Obama To Expand Faith Based Programs

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Johonebesus
Jedi Master
Posts: 1487
Joined: 2002-07-06 11:26pm

Obama To Expand Faith Based Programs

Post by Johonebesus »

Obama Wants To Expand Bush's Faith Based Programs

JENNIFER LOVEN | July 1, 2008 08:41 AM EST

CHICAGO — Reaching out to evangelical voters, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is announcing plans to expand President Bush's program steering federal social service dollars to religious groups and _ in a move sure to cause controversy _ support some ability to hire and fire based on faith.
Obama was unveiling his approach to getting religious charities more involved in government anti-poverty programs during a tour and remarks Tuesday in Zanesville, Ohio, at Eastside Community Ministry, which provides food, clothes, youth ministry and other services.
"The challenges we face today ... are simply too big for government to solve alone," Obama was to say, according to a prepared text of his remarks obtained by The Associated Press. "We need all hands on deck."
Obama's announcement is part of a series of events leading up to Friday's Fourth of July holiday that are focused on American values.
The Democratic presidential candidate spent Monday talking about his vision of patriotism in the battleground state of Missouri. By twinning that with Tuesday's talk about faith in another battleground state, he was attempting to settle debate in two key areas where his beliefs have come under question while also trying to make inroads with constituencies traditionally loyal to Republicans.
But Obama's support for letting religious charities that receive federal funding consider religion in employment decisions could invite a storm of protest from those who view such faith requirements as discrimination.
Obama does not support requiring religious tests for recipients of aid nor using federal money to proselytize, according to a campaign fact sheet. He also only supports letting religious institutions hire and fire based on faith in the non-taxypayer funded portions of their activities, said a senior adviser to the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity to more freely describe the new policy.
Bush supports broader freedoms for taxpayer-funded religious charities. But he never got Congress to go along so he has conducted the program through administrative actions and executive orders.
David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.
This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.
"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.
Kuo called Obama's approach smart, impressive and well thought-out but took a wait-and-see attitude about whether it would deliver.
"When it comes to promises to help the poor, promises are easy," said Kuo, who wrote a 2006 book describing his frustration at what he called Bush's lackluster enthusiasm for the program. "The question is commitment."
Obama proposes to elevate the program to a "moral center" of his administration, by renaming it the Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and changing training from occasional huge conferences to empowering larger religious charities to mentor smaller ones in their communities.
Saying social service spending has been shortchanged under Bush, he also proposes a $500 million per year program to provide summer learning for 1 million poor children to help close achievement gaps with white and wealthier students. A campaign fact sheet said he would pay for it by better managing surplus federal properties, reducing growth in the federal travel budget and streamlining the federal procurement process.
Like Bush, Obama was arguing that religious organizations can and should play a bigger role in serving the poor and meeting other social needs. But while Bush argued that the strength of religious charities lies primarily in shared religious identity between workers and recipients, Obama was to tout the benefits of their "bottom-up" approach.
"Because they're so close to the people, they're well-placed to offer help," he was to say.
He also planned to talk bluntly about the genesis of his Christian faith in his work as a community organizer in Chicago, and its importance to him now.
"In time, I came to see faith as being both a personal commitment to Christ and a commitment to my community; that while I could sit in church and pray all I want, I wouldn't be fulfilling God's will unless I went out and did the Lord's work," he was to say.
Why has everyone bought into the republican myth of the power of the Christian Right? They are a small minority in this country, and if they were ignored they would be powerless. Even with their exaggerated clout, Democrats are wasting their time pandering to them.

