This story isn't so much about Second Baptist Church pastor Willie Davis' recent federal fraud indictment on charges he misspent $330,000 earmarked for a handful of ex-felon halfway homes—the justice system will decide if the pastor of one of the Valley's most influential African-American congregations, his wife Emma and their associate McTheron Jones are innocent or guilty. (Disclosure: I used to attend Second Baptist).
Rather it's mostly about the full-court press many churches, particularly black ones, have put on to get a slice of the billion-dollar, faith-based initiative pie and how such money can imperil the pious.
Fond of recalling how God delivered him from the bottle, President Bush championed the White House's Office Faith-Based and Community Initiatives as a way to unleash divine power on at-risk youth, ex-felons, the homeless and the hungry, substance abusers, people with HIV/AIDS and welfare-to-work families.
"President George W. Bush's Faith-Based and Community Initiative represents a fresh start and bold new approach to government's role in helping those in need," according to the office's website.
Nothing wrong with that.
"Too often the government has ignored or impeded the efforts of faith-based and community organizations," the website continues. "Their compassionate efforts to improve their communities have been needlessly and improperly inhibited by bureaucratic red tape and restrictions placed on funding."
Problem is, there's not a lot of evidence supporting the notion that churches outperform government in delivering social services.
"The White House Office and the Centers for the Faith-Based and Community Initiative—located in 10 federal agencies—are working to support the essential work of these important organizations," the website continues. "Their goal is to make sure that grass-roots leaders can compete on an equal footing for federal dollars, receive greater private support and face fewer bureaucratic barriers."
In other words, Halliburton for the hallelujah set.
Republicans have found a wedge into increasing black voter support by opening up federal coffers for churches and sledge-hammering conservative black clergy with spin-meistered rhetoric on the deviltry of abortion and gay marriage. A February 2004 Los Angeles Times article, "GOP Sees Future in Black Churches," notes the efforts of televangelist Frederick Price of the Crenshaw Christian Center to rally black LA ministers around the issue of banning same-sex marriages. A later Times investigation reported that many black leaders whose churches got faith-based monies switched parties in time for the 2004 presidential election. And in a story on blackcommentator.com, the Rev. Timothy McDonald says the faith-based movement aims to neuter black churches and divert them "from their traditional role as a 'prophetic voice' for social justice."
"They are trying to buy the allegiance of the black church," says McDonald, president of the African American Ministers Leadership Council, which has about 60 ministers in 30 states. "And that is to the advantage of the Republican Party, because the black church has been a major thorn in their side."
According to the Associated Press, millions of the more than $1 billion in federal funds doled out to U.S churches in 2003 went to black congregations, including a $1 million faith-based grant to the Greater Exodus Baptist Church, whose pastor, the Rev. Herbert H. Lusk II, endorsed Bush.
None of which is to say that Davis, whose church became a favored election-year stopover for politicians like Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley, Gov. Kenny Guinn and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., was emboldened by such handouts.
Controversy first arose in September 2002 over claims that several names on a board member list for the Alliance Collegiums Association of Nevada (ACAN)—the Davis-led group set up to run four halfway houses for ex-felons—were falsified, including those of Judge Warren VanLandschoot, who told the Review-Journal that participating would be a conflict of interest, and gaming executive Tony Gladney. Jones told the R-J that a squiggly line next to Gladney's name was meant to indicate he wasn't on the board. A larger controversy cropped up in June 2003, when the Justice Department, six months after dispersing a $423,000 grant to ACAN, froze the remaining funds.
According to published reports, the indictment charges, among other things, that a board meeting during which Davis' wife, Emma, was hired never took place; that Emma failed to disclose a previous conviction; and that Jones lied about having a doctorate.
For decades, scuttlebutt around church pews has been that pastors get rich off the backs of clergy. Black pastors routinely get eagle-eyed, church members noticing every new trinket, new suit or new car. How much more tempting, then, is it with the federal government shoveling barrelfuls of money churchward?
But there's no guarantee that faith-based monies will be used for their intended purpose—the feds alleged the Davises and Jones enriched themselves with $330,000. Or that success is ordained; back in 2002, the obviously partisan Americans United for the Separation of Church and State reported on a study by the Texas Freedom Network criticizing Bush's faith-based initiatives as governor—TFN claims Bush dropped a requirement that ministries offering social services be accredited by the state, leading to horrible results. (To be fair, faith-based church programs have also run successful drug-treatment programs throughout the country). And how to be sure that the churches receiving monies can render the services they claim?
Maybe the government should follow in the footsteps of the Volunteers of America, a 108-year-old faith-based and community resource center that provides service programs. In an interview on the website for the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, based out of the Rockefeller Institute at the State University of New York, Paul McLendon, a longtime Southern Baptist pastor and director of VOA, says groups applying for VOA funding must attend sessions to learn about grant guidelines and restrictions. Grant recipients are also required to read and understand government standards, generate a budget and regularly submit financial reports showing where money is going and how it's being spent.
Perhaps if the Davises and Jones had been held to tougher standards, they might not be in this predicament.