Versión de HTML Básico
Policy: The Bible and Welfare Reform
109
at the hands of both local and imperial leaders. The “charitable choice”
provision in the 1996 PRWORA legislation may place churches in the
midst of a similar political situation. In particular, as they struggle to
respond to the needs of people who are poor in their communities by par
ticipating in programs receiving funding under welfare reform provisions,
many black churches may be caught delivering the state’s moral message
when functioning in the state-designated role of service provider.107
This assignment for churches by political officials in welfare reform
policies is comparable to what political scientist Cathy Cohen calls sec
ondary marginalization. Though she uses this term in her study of black
politics and the AIDS crisis, it can be usefully applied to welfare reform
policy as well. As Cohen explains, “Dominant elites, refiguring the
process of regulation of and service to marginal groups, come to depend
on a stratum of and service to marginal group members expected or
allowed to staff those dominant institutions and that directly affect the
quality of life of the most vulnerable in marginal communities___Indige
nous leaders risk assimilation or cooptation through such a process.”108
Cohen’s description allows us to recognize a concerted strategy that is
routinely used by national political leaders. It is a political strategy that
enlists a certain sector of socially marginalized communities to implement
regulations and deliver certain services for others in that community.
Most germane to this discussion, moral values about who deserves to
occupy the “thrones” of power and who deserves to be shamed for being
“lowly” are maintained in the enforcement of those regulations and deliv
ery of services. The configuration of bureaucratic personnel and proce
dures helps to preserve the interests of those with the most privileges,
advantages, and material resources in our society.
In welfare reform policy, regulations connected to “charitable choice” as
well as certain governmental “faith-based initiatives” sponsored by
churches in poor communities of color may reflect this kind of political
strategy. Some churches face the dilemma of how to maintain services for
socioeconomically vulnerable persons in their communities by utilizing
s(>me state sponsorship but without adopting the state’s values. If faith-based
groups do not adhere to the rules and regulations of the state—upholding
specific, predetermined values—they risk the loss of their funding.
The economic policies of George W. Bush drew upon the wide
spread acceptance of welfare reform ideology established in the 1990s by
Newt Gingrich, Bill Clinton, and others. In a 2003 speech to a group of
( Christian leaders in which he affirms the key role of the church in meet
ing the needs of the poor, Bush explained, “Welfare policy will not solve