This is the sort of thing that could really hurt Obama. One of his key attractions was the perception that he was unusually principled and idealistic. The more he shows his colors as just another politician, the harder it will be for him to survive the Vast Right-wing Propaganda Machine, never mind racism.
"Can you eat quarks? Can you spread them on your bed when the cold weather comes?" -Bernard Levin

"Sir: Mr. Bernard Levin asks 'Can you eat quarks?' I estimate that he eats 500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,001 quarks a day...Yours faithfully..." -Sir Alan Cottrell


Elohim's loving mercy: "Hey, you, don't turn around. WTF! I said DON'T tur- you know what, you're a pillar of salt now. Bitch." - an anonymous commenter
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Post by ArmorPierce »

Obama seems to be becoming less and less of nearly everything I wanted in a candidate and leaning more and more to the right as the campaign continues.
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Obama To Expand Faith Based Programs

Post by General Zod »

Johonebesus wrote: Why has everyone bought into the republican myth of the power of the Christian Right? They are a small minority in this country, and if they were ignored they would be powerless. Even with their exaggerated clout, Democrats are wasting their time pandering to them.
What parallel reality are you living in? The 45% of Americans that believe in creationism are more than sufficient for the extreme Christian Right to sway to their side on several key issues, and the religious right have the pandering and making as much noise as possible down to a T. On the downside, I don't see how endorsing Bush's faith based bullshit can help his campaign. :|
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

ArmorPierce wrote:Obama seems to be becoming less and less of nearly everything I wanted in a candidate and leaning more and more to the right as the campaign continues.
That is because in the US there is no viable left. You HAVE to appear at least centrist in the general election to have a shot at winning, if you are a liberal. If you are a conservative you can be pretty right wing and even democrats will vote for you
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Patrick Degan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 14847
Joined: 2002-07-15 08:06am
Location: Orleanian in exile

Post by Patrick Degan »

Keep in mind that not all the religious organisations even among evangelicals are right wing and there has in fact been a marked chafing of evangelicals who are liberal and finding their congregations being increasingly co-opted or shut out by Christian Taliban, Inc. Obama's programme is likely to draw in the more liberal congregations, particularly as he opposes any religious test for aid recipt or for inclusion in the programme. By contrast, Bush's faith-based initiatives have been skewed heavily toward the rightard churches and anybody else was pretty much shut out of the picture altogether.
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln

People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House

Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
User avatar
Sarevok
The Fearless One
Posts: 10681
Joined: 2002-12-24 07:29am
Location: The Covenants last and final line of defense

Post by Sarevok »

Obama has to make some harsh choices to have a shot of winning. We can only hope he is not corrupted by them and at his heart he remains the man who won accolades from so many across the world.
I have to tell you something everything I wrote above is a lie.
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

Obama is ultimately a victim of the biggest poison created by American Conservatism: Being popular with the Democratic base is a bad thing, which alienates real Americans. As defined by reporters making millions of dollars a year in D.C.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Patrick Degan wrote:Keep in mind that not all the religious organisations even among evangelicals are right wing and there has in fact been a marked chafing of evangelicals who are liberal and finding their congregations being increasingly co-opted or shut out by Christian Taliban, Inc. Obama's programme is likely to draw in the more liberal congregations, particularly as he opposes any religious test for aid recipt or for inclusion in the programme. By contrast, Bush's faith-based initiatives have been skewed heavily toward the rightard churches and anybody else was pretty much shut out of the picture altogether.
And bear in mind, churches do provide a good decentralized system with plenty of volunteers who can distribute aide with minimal overhead. If properly applied they can do a very good job, and if they are kept from using those funds to try to convert people, can do so within the bounds of the constitution.

In other words: Baptist church=Bad. United Church of Christ, Unitarians, or Metropolitan Community Church=good. Heh... you can even use Synogogues, they have no missionary impulse...
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
CaptainZoidberg
Padawan Learner
Posts: 497
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:05pm
Location: Worcester Polytechnic
Contact:

Post by CaptainZoidberg »

I find it funny that a lot of the people who oppose hiring on the basis of religious views discriminatory, but have no problem with affirmative action.
User avatar
The Duchess of Zeon
Gözde
Posts: 14566
Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.

