Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1429, Improving Head Start Act of 2007

Floor Speech

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1429, IMPROVING HEAD START ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - May 02, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WELDON of Florida. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, the Democratic majority pays lip service to their support of religious people and faith-based groups, but now they are here today, in this House, enacting a piece of legislation that I believe is a shot across the bow to all faith-based organizations that are involved in social services in this country. The Head Start bill today says that if you participate in the grant process, you will not be able to hire like-minded people to work in your child-care facility.

The Democrats are saying that a bureaucracy in Washington, D.C., has more wisdom to decide who you can and can't hire than the hundreds, thousands of small businesses that run these Head Start programs. The Democrats are essentially saying, with this legislation, while we thank you for your tireless dedication and recognize that you are an integral part of this process, we don't trust you to make fair choices in the employees that you hire.

Don't be misled. This is in direct contradiction to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Supreme Court, both of which came to the conclusion that faith-based organizations had the right to hire employees on a religious basis. Faith-based organizations such as churches, synagogues and other faith-based charities are a central part of the fabric of communities all across America. Many of these organizations provide assistance and services to the neediest members of society, offering a helping hand to the less fortunate among us. Many faith-based organizations can and want to make a vital contribution to the Federal assistance programs.

The landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act explicitly protects the rights of religious organizations to take religion into account in their hiring practices. In fact, the Civil Rights Act made clear that when faith-based organizations hire employees on a religious basis, it is an exercise of the organization's civil liberties and does not constitute discrimination under Federal law.

The freedom to hire those who share religious beliefs was upheld in a unanimous 1987 Supreme Court decision, Corporation of the Presiding Bishop v. Amos, in which the Court observed, ``A law is not unconstitutional simply because it allows churches to advance religion, which is their very purpose. For a law to have forbidden 'effect' ..... it must be fair to say that the government itself has advanced religion through its own activities and influence.''

Now, in an attempt to appease Republicans and conservative Democrats, an alternative amendment will be provided by the gentleman from North Carolina. This amendment, in effect, praises the work of faith-based organizations, but tells them they have to give up their right to hire who they want to hire to participate in Head Start.

Current Federal law protects the Civil Rights Act hiring protections for faith-based organizations and providers. And, indeed, as was stated earlier by a previous speaker, President Bill Clinton signed four laws protecting religious organizations in this context.

Now, I want to close by just pointing out a very, very simple fact. There is a reason why on the floor today the amendment to correct this problem will not be allowed, and the reason is because it will pass. A majority of this Congress, Republicans working with Blue Dog Democrats, would pass the Fortuno amendment which would protect these faith-based religious organizations. We had many of the Blue Dogs vote with us on this issue in the past. But, alas, under this rule, and it is why I am imploring my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``no'' on this rule, that amendment will not be allowed and we will be asked to stifle the freedom of religion in the United States.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source