Should ministries angle for earmarks?
There's been a legitimate debate about President Bush's faith-based initiative and the wisdom of ministries seeking government funds to carry out the "secular" aspect of their social ministries - helping the homeless, the unemployed, the drug addicted, the victims of spousal abuse. Will such ministries over-secularize their efforts just to keep government inspectors happy - or their own consciences clean? Should the church do such ministry without an appropriate spiritual component?
Those are all legitimate areas for debate. But a New York Times story posted this past weekend raises a related and still more problematic issue. Religious Groups Reap Federal Aid for Pet Projects reports that a number of religious institutions and ministries have now hired lobbyists to seek earmarks for their special projects. Unlike grants made through the usual welfare programs, earmark funding carries little or no accountability. No regulators. No inspectors. And earmarks are a multifaceted problem for our federal budget. (See Chuck Colson's CT column, "The Earmark Epidemic" from October 2006.)
The article quotes NAE vice president for governmental affairs Rich Cizik thus:
The Rev. Richard Cizik ... said that while religious organizations should be able to compete for federal money, such groups "shouldn't do that through earmarks." He explained, "As good stewards of the public trust, we have to be transparent and above board - and earmarks are not transparent or above board."
Time for a new debate.
Posted by David Neff on May 14, 2007 7:58AM
Comments
Richard Cizik is surely going to get in trouble with Focus on the Family and Family Research Council for these types of comments. Ofcourse, they'll find some reason to smear him again....
Posted by: John at May 14, 2007
If the churches become co-dependent on the government, we will be reviled like the tax collectors in Jesus' day. And, unlike the church of Acts 2 (who figured out true koinonia in seeing each others' needs), we will not enjoy the favor of all the people.
Posted by: caveat bettor at May 14, 2007
David, you raise some excellent points on the need to prevent abuses when Christian organizations seek congressional earmarks. I could not agree more. It is essential for leaders of ministries not to "over-secularize their efforts just to keep government inspectors happy - or their own consciences clean."
Please note, though, contrary to popular belief, spending designations by Congress are subject to regulations. In some cases, members of Congress or their staffs have approached us - World Vision - with offers of funding for specific programs, such as gang-prevention activities. Why? Because they believe we have the expertise to deliver excellent work. In addition, after World Vision - and any organization - receives the funds, we are held accountable for how those funds are managed, including reporting back to Congress and the Administration.
Earmarks are awarded by our elected representatives and the process to secure them is open to everyone - not just those willing to pay lobbyists. Why should faith-based organizations be excluded? As long as the services for which they are seeking funds are helping address the needs of the poor, and not expanding church parking facilities, it doesn't make it wrong for those who participate with integrity.
I cannot speak for other Christian or secular organizations receiving government funds. But I can assure the readers of your blog that we at World Vision hold ourselves accountable to the American taxpayers for the public funds we receive. Moreover, we have an uncompromising commitment to our faith, a commitment that is funded through private donations, not public funds.
Rich Stearns, President
World Vision
Posted by: Rich Stearns at May 15, 2007
Post a comment