Post by The Duchess of Zeon »

ArmorPierce wrote:Obama seems to be becoming less and less of nearly everything I wanted in a candidate and leaning more and more to the right as the campaign continues.
Duh. All politicians do this during the General Election.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.

In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.
User avatar
Superboy
Padawan Learner
Posts: 294
Joined: 2005-01-21 09:09pm

Post by Superboy »

I find it funny that a lot of the people who oppose hiring on the basis of religious views discriminatory, but have no problem with affirmative action.
Affirmative action is an attempt at correcting discrimation in hiring practices. How can you compare that to actual discrimination?
User avatar
Hawkwings
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3372
Joined: 2005-01-28 09:30pm
Location: USC, LA, CA

Post by Hawkwings »

umm... because it's also discrimination?
Vendetta wrote:Richard Gatling was a pioneer in US national healthcare. On discovering that most soldiers during the American Civil War were dying of disease rather than gunshots, he turned his mind to, rather than providing better sanitary conditions and medical care for troops, creating a machine to make sure they got shot faster.
Gigaliel
Padawan Learner
Posts: 171
Joined: 2005-12-30 06:15pm
Location: TILT

Post by Gigaliel »

Affirmative action is meant to correct long standing racial discrimination. Since race is not chosen or invisible during interviews, adjusting for this makes some sense. Versus say, religion, which no can tell unless you advertise it.

They're both discrimination, but only in the literal sense as opposed to the normal stigma attached to the word.

Also:
David Kuo, a conservative Christian who was deputy director of Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives until 2003 and later became a critic of Bush's commitment to the cause, said Obama's position on hiring has the potential to be a major "Sister Souljah moment" for his campaign.
This is a reference to Bill Clinton's accusation in his 1992 presidential campaign that the hip hop artist incited violence against whites. Because Clinton said this before a black audience, it fed into an image of him as a bold politician who was willing to take risks and refused to pander.
"This is a massive deal," said Kuo, who is not an Obama adviser or supporter but was contacted by the campaign to review the new plan.
This totally isn't pandering, guys.
User avatar
Fire Fly
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1608
Joined: 2004-01-06 12:03am
Location: Grand old Badger State

Post by Fire Fly »

According to the Huffington Post, the Obama campaign is rejecting the AP story.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Fire Fly wrote:According to the Huffington Post, the Obama campaign is rejecting the AP story.
Your URL isn't working.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Fire Fly
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1608
Joined: 2004-01-06 12:03am
Location: Grand old Badger State

Post by Fire Fly »

Strange, it works for me.

Anyways, the relevant part:
UPDATE: An Obama campaign official told the Huffington Post that the AP's claims about Obama allowing hiring or firing based on faith are false. From a portion of Obama's speech today:

"Now, make no mistake, as someone who used to teach constitutional law, I believe deeply in the separation of church and state, but I don't believe this partnership will endanger that idea - so long as we follow a few basic principles. First, if you get a federal grant, you can't use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can't discriminate against them - or against the people you hire - on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs. And we'll also ensure that taxpayer dollars only go to those programs that actually work."

The Politico, meanwhile, describes Obama's new plan not as an expansion of Bush's Faith-Based Initiative, but as an effort to tear down what Bush created and establish a new program with a new set of goals:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) slammed President Bush's faith-based program as "a photo-op" and a failure on Tuesday, and said he will scrap the office and create a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships that would be a "critical" part of his administration.


Obama, unveiling a plan to overhaul and expand Bush's faith-based program during remarks at a community ministry in Zanesville, Ohio, said the White House Office of Community and Faith-Based Initiatives - which Bush founded during his second week in office - "never fulfilled its promise." [...]

Reaching out to evangelicals who are non-plussed by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Obama declared: "I still believe it's a good idea to have a partnership between the White House and grassroots groups, both faith-based and secular. But it has to be a real partnership - not a photo-op. That's what it will be when I'm President. I'll establish a new Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships."

