# 48 Bush push to shackle churches using faith-based funds.
Anything the government funds, the government controls.
This faith-based idea of "Brother" Bush is nothing but a scam to bring more churches under the thumb of Big-Brother. This aid comes with strings (chains) attached preventing a church from witnessing to the benefactors.
Yes, "Brother" Bush's plan will prevent Christians from testifying for Christ.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050103/D87CS0J81.html
Bush Pushing for More Faith-Based Funds
Jan 3, 4:59 PM (ET)
By LAURA MECKLER
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush has succeeded in opening the checkbooks of five federal departments to religious organizations. Now he's setting his sights on money doled out by the states. The goal is to persuade states to funnel more of the federal money for social service programs that they administer to "faith-based organizations."
Federal regulations now allow federal agencies to directly fund churches and other religious groups. Bush acted alone to rewrite these regulations after failing to persuade Congress to change the law.
Partly as a result, in 2003, groups dubbed "faith-based" received $1.17 billion in grants from federal agencies, according to documents provided by the White House to The Associated Press. That was about 8 percent of the $14.5 billion spent on social programs that qualify for faith-based grants in five federal departments.
That's not enough, said Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. An additional $40 billion in federal money is given out by state governments, he said, and many states do not realize that federal rules now allow them to fund these organizations. "We're on the sunrise side of the mountain," he said.
To encourage states, the White House has hosted a series of conferences, Towey has met with state leaders and Bush has personally lobbied governors.
The White House office also is providing states with technical assistance in setting up their own faith-based offices.
Towey's office will also be looking for cases in which the administration believes state or local governments are not treating religious groups fairly. He cited a case last fall where the city council in Janesville, Wis., was urged by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, a group that opposes Bush's initiative, not to give the Salvation Army $250,000 to buy a building for a homeless shelter because worship activities would also take place inside.
Towey's office told city officials that federal regulations allowed the grant to go forward. "When it's brought to our attention that a group's being discriminated against, the federal government's going to weigh in," he said.
The coming year will also see a new $100 million drug treatment program get up and running, which allows addicts to use their government money to seek treatment from religious groups.
States were initially slow to warm to the Bush initiative.
An independent 2003 study of state efforts to contract with faith-based groups found little activity. That was partly because states did not see a need to target religious groups and partly because their budgets were so tight that there was little room for new contractors, said Richard Nathan, director of the Rockefeller Institute at the State University of New York in Albany.
"For the most part, the response ... has been muted," concluded the 2003 study.
But within the past six months, Nathan said, the states have shown more interest, with more governors appointing liaisons to the religious community and announcing policies that make it clear the state will consider their applications for funding.
By Towey's count, there are now 21 governors, including many Democrats, who have set up their own faith-based offices.
Meanwhile, opponents, who contend that the White House is walking over the line separating church and state, are looking for a case to take to court to challenge the entire initiative on constitutional grounds. And they are promising to keep their eye on the states.
"There clearly is a wave of new faith-based offices coming to states around the country, and I think some of them are likely to deal with it responsibly and others to deal with it as irresponsibly as the administration does," said the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Also advancing Bush's initiative: a drug treatment program that is just getting under way. Called Access to Recovery, it gives drug users vouchers to take to any organization they choose - including those that rely on a religious conversion to break the addiction.
Because the program uses vouchers, it can legally fund explicitly religious activity. "Many people have overcome addition through faith transformation," Towey said. Counselors in these programs won't have to meet the same medical standards that drug treatment counselors typically must, he said. "There's going to be standards in place, but also, in addition to science, some faith."
That's what worries people like Lynn. "Some of them are not qualified to do this work," he said, "particularly in areas where medical expertise is needed but is no longer apparently necessary."
This faith-based idea of "Brother" Bush is nothing but a scam to bring more churches under the thumb of Big-Brother. This aid comes with strings (chains) attached preventing a church from witnessing to the benefactors.
Yes, "Brother" Bush's plan will prevent Christians from testifying for Christ.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050103/D87CS0J81.html
Bush Pushing for More Faith-Based Funds
Jan 3, 4:59 PM (ET)
By LAURA MECKLER
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush has succeeded in opening the checkbooks of five federal departments to religious organizations. Now he's setting his sights on money doled out by the states. The goal is to persuade states to funnel more of the federal money for social service programs that they administer to "faith-based organizations."
Federal regulations now allow federal agencies to directly fund churches and other religious groups. Bush acted alone to rewrite these regulations after failing to persuade Congress to change the law.
Partly as a result, in 2003, groups dubbed "faith-based" received $1.17 billion in grants from federal agencies, according to documents provided by the White House to The Associated Press. That was about 8 percent of the $14.5 billion spent on social programs that qualify for faith-based grants in five federal departments.
That's not enough, said Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. An additional $40 billion in federal money is given out by state governments, he said, and many states do not realize that federal rules now allow them to fund these organizations. "We're on the sunrise side of the mountain," he said.
To encourage states, the White House has hosted a series of conferences, Towey has met with state leaders and Bush has personally lobbied governors.
The White House office also is providing states with technical assistance in setting up their own faith-based offices.
Towey's office will also be looking for cases in which the administration believes state or local governments are not treating religious groups fairly. He cited a case last fall where the city council in Janesville, Wis., was urged by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, a group that opposes Bush's initiative, not to give the Salvation Army $250,000 to buy a building for a homeless shelter because worship activities would also take place inside.
Towey's office told city officials that federal regulations allowed the grant to go forward. "When it's brought to our attention that a group's being discriminated against, the federal government's going to weigh in," he said.
The coming year will also see a new $100 million drug treatment program get up and running, which allows addicts to use their government money to seek treatment from religious groups.
States were initially slow to warm to the Bush initiative.
An independent 2003 study of state efforts to contract with faith-based groups found little activity. That was partly because states did not see a need to target religious groups and partly because their budgets were so tight that there was little room for new contractors, said Richard Nathan, director of the Rockefeller Institute at the State University of New York in Albany.
"For the most part, the response ... has been muted," concluded the 2003 study.
But within the past six months, Nathan said, the states have shown more interest, with more governors appointing liaisons to the religious community and announcing policies that make it clear the state will consider their applications for funding.
By Towey's count, there are now 21 governors, including many Democrats, who have set up their own faith-based offices.
Meanwhile, opponents, who contend that the White House is walking over the line separating church and state, are looking for a case to take to court to challenge the entire initiative on constitutional grounds. And they are promising to keep their eye on the states.
"There clearly is a wave of new faith-based offices coming to states around the country, and I think some of them are likely to deal with it responsibly and others to deal with it as irresponsibly as the administration does," said the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Also advancing Bush's initiative: a drug treatment program that is just getting under way. Called Access to Recovery, it gives drug users vouchers to take to any organization they choose - including those that rely on a religious conversion to break the addiction.
Because the program uses vouchers, it can legally fund explicitly religious activity. "Many people have overcome addition through faith transformation," Towey said. Counselors in these programs won't have to meet the same medical standards that drug treatment counselors typically must, he said. "There's going to be standards in place, but also, in addition to science, some faith."
That's what worries people like Lynn. "Some of them are not qualified to do this work," he said, "particularly in areas where medical expertise is needed but is no longer apparently necessary."
posted by T.G. at 7:30 AM
<< Home