This Week Crossing A Divide Jewish groups split on proposed expansion of "charitable choice." ERIC L. ROZENMAN Jewish Renaissance Media Washington resident George W. Bush has promised a substantial expansion of a new approach to delivering social services — "charitable choice" — under which faith-based organizations can bid against secular agencies for government money to provide the assistance. The prospect for expansion, which will require a variety of regulatory changes by state and federal agencies, divides national Jewish groups. Some oppose it as a crack in the wall of church-state separation. Others see it as a long overdue leveling of the play- ing field between public and private p Related editorial: page 35 sectors when it comes to tax-supported social services. And some await clarifi- cation from a new White House office for charitable choice. Michael Lieberman, counsel at the Anti Defamation League's Washington, D.C. office, says the con- cept means trouble. According to Lieberman, "the design of 'charitable choice' is to blow up the firewalls" that separate religion-centered social servic- es from taxpayers' money. Nonsense, says Washington, D.C., lawyer Nathan Lewin, who has argued a number of church-state cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. "It's an obso- lete notion in the United States — that the American Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committee and ADL keep saluting — that the minute you get churches involved in something with government funding, Judaism's - going to hell in a hand-basket." Charitable choice began in 1996, as parr of the federal changes that ended welfare as an entitlement. How Much, To Whom? No one is certain yet how much money will be involved, but estimates start with at least several hundred mil- lion dollars. Funds are expected to flow through individual contracts with the departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Justice, and Housing and Urban Development. For example, notes Carl Esbeck, director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom in Annandale, Va., "almost all drug rehabilitation is done in the private sector, but with govern- ment grants. Charitable choice said faith-based groups now could have an equal shot at bidding" for government money. "But they're not guaranteed any money; if you can't rehabilitate people, you're not going to get the grants. Former Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith, himself Jewish, may be tapped to monitor expanded charita- ble choice programs from the new White House office. In addition to drug rehab, projects would focus on welfare-to-work, after-school and teen programs, reforming criminal offend- ers and more. "Generally, we support it," says Nathan Diament, head of the Orthodox Union's Institute of Public Affairs. "And it's one of the few policy areas [Democratic presidential nomi- nee] Al Gore and Bush agreed on dur- ing the campaign." Religious institutions such as schools already may receive government funds for non-religious purposes, opponents and proponents of charitable choice agree. But because of the president's emphasis on enabling faith-based organizations to provide social servic- es, opponents fear tax dollars might be used to support religious indoctrina- tion or discrimination in hiring based on religious beliefs. Nevertheless, "the constitutional obligation is fairly simple," acknowl- edges Marc Stern of the American Jewish Congress. As decided in an 1898 U.S. Supreme Court case, Bradfield v. Roberts, "the mere fact of Participants in a Jobs Partnership training class pray together after class in Brenham, Texas. Participating clockwise from Andre King at twelve o'clock are: Maria Espinosa; Yvette Adams; instructor Suzanne Flammer; Ana Grant; Flammer's daughter Hattie (just visiting); Rick Rainmer;Ella Dorsey; Carolyn Hogan; and Yolanda Cunningham. 1/26 2001 22