"The new name will reflect a new commitment," he continued. "This Council will not just be another name on the White House organization chart - it will be a critical part of my administration."
User avatar
Fire Fly
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1608
Joined: 2004-01-06 12:03am
Location: Grand old Badger State

Post by Fire Fly »

Hmm, a more thorough read suggests that it isn't as false as I thought.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Fire Fly wrote:Hmm, a more thorough read suggests that it isn't as false as I thought.
Provided Obama's plan has sufficient oversight, I wouldn't have any issues with that kind of program. The catch of course is they actually have a sufficient degree of accountability for what they're using that money on.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Post by RedImperator »

It makes a certain amount of sense that Obama would support working through churches to provide some social services. He was a community organizer in the ghetto, and in the ghetto, the churches half the time are the only functioning organizations.
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues
User avatar
Ender
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11323
Joined: 2002-07-30 11:12pm
Location: Illinois

Post by Ender »

Patrick Degan wrote:Keep in mind that not all the religious organisations even among evangelicals are right wing and there has in fact been a marked chafing of evangelicals who are liberal and finding their congregations being increasingly co-opted or shut out by Christian Taliban, Inc. Obama's programme is likely to draw in the more liberal congregations, particularly as he opposes any religious test for aid recipt or for inclusion in the programme. By contrast, Bush's faith-based initiatives have been skewed heavily toward the rightard churches and anybody else was pretty much shut out of the picture altogether.
Which means they engage in steeple jacking rather then receiving the money directly. End result is the exact fucking same - dominionists get more money.
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Post by ArmorPierce »

CaptainZoidberg wrote:I find it funny that a lot of the people who oppose hiring on the basis of religious views discriminatory, but have no problem with affirmative action.
This is a retarded statement and there is no connection between the two.
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
User avatar
Battlehymn Republic
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1824
Joined: 2004-10-27 01:34pm

Post by Battlehymn Republic »

I think an Obama administration would probably go at this better than Bush did because 1) it'd probably show less favoritism to rightist denominations, if anything it'll show more favor towards leftist churches like his own UCC and 2) didn't Bush basically ignore faith-based initiatives after 2000 to focus on his War on Terror?

Anyways, a Democratic faith-based initiative plan would probably have far more oversight than Bush's ever did.
User avatar
Ender
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11323
Joined: 2002-07-30 11:12pm
Location: Illinois

Post by Ender »

For those of you defending it, setting aside the LONG track record these fucks have of getting money they shouldn't through steeplejacking, outright lying, etc... Does it occur to you that Obama will not be president forever? And that when he leaves, these programs will still be in place for the next president to do whatever they want with, including expanding them to give aid directly to the dominionists?
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
User avatar
Battlehymn Republic
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1824
Joined: 2004-10-27 01:34pm

Post by Battlehymn Republic »

If it turns out to be really as shady as criticized and unhelpful towards solving society's ills, in short a boondoggle, then it'll probably die out like Americorps.

And it's not as if the right-wing loves it, the Heritage Foundation is attacking it already.
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12270
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Post by Surlethe »

Battlehymn Republic wrote:And it's not as if the right-wing loves it, the Heritage Foundation is attacking it already.
Beautiful.
Heritage Foundation wrote:But even worse, Obama’s plan says that when a faith-based organization takes federal dollars, it would lose its ability to preserve its faith-based character through maintaining hiring standards consistent with its mission. It could be forced to hire an atheist. In other words, it would strike at the heart of the faith-based initiative.
Rephrased, it would force faith-based organizations not to discriminate. That's the whole point of involving the government anyway; trying to solve social issues with charities, non-profits, and the like does not guarantee that for any person an organization will exist which is obligated to help him. Perhaps back in the day, when everyone in a village was Catholic or Protestant or what-have-you, the church felt obligated to have a safety net; in today's diverse world, however, only the government exists to serve everybody.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
Post Reply