Values the Bush Administration 
Sees in Its Faith-based Initiative The 
following points are summarized from the 
White House document "Rallying the Armies 
of Compassion" and from statements of supporters 
of the initiative.

Pros
1.Encourages and supports locally-based 
programs and care-givers, responding to 
needs while diminishing reliance on government.

2.Increases the possibilities for grassroots 
and nonprofit engagement in social programs 
and builds partnerships of various kinds. 
"We must heed the growing consensus across 
America," said Mr. Bush, "that successful 
government social programs work in fruitful 
partnership with community-serving and 
faith-based organizations-whether run by 
Methodists, Muslims, Mormons, or good people 
of no faith at all." 

3.Does not relieve government of responsibility 
for the needy but increases the variety of 
delivery systems. Stephen Goldsmith, a major 
advisor to the President, has written, "Those 
in need should have the freedom to choose from 
successful providers."
 
4.Brings faith organizations to the table and 
removes legal barriers to full participation 
in public programs and access to public program 
funds. "Private and charitable groups, including 
religious ones," Bush said, "should have the 
fullest opportunity permitted by law to compete 
on a level playing field, so long as they achieve 
valid public purposes, like curbing crime, 
conquering addiction, strengthening families, 
and overcoming poverty."
 
5.Does not subsidize religion or evangelizing 
but allows religious providers to retain their 
religious identities.
 
6.Puts an emphasis on results, whether by 
government, nonprofit or faith-based programs.
 
7.Provides tax incentives for individual citizens 
and corporations to be more generous to community 
and faith-based service providers. "Increased 
charitable giving is a better way than government 
support to help faith-based groups," Goldsmith wrote.
 
8.Encourages states and local government to help 
nonprofit and faith groups to increase their capacity 
and technical expertise. The White House Faith-based 
Office is charged especially with "increasing the 
capacity of small-scale organizations." 

Cons
Major Questions and Concerns about the Initiative 
The following are among the most frequently raised 
concerns and criticisms of the Bush faith-based 
initiatives and the charitable choice concern 
on which it builds. (Points gleaned from many sources.) 

1.Uses a term, "faith-based," that is not defined 
in law or practice but is usually taken to be a 
circumlocution for "religious." (The charitable 
choice statute uses "religious.") 

2.May convey the assumption that faith-based 
or religious organizations have an obligation 
to perform social services; some claim that role 
but other do not include such work in their 
definitions or mission and purpose. 

3.May step across the boundary of church-state 
separation. Concerns of this kind arising from 
charitable choice include: 
	a) exemption from civil 
	rights laws barring hiring discrimination on religious 
	grounds, 
	b) not requiring separate incorporation of contract 
	holders, 
	c) allow religious symbols to be displayed 
	in service areas, and 
	d) allowing religious content in service programs, 
	even though participation is voluntary. 
	
4.May result in excessive religious reliance on 
public money, leading to a weakening of the "prophetic role" 
of religion, particularly as that may involve 
criticism of government policy; may cause a decrease 
in giving to religion by members and other private donors. 
	
5.May result in improper religious use of public 
funds unless each program is closely monitored 
	
6.May introduce government interference in the internal 
affairs of religious groups or government scrutiny of 
religion's financial records-a concern heard across 
the religious board. 
	
7.May imply that government considers faith-based 
providers superior to secular ones and result in 
unequal treatment. 
	
8.May encourage religious groups with insufficient 
capacity or competence to enter the social service field, 
especially risky with regard to "performance-based 
contracts," as is usually the case with government, 
which requires upfront money. Also introduces burdensome 
paperwork and the recurring need to reapply since 
government contracts are often of short duration.