Customer Reviews

Of Little Faith: The Politics of George W. Bush's Faith-Based Initiatives (Religion and Politics series)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This meaty work is written for upper level college and graduate students who want a thorough understanding of how the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives came to be. It is written by a trio of political science professors from the most academically rigorous Christian colleges in the U.S. - Wheaton, Trinity and Hope College and published by Georgetown Press - a solid scholarly minded university publisher. These badges of authority are assurance that the work is academically worthy and not a polemic for or against Christianity.

The authors, all with experience in the Capital, focus roughly on the two year period beginning at the 2000 presidential elections. The narrative begins with the stated desire of Candidate Bush to make it much easier for religious service organizations to access federal funds - and at a level that secular organizations have done for decades. President Bush worked at passing such a bill on the Hill, but as the authors describe so well, the final result was something so meager that it satisfied nobody. And no-one could have predicted for how long 9/11 would move all domestic issues to the background. Figuring out how to help little churches keep former prisoners out of jail just couldn't compete with the endless loop of the Trade Towers collapsing...The White House, in the end, took its ball and went home to play. It opened up an office within the White House and among many of the Cabinet branches. Here, the White House salvaged what it could of the concepts and implemented the program changes that it could by fiat. Much of these centered on making grant processes more intelligible and accessible to small religious groups that barely have the funds to keep the lights on - let alone have a skilled grant writer on staff .

The same events are examined "...through three lenses: a public policy lens, a political party lens and a lens of religion in the public square." This provides a sophisticated look at motivations of the parties involved which appears to be at odds with the press accounts of the time. The authors do not shy away from analyzing the racial issues surrounding faith-based initiatives. Nor do they avert their scholarly gaze from the leaders of the white conservative Christian community. Pat Robertson, a graduate of Yale Law School and himself a founder of a law school, is revealed through his own words, as a supporter of legislation that would make Christianity the legally favored religion in the United States.

The complex constitutional interpretations relating to faith-based initiatives are examined thoroughly with equal attention given to all views. The sometimes abstruse analysis is well complemented with sidebars on items ranging from short bios of key players, the significance of certain memos to a spotlight on regional Faith-Based conferences put on by the White Office.

There are extensive footnotes and a huge bibliography - about 300 entries. The index appears to be thoroughly done with every proper name of a person, law, or organization included that would be expected. There are three appendices: the interview methodology, list of interviews (41), and executive orders affecting faith-based policies 2001-2002. There is also a list of cases cited (24).

This even-handed tome provides clear-eyed research on what was to be the hallmark of the George W. Bush presidential administration: 'faith-based initiatives'.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, in an effort to (particularly) win votes from religious conservatives and economic conservatives, then-Texas Governor George W. Bush argued that the government could save it's money by contracting with religious institutions to provide social services.

Using scholarly data, the authors examined how a legislative objective is first proposed but can then be subsequently altered by many other factors.

With terrorism and Iraq the administration's new buzz words, does the White House Office for Religious Initiatives and Outreach even have enough money and resources to implement its related policies as the supporters of this project had initially envisioned?

In government, having appropriate funding levels for a project and/or office is everything. An idea sounding initially good and workable can subsequently morph into a veritable nightmare (and become cited by the public as 'government failure') when it lacks enough implementation resources.

Such an environment is ironically what supporters of the faith-based initiatives have cited as their evidence for the 'practical' successes of faith-based social services.

However some opponents (including religious clergy themselves) have argued back that religious institutions becoming entangled in the government's economic environment means that churches then loose the specific reason why their own programs had worked in the past sans the government partnership. Becoming subject to the same forms of bureaucracy, these organizations then cannot work exactly as they had in the past.

Apparently it never occurred to the U.S. Congress under President George W. Bush that taxpayer money allocated to and for religions (under the guise of religion, i.e., faith-based entities, is a violation of the Constitutional obligation of separation of church and state.

That the American people haven't challenged the program is, itself, an affront to the Constitution in the right of the people to protect it - as written.

That the Bush Administration has force-fed religion by making such a preference for religion through government by endowing religion and encouraging the taxpayer, therefore, to condone it by ignoring the Constitutional separation mandated amounts to the same act as the serpent in the Garden of Eden - to ignore God's warning not to eat of its fruit.

Instead, the serpent has opened the entire garden to all comers in making a preference for religion, but not every religion in its bid to force taxpayers to pay for religion, or else suffer the consequences....

That makes Americans as bad as Muslims in forcing their religion upon others. There doesn't seem to be a difference. Religion as force defies the very notion of religious freedom which also includes freedom from religion as cult based practices, rooted in ancient traditions of a pagan world. In that sense, it's a preference for paganism, or else.

This book is a wonderful report on the role faith based groups play in our nation. It also shows that faith based initiatives reach across party, denominational, ethnic, and religious lines. The history of faith-based groups in our country is a long one indeed--that has always seen positive support. Whether you're a Democrat, Republican, or don't care--this book is for you. It shows that faith based initiatives benefit the whole of America, not just the religious right. Let us continue to support the great tradition of civic religion that has helped make this country great. May God bless America.