President Clinton signed these charitable choice provisions into law but issued signing statements indicating that his Administration would not "permit governmental funding of religious organizations that do not or cannot separate their religious activities from [federally-funded program] activities," because such funding would violate the Constitution.  In short, the Clinton Administration interpreted the provisions as being constrained by the constitutional mandates that prohibit the direct funding of houses of worship and government-funded employment discrimination.

Some programs--such as Head Start, AmeriCorps, those created by the Workforce Investment Act, and others--contain specific statutory provisions barring religious discrimination that cannot be superseded by executive order.  As a result, the Bush Administration has attempted to repeal these statutory provisions as applied to religious organizations.  Each time, Congress, at the urging of CARD, has resoundingly rejected these efforts.

Although the Faith-Based Initiative provides that no direct funds should be expended for "inherently religious activities, such as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization as part of the program," it fails to adequately protect the religious liberty of beneficiaries.  The Bush Administration recognizes that some religious social service providers integrate religion into their services and cannot be funded by the government constitutionally, yet its regulations require only that "inherently" religious activities should be separated in time or place from government-funded services.  Furthermore, the regulations fail to require adequate notice to vulnerable beneficiaries about their rights and there has been little oversight to ensure that religious liberty rights of beneficiaries are being respected.

Direct government funding of houses of worship represents a radical erosion of First Amendment principles, endangering the autonomy of religious bodies by allowing government intrusion directly into the activities of houses of worship.  Though the Bush Administration has argued that this traditional arrangement singles out religious institutions for an additional "burden," in reality, requiring funding to go to separately incorporated, religiously affiliated institutions serves to protect the integrity of the religious institutions and provide accountability for government funds.  Many religious organizations are rightly wary of the Faith-Based Initiative; they remain concerned that their religious ministries would be subject to intrusive government regulations, including audits, reporting requirements, and compliance reviews.

Accordingly, CARD urges you to respect religious liberty by reinstating the longstanding, constitutionally required policy prohibiting direct government funding to pervasively sectarian entities.

Charitable choice statutes and the Faith-Based Initiative have been counterproductive, undermining fundamental civil rights and religious liberty protections and impeding the ability of state and local governments to enforce their own laws.  Past partnerships between government and religiously affiliated organizations have demonstrated well that necessary constitutional and anti-discrimination safeguards do not interfere with these organizations' ability to provide excellent service to Americans participating in federal programs.  

CARD strongly believes that it is entirely possible to encourage charitable works and provide services to communities in need without rolling back religious liberty and civil rights protections.  We disagree that communities in need should be faced with the stark choice between services they need and the constitutional and civil rights protections to which they are entitled.  Therefore, we ask you to carefully weigh the constitutional and practical considerations of the Faith-Based Initiative as you continue your presidential campaign.  We urge you to restore religious liberty and civil rights as critical components of future administrative policy.