Rev. Dr. Chuck Currie

Romney Puts Politics Before Country During Hurricane Sandy #Sandy

As the nation deals with the impact of Hurricane Sandy it ought to be a time to set aside partisan politics - even with the election just a week away. But Mitt Romney has decided to continue campaigning in the battleground state of Ohio (renaming his election rallies "Storm Aids Rallies"). He is putting politics before country.

Press badge for today's "storm relief event" in Ohio: twitter.com/Ari_Shapiro/st…

— Ari Shapiro (@Ari_Shapiro) October 30, 2012

Compare that to the response of people like President Obama and GOP New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a strong ally of Governor Romney.  When asked about the election, President Obama (who has returned to the White House to oversee relief efforts) said:

I am not worried at this point about the impact on the election.  I’m worried about the impact on families, and I’m worried about the impact on our first responders.  I’m worried about the impact on our economy and on transportation. 

The election will take care of itself next week.  Right now, our number-one priority is to make sure that we are saving lives, that our search-and-rescue teams are going to be in place, that people are going to get the food, the water, the shelter that they need in case of emergency, and that we respond as quickly as possible to get the economy back on track.

Governor Christie had the same message this morning.  When asked if Romney would be joining him in New Jersey this week the governor declared:

“I’ve got a job to do here in New Jersey that’s much bigger than presidential politics, and I could care less about any of that stuff. I have a job to do. I’ve got 2.4 million people out of power. I’ve got devastation on the Shore. I’ve got floods in the northern part of my state. If you think right now I give a damn about presidential politics, then you don’t know me.”

Meanwhile, federal officials and non-profits, including faith-based groups, are working with leaders like President Obama and Governor Christie to respond.

FEMA is the lead agency.  The New York Times notes:

Most Americans have never heard of the National Response Coordination Center, but they’re lucky it exists on days of lethal winds and flood tides. The center is the war room of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where officials gather to decide where rescuers should go, where drinking water should be shipped, and how to assist hospitals that have to evacuate. 

Gov. Christie reports on how the federal response is working:

“It’s been very good working with the president,” Christie said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “He and his administration have been coordinating with us. It’s been wonderful.”

On NBC’s “Today,” Christie said the president had been “outstanding” and FEMA’s response has been “excellent.”

As we keep all those impacted by the storm in our prayers today, let's  set aside the usual partisan politics and figure out how we can help.

Church World Service (CWS) has issued an emergency appeal for donations. 

"Founded in 1946, Church World Service is a cooperative ministry of 35 Protestant, Orthodox, and Anglican denominations, providing sustainable self-help and development, disaster relief, and refugee assistance around the world."  The United Methodist Church and the United Church of Christ are both members of CWS.

The Red Cross is also in need of support.

Talking with KPOJ About Mitt Romney And Other Topics Of The Day

I was back with Carl Wolfson and the good folks at KPOJ this morning to talk about Komen, Planned Parenthood and why Mitt Romney should care about those living in poverty. Listen here:

President Obama Addresses Unemployment Crisis In Moral Terms; Sets Agenda For Progress #jobsnow

President Obama addressed the unemployment crisis today in moral terms that once again offered a progressive and positive vision for the United States - a start contrast to the Tea Party mentality.  I've just finished a conference call with senior White House officials who have offered more specific information on the president's proposed American Jobs Act.

Here's the basic outline, as offered by Think Progress:

President Obama tonight laid out a $450 billion job creation plan before a joint session of Congress, challenging lawmakers to repeatedly to “pass this jobs bill.” “Regardless of the arguments we’ve had in the past, regardless of the arguments we’ll have in the future, this plan is the right thing to do right now. You should pass it. And I intend to take that message to every corner of this country,” he said.

Obama called for a reduction in the payroll tax, investments in infrastructure, a plan to modernize up to 35,000 schools, as well as tax breaks for new hires and a plan to reform the corporate tax code that currently “stands as a monument to special interest influence in Washington.” Obama emphasized that many of these ideas have, in the past, garnered bipartisan support and he threw in some Republican favorites, such as approving pending free trade agreements.

However, despite drawing cheers from the Republicans in the crowd when he mentioned eliminating or streamlining regulations, Obama said that he would not use the economic crisis as an excuse to engage in a regulatory race to the bottom...

Many of these items are the ones anti-poverty advocates recommended to the president in advance of his speech.

The White House explains the American Jobs Act in these terms:

First, it provides a tax cut for small businesses, not big corporations, to help them hire and expand now, and provides an additional tax cut to any business that hires or increases wages. 

Second, it puts more people back to work, including up to 280,000 teachers laid off by state-budget cuts, first responders and veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan, and construction workers repairing crumbling bridges, roads and more than 35,000 public schools, with projects chosen by need and impact, not earmarks and politics.   And, it expands job opportunities for hundreds of thousands of low-income youth and adults through a new Pathways Back to Work Fund that supports summer and year round jobs for youth; innovative new job training programs to connect low-income workers to jobs quickly; and successful programs to encourage employers to bring on disadvantaged workers.  

