|
|
Private charity has a proud place in the American tradition and a position of primacy in libertarian ideas. Experience has taught us that almost any combination of market freedom and voluntary aid will yield results superior to that of almost any tax-funded, bureaucratic program with the same supposed ends.
It's sad, although not unexpected, that one of the first initiatives to issue forth from George W. Bush's office is a blow against charities that have heretofore maintained their independence from government.
Let us call Bush's "Office of Faith-Based Services" what it is:
payola, n. Informal a secret or private payment in return for the promotion of a product, service, etc., through the abuse of one's positions, influence or facilities.(Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, NY 1996, p. 1425)
In the 1970s, the burgeoning evangelical Christian movement lent its money (not its numbers -- the evangelicals are not, and never have been, more than an insignificant minority in terms of population) to a resurgent Republican Party. They've been in the driver's seat of the GOP ever since, and now that that party controls both houses of Congress and sits (however uneasily) on the executive throne, they're calling for the piper to be paid.
Political whores like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson have spent the last half of the twentieth century in a difficult position. In order to pass themselves off as Christians, they've been obliged to pay at least nominal obeisance to the values of charity and succor to the poor. That's hard on the old bank account, and it siphons away resources that could otherwise be used to further their true agenda, the pursuit of political power.
Bush's program is simple, and it cuts to the heart of the matter: The "good works" of the Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family and numerous other groups will now be subsidized with your paycheck, whether you like it or not. Pat Bauer and friends can get back to the real game -- finding better ways for them to run your life -- with an increased portion of the revenues produced by their sweat-soaked telethons and direct mail campaigns.
Some of the less ethically challenged sects -- the Mormons, for example -- have already indicated that they want no part in the subjugation of religious charity to the political process. Others, no doubt, will find themselves locked out. Oh, certain Catholic charities and so forth are too large to ignore, and they'll get their thirty pieces of silver in return for worshipping at the altar of the state. But the real purpose, and ultimate effect, of "faith-based services" is to funnel money to Bush's political allies in the pulpit.
"Faith-based services" is a double whammy to freedom of religion. It will enhance the power of some churches at the expense of others -- and, simultaneously, expose those religious foundations which line up for a tax handout to increasing intrusion by the "senior partner" (the state) in all such "public-private partnerships."
Even if these programs were administered evenhandedly -- the chances of which are nil -- they'd be a bad idea. They strike at the roots of two long-cherished American ideals: separation of church and state, and voluntary charity as such. The cures for poverty and other social ills are found in the marketplace and in voluntary actions, including charitable works. The further intrusion of government into this milieu is just another detour away from the real solution: getting the government out of religion and out of the market.
