|
|
|
| A Larger View |
|
A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership |
| Volume IX Edition 4 |
July/August |
2004 |
Faith-based Organizations:
Reinforcing The Cultural Divide
Last June, a group of 2000 religious leaders gathered in Washington and listened to President Bush pledge to increase the money available to faith-based organizations. Earlier, the president had signed an executive order making it possible for the Department of Commerce, the Small Business Administration and the Department of Veterans Affairs to join seven other federal agencies to establish faith-based offices. These 10 offices are meant to focus all their efforts on helping religious organizations tap into government grants. In his talk Bush said that he had told his administration, "...rather than fear faith programs, welcome them. They're changing America. They do a better job than government can do."
Political observers acknowledge that Bush's effort is key to rally religious conservatives and Christians in an election year. The faith-based initiative has, however, led to controversy and tensions in Congress for far more substantive, if no less important reasons. Some lawmakers are concerned about the groups' hiring practices, fearing the government is funding discrimination, since some organizations will only hire people of like beliefs. The debate has led the president to mainly enact his faith-based "compassionate conservative" agenda through executive orders and administrative rulemaking. The Office of Faith-Based Initiative itself was created by executive order in January 2001. This way of disbursing public monies has meant that in the last fiscal year almost $1.2 billion went to faith-based organizations. While it is true that the money was allocated for programs like substance abuse treatment or housing assistance, there is no way to evaluate the results, nor to account for how it was spent. One reason is that many of the religious groups are tax exempt and are not required to file documents that would make them answerable to a federal funding source.
The controversy surrounding faith-based groups has been about the division of church and state and whether public monies allocated to religious groups violate the constitution's separation of church and state. But it seems that the issue is even more tricky and challenging than just that of church and state. The United States is in the midst of a cultural war that pits Christian conservatives against most others and where the role of religion in public life is a cornerstone of that divide. The use the executive orders and the lack of public debate that tends to come with them along with the lack of accountability they imply reinforce the divide and are far more nefarious to the public good than one might at first surmise.
Prisons Sentences:
Factoring In Cost
It's expensive to keep people in prison. Although the cost varies per state, in California, for example, it is $31,000 per person per year. The cost of incarcerating someone, however, is not an issue judges are permitted to take into account. The law does not allow it. Given that prison populations are rising and expected to continue to, the issue of cost is inevitable. While cost/benefit analyses are standard measures for effectiveness, the criminal justice system is exempt.
Although the crime rate in the United States is the lowest it has been in a number of years, in 2003 the prison population grew 2.7% or by 2.1 million people. Seven hundred fifteen Americans per 100,000 are incarcerated, the highest in the world. Mexico has 169 per 100,000, Canada 116 and England and Wales 143. Even Russia's numbers have dropped to 584 per 100,000. The increase is due to mandatory sentencing usually reflecting a get-tough approach and to 3-strikes laws.
For proponents of the status quo, like Attorney General John Ashcroft, public safety is paramount no matter how much incarceration costs. To him it is no accident that the crime rate is lower. It speaks for the right approach and the need to continue it. But increasingly other voices are being heard. Some members of Congress as well as a recent ABA report make a case that many rehab programs are cheaper than incarceration. And if they're not, many instances show that alternative programs including rehabilitation, literacy and job training are cost effective. The human side of the equation is even more compelling. Helping people become productive, guiding them to change their mindsets and habits not only helps them and their families, eventually it helps all of us. Fortunately such ideas are gathering momentum. A recent poll shows overwhelming support for a new approach. About two thirds of respondents favored stressing rehab programs for prisoners and those on parole.
Redeeming lives strengthens society. Perhaps that ought to be our bottom line.
The Gap Stores And The Lot of Workers
Sometimes it takes the findings of a formal study to demonstrate what some have known all along. Corporate Voices for Working Families, a non-profit aimed to bring the private sector point of view into issues of public policy, sponsored "Increasing The Visibility of The Invisible Workforce," a study conducted by Boston College Center for Work and Family. Donna Klein, chief executive of the organization, put the study's result succinctly, "anything that increases employee satisfaction and morale and basically makes it easier for {low wage workers} to show up for work every day, can have tremendous impact on employee engagement, customer service and productivity." In short the study encourages employers to answer their workers' needs and be rewarded with higher productivity and perhaps profits.
The issue is ever more relevant since the number of low wage earners is increasing. Roughly one third of workers in the U.S. earn less than $15.000 a year and the next 20% earn between $15.000 and $25.000. They are workers who generally do not have benefits, sick leave, vacations, or health coverage. A small problem like an appliance repair or flat tire can set them back weeks if not months. Several corporations recognizing the problems involved have initiated programs in emergency aid, financial assistance, child-care, incentives or flexible work schedules. Corporations like Bank of America which offer child-care, or Levi Strauss which makes emergency loans available, are joining a number of companies which recognize the importance of paying attention to their workers.
The idea is spreading to other areas of corporate responsibility. The Gap Inc., for example, is seeking better conditions for its workers in its factories in countries like China where abuses have been reported. Like Reebok International Ltd., The Gap Inc. is responding to pressure from labor rights activists. Regardless of who exerts pressure, the lot of workers is being improved. And, of course, so is that The Gap Inc. Its shares rose 15 cents on news the company was addressing working conditions and its profits for the quarter were up 54%.
The problems of workers do not normally grab headlines. They are nonetheless real and poignant and any effort or trend that addresses them is at least worth noting. Nationally or internationally, the efforts, given the overall need, may be small but make a big difference in lives that are normally rife with struggles.
A New Miranda Ruling: Preying On Our Ignorance?
What has distinguished the United States from less open governments is its insistence, via the constitution, that individuals, whether or not they are suspected or accused, do have rights. The distinction stems from the premise that people are innocent until proven guilty and can therefore retain their civil liberties if arrested or questioned. Miranda rights have been part of this due process, an institution since 1966 when the Supreme Court first ruled that defendants had to be informed of their rights. They are part of the lore, something so embedded in our culture it can be taken for granted. It is a routine part of television and movie scripts, "You have the right to remain silent anything you say may be held against you..."
Although in a ruling last month the Supreme Court reaffirmed the basis of these rights, the trend has nevertheless been toward limiting them. A few weeks ago it ruled that the police do not always have to warn a teenage suspect of his rights before they question him. A suspect's age or youth, they said, is not reason enough to treat him more cautiously. The decision hinged on whether the suspect is free to leave. If he or she is, the detention is not considered a formal police questioning and suspects do not have to be "mirandized". Critics of course point out that youngsters may have a different view of how free they are to leave when questioned by adults and particularly by police. Indeed, regardless of age, rare is the person who, when stopped by the police and questioned by them, feels free to leave before being dismissed.
Curtailing Miranda rights in this instance preys on ignorance. How many people know they are free to leave if not being formally questioned? That in itself is discriminatory. More than that, it is not in line with the tenets of an open society.
Web Site of Interest: www.commondreams.org
A Gateway To Progressive Thought
commondreams.org is one of those amazing gateways to other sites. It is a portal to just about every news source and journalist in the progressive community. It calls itself a news center and it is indeed that. In fact one of its most useful feature is its presentation of a rather comprehensive listing of current and recent articles on topics of interest to those who call themselves or are sympathetic to progressive issues. Although the site has its fair share of liberal issues, what may be useful and of interest to many more is commondreams.org's access to the work or sites of a long list of periodicals and columnists, including a fair number whose perspective is more mainstream than the site might suggest. In addition one can reach radio and television programs and some alternative media. Through its Inside Washington section one can access much general information and reach sites dealing with federal statistics or the U.S. Supreme Court as easily as that of the Green Party.
Begun in 1998 commondreams.org is funded through membership and donations. It takes no corporate money and has no ads. It feels that it therefore has no hidden agenda and can be free to present views as they are.
To Ponder On
A Pyrrhic Victory
"We have lost that moral distinction between ourselves and our enemies if we believe that our success is measured by the confessions that we coerce rather than the civil liberties that we defend. We are left with the one question not asked...:Once the president declares victory over our enemies, what will we be other than victorious?"
Jonathan Turley, columnist and law professor at George Washington University
A Larger View is published by the Inner\Outer Partnership, a tax-exempt educational organization addressing issues of higher values. We are funded through donations. Please send yours-as well as any comments-to P.O.Box 1293, Pac. Pal. CA 90272-1293. Also contact us by email at innerouter@earthlink.net or call 310-8367710 or visit our web site at www.innerouterpartnership.org
To un-subscribe, send an email to innerouter@earthlink.net |
|