Third, it helps out-of-work Americans by extending unemployment benefits to help them support their families while looking for work and reforming the system with training programs that build real skills, connect to real jobs and help the long-term unemployed.    It bans employers from discriminating against the unemployed when hiring, and provides a new tax credit to employers hiring workers who have been out of a job for over 6 months. 

Fourth, it puts more money in the pockets of working and middle class Americans by cutting in half the payroll tax that comes out of every worker's paycheck, saving families an average of $1,500 a year’ and taking executive action to remove the barriers that exist in the current federal refinancing program (HARP) to help more Americans refinance their mortgages at historically low rates, save money and stay in their homes.   

Last, the plan won’t add a dime to the deficit and is fully paid for through a balanced deficit reduction plan that includes closing corporate tax loopholes and asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share.

Asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share has been a demand of many U.S. religious leaders to Congress and so I deeply appreciated it when President Obama said tonight:

We have to ask ourselves, “What’s the best way to grow the economy and create jobs?”

Should we keep tax loopholes for oil companies?  Or should we use that money to give small business owners a tax credit when they hire new workers?  Because we can’t afford to do both.  Should we keep tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires?  Or should we put teachers back to work so our kids can graduate ready for college and good jobs?  Right now, we can’t afford to do both.  

This isn’t political grandstanding.  This isn’t class warfare.  This is simple math.  These are real choices that we have to make.  And I’m pretty sure I know what most Americans would choose.  It’s not even close.  And it’s time for us to do what’s right for our future. 

We'll hear more in the coming days.  But I believe that President Obama is setting the right course.

Photo Credit: WhiteHouse.gov 

Rally For Jobs In Oregon (And What I Wrote The President)

The Oregon Center for Public Policy sends along the following information:

This week Oregonians will be rallying in cities throughout the state, delivering a message to their congressional representatives: jobs, not cuts.

Below is the list of cities where rallies will take place. The accompanying links are to flyers (PDF) providing details regarding the times and locations:    

Hood River -- Tuesday, August 30

Eugene -- Tuesday, August 30

Medford -- Wednesday, August 31

Salem -- Wednesday, August 31

Bend --  Thursday, September 1

Portland -- Thursday, September 1st 

These events, in coordination with the Rebuild The Dream movement, are sponsored by: Oregon Action, Jobs With Justice, Alliance for Democracy, US Uncut, Rural Organizing Project, We Are Oregon, SEIU 503, SEIU 49, Moveon.org, AFSCME, PCUN, Economic Fairness Oregon, Unite-Here Local 9, Our Oregon, Pride At Work and Basic Rights Oregon.

How we address the unemployment crisis was the topic of a letter I sent President Obama today - asking him to support the Urban Jobs Act and to support recommendations made by the Center for American Progress regarding job growth.

As the Center for American Progress notes, the GOP's jobs plan is a "Wolf in Sheep's Clothing" that would hurt families across our nation.

We can and we must do better.

Christians for a Sustainable Economy

A new group with a good sounding name - Christians for a Sustainable Economy - has formed.  But what's their real agenda?  As Faith in Public Life notes the political organization is a "who's who" of the conservative movement with a campaign that:

...cloaks conservative economic orthodoxy in the language of compassion and falsely alleges that the Circle of Protection's signers "provide a religious imprimatur for big government and sanctify federal welfare programs that are often ineffective."

Recognizing that Americans' views on the economy are shaped by their moral values, the Religious Right is mounting a large-scale effort to convince the country that protecting tax breaks for those at the top and slashing protections for the rest of us is the moral response to hard times. We can't cede the high ground.

Click here for more.

Debt Deal Raises Moral Questions: What Will Be President Obama's Legacy?

President Obama and leaders of Congress have reached a deal to increase the debt ceiling.  Without such a deal the economy would spiral out of control and a worldwide depression would likely result.  This is how tenuous our economic position is in the post-Bush era.  At the same time, the deal (and not all the details are known) apparently calls for cuts in domestic spending that are so deep that they would betray our most cherished values of a nation and put at risk the lives of our most vulnerable citizens.  A vote in favor of the debt ceiling "compromise" might be necessary but could also be fairly labeled as morally questionable.  We've been saved from a hurricane only to be thrown into a tornado.    

We all know that Barack Obama was dealt a terrible hand by coming in as the president who had to clean-up George W. Bush's mess.  In the midst of gruesome political conditions he managed to expand health care for 30 million Americans - though that achievement is now in some doubt as a part of this compromise could result in new cuts to health care programs - and has ended combat operations in Iraq, a war