Religious right wields clout: Secular groups losing funding amid pressure (thanks to Evengelical Right)
Senator Rick Santorum , a Pennsylvania Republican, charged last year that CARE was “anti-American” and “promoted a pro-prostitution agenda.” Focus on the Family, the religious group headed by James Dobson , said the agency that delivered the contract, the US Agency for International Development, was a “liberal cancer.”….The complaining paid off. CARE’s $50 million contract is being phased out this year; it has been replaced with a $200 million program of grants that is targeted at faith-based providers, and overseen by USAID itself.
So, how’s that whole “separation of Church and State” thing working out for you? If you’re wondering just what in the world I’m talking about, you’re not alone, because these days, in Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader’s America, that separation is more myth than fact. Gradually and almost imperceptibly, we’ve become a nation run by hyper-nationalistic, intolerant, Apocalyptic Christians who see it as their role (and Divine Right) to directly or indirectly control and influence policy.
When it comes to the example of CARE, you almost had to know that Rick Santorum would be involved. Here’s perhaps one of the most effective and well-known charitable organizations in this country’s history, and Santorum is making up spurious charges out of whole cloth in an effort to discredit it. Why? Because CARE does not discriminate between secular and faith-based organizations when it comes to determining where to spend their money. Left to their own devices, knuckle-draggers like Santorum and James Dobson would chop CARE and other NGOs like it off at the knees. The fact that CARE does many good and laudable things seems beside the point. No, CARE and other secular organizations are viewed as instruments of Satan simply because they go about their mission without regard to theology or ideology.
The pressure on CARE is emblematic of that facing many other secular groups. President Bush’s faith-based initiative has not only increased funding for church groups, but also raised the expectations of the religious right, which has asserted a stronger role in setting policy.
The pattern of outcry by religious conservatives, followed by accommodation by the administration, has been replicated on numerous occasions at USAID, from personnel decisions to choices of who runs humanitarian programs overseas.
In the process, secular groups have seen an overall drop in funding. CARE’s USAID dollars declined every year, from $138 million in fiscal 2001 to $96 million in fiscal 2005, the last year for which data is available, according to a Globe survey of prime contractors and grantees in the development arena.
Kristin Kalla , the CARE official overseeing its AIDS contract, said she found herself in the middle of a war over politics, religion, and money.
“There was a lot of resentment, a lot of pressure, from the religious right feeling that they supported Bush, especially for the second term, and they wanted to get paid their dues, they wanted a piece of the pie in terms of foreign assistance,” Kalla said.
And get “their” piece of they pie they did. Note that this resentment and pressure had nothing with how successfully NGOs turned donations into charitable works and results. It had nothing to do with someone wanting to do it better, faster, or more effectively and efficiently. No, it was all about power and control…and MONEY. These alleged Christians were more concerned with getting “their share” than what they might actually accomplish with the money.
James Towey , the former head of the White House’s faith-based office, acknowledged that he fought hard to shift international aid to faith-based groups, although he denied it was a political payback.
“The fact is [officials at USAID] tended to be left of center and they tended to be more of a secular perspective than a religious one,” said Towey, who served as Bush’s top faith-based official from 2002 until June 2006.
“There were pockets of extreme hostility to faith-based organizations. There were instances where people had agendas that were very clearly at odds with what President Bush had laid out as his foreign policy agenda… . We wanted to see the new groups have a chance.”
These “pockets of extreme hostility” were and are largely figments of the over-heated imaginations of Fundamentalists who simply felt that they weren’t getting “their share.” The reality is that secular organizations, at least the effective ones, are concerned with their mission- alleviating suffering, making the world a better place- over ideological or theological considerations. This isn’t to say that faith-based groups can’t be and aren’t equally effective in what they do, but Towey’s argument is specious at best and disingenuous at worst. Too often, Christians want “their share” of the public dollar, and if they have to tear down secular organizations, then that’s what they’ll do. Again, this is not about efficiency or effectiveness. It’s about power, control, and MONEY.
Faith-based NGOs are not morally superior to secular NGOs. What makes a charitable organization effective is how effectively it meets the needs it tries to address, and what percentage of money it takes in actually goes for programs vs. administration. Faith-based NGOs have no advantage over secular ones in this respect. To claim a degree of moral superiority simply because you feel blessed by the Almighty is both arrogant and wrong.
There should be a place for everyone at the table, and in my experience, there always has been. I worked for a faith-based organization (Mercy Corps International) in Croatia and Kosovo. My salary was paid by USAID as part of a program to provide medical supplies, clothing, and cooking stoves to people in parts of the former Yugoslavia. During my time there, I also worked with many secular organizations. We all had a place at the trough, and we all did what we needed to do in order to complete our particular mission. Though not a Christian myself, Mercys Corps is most definitely a faith-based organization, and yet I felt no discrimination from anyone within or outside government due to my affiliation or non-Christianity.
Of course, those who claim, as Towey does, that there are “pockets of extreme hostility” who work to quash the aspirations of faith-based organizations are the same ones who bleat about the “homosexual agenda” and the “Liberal media”. It’s not about truth…and it never has been. It’s about power, control, and MONEY…and it’s about Fundamentalist Christians who will do whatever it takes to get what they feel they deserve. If it takes lying, propaganda, and making claims they clearly cannot and have no intention of supporting, so be it.
What would Jesus do? He’d no doubt kick ass and take names….
STILL GLAD YOU VOTED REPUBLICAN??
