly critical of the president’s ideas, thought Mr. Bush’s plans were carefully tailored to avoid constitutional problems and would be shepherded by respected moderates in the new administration.

Sara E. Meléndez, president of Independent Sector, a coalition of charities and grant makers, said the mixed reaction to the administration’s ideas on religious organizations was understandable. “Some in the faith-based community are elated, while others share concerns over the potential for the blurring of the line between government and religion,” she said. “We all have to watch closely and see what they do.”

Aid to Religious Groups

The cornerstone of Mr. Bush’s efforts to help religious groups is his proposal that Congress change federal law to explicitly allow religious and other nonprofit organizations to compete for many types of federal government grants and contracts to provide social services. Current federal law explicitly allows such competition in four areas, including welfare programs.

Among other things, the president also wants to create several new federal programs to “test partnerships between the federal government and faith-based and grassroots groups.” For example, Mr. Bush wants to provide money to faith-based groups that help the children of prisoners, inmates who are about to be released, and women in maternity group homes.

Mr. Bush said that assisting faith-based and community programs is “one of the most important initiatives that my administration not only discusses, but implements.”

The president said he approaches his goal with the understanding that government has important responsibilities for public health, public order, and civil rights, and that government will never be replaced by charities and community groups.

“Yet when we see social needs in America, my administration will look first to faith-based programs and community groups, which have proven their power to save and change lives,” Mr. Bush said. “We will not fund the religious activities of any group, but when people of faith provide social services, we will not discriminate against them.”

He added, “As long as there are secular alternatives, faith-based charities should be able to compete for funding on an equal basis, and in a manner that does not cause them to sacrifice their mission.”

Concern About Coercion

But the president’s proposal drew immediate criticism from many quarters.

The American Civil Liberties Union said that Mr. Bush’s “new initiative to give tax dollars to religious organizations would lead to government-funded discrimination in employment and services and a dangerous loosening of licensing and standards for providers of social services.”

Richard T. Foltin, legislative director of the American Jewish Committee, worried that changes in the law would open the door to government-financed programs in which recipients of social services would wind up being coerced to take part in religious activities, notwithstanding legal provisions prohibiting such coercion.

Others worried that charities would be compromised by working with the government, or that they might be seen merely as private contractors for a government that is seeking to shed its responsibility for providing services. Charities, they contend, must not be distracted from performing their role as advocates and social critics.

But some, like the Rev. Jim Wallis, editor of the Christian magazine Sojourners and leader of Call to Renewal, a coalition of religous groups, pointed out that governments and nonprofit organizations already have many successful partnerships that could be expanded without violating constitutional proscriptions, if great care is taken.

“There’s a danger that faith-based organizations could become the cleanup crew for bad social policy,” said Mr. Wallis. “There are certain things that only government can do.” But, he added, “There are an awful lot of faith-based organizations doing great work that would be more effective if they were partnering with mayors, councils, and governors.”

President Bush kicked off his overall effort, which he calls “Rallying the Armies of Compassion,” by signing two executive orders to promote philanthropy and encourage religious-oriented organizations to play a big role in the delivery of social services.

One executive order creates a new unit, called the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, that will be headed by John J. DiIulio Jr., a Democrat who has been a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and professor of politics, religion, and civil society at the University of Pennsylvania.

The office will identify barriers to religious and grassroots groups in federal rules and practices, propose regulatory and statutory relief, and coordinate new federal programs to “empower and partner with faith-based and community problem solvers,” the White House said.

Mr. Bush said that Mr. DiIulio, who will report directly to him, “will make sure our government, where it works with private groups, is fair and supportive. And he will highlight groups as national models so others can learn from them.”

The other executive order establishes special units in five federal agencies — the Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Justice, and Labor — “to ensure greater cooperation between the government and the independent sector.”

Currently, Mr. Bush said, those agencies “make private groups hesitate to work” with government. The new centers “will report back on regulatory barriers to working with nonprofit groups, and make recommendations on how those barriers can be removed,” the president said.

Compassion Capital Fund

The president said that Stephen Goldsmith, the former Republican mayor of Indianapolis who was a chief domestic-policy adviser to Mr. Bush during his campaign, will advise the president on issues involving nonprofit organizations.

One major effort already planned by the administration is the creation of a Compassion Capital Fund, a public-private partnership to match private giving with federal dollars to, among other things, help small community and faith-based charities expand their programs.

President Bush also signaled his support of the Corporation for National Service, which runs AmeriCorps, the national-service program championed by former president Bill Clinton, by naming Mr. Goldsmith to its board. The president apparently hopes that the board will name Mr. Goldsmith as its chairman.

Many Republicans have tried to shut down the corporation over the years, saying it was ridiculous to pay people to perform community service. But, said Mr. Bush, “this organization has done some good work in mobilizing volunteers of all ages. I’ve asked Steve to report to me on how we can make the corporation do better, and to get help where it’s most needed.”

Acknowledging Differences

Mr. DiIulio, speaking at a Washington briefing sponsored by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, asked all sides for help as he assumes his new duties, while also acknowledging that serious differences exist.

“We can spend all our time disagreeing and it will not put any bread on anybody’s table, it’s not going to put a mentor in any child’s life, it’s not going to lift up the children, youth, and families of any community,” he said. Bickering, he added, has been the “real history” of the past quarter century. “We have an opportunity now to maybe set that a bit aright,” said Mr. DiIulio. “At least I hope and pray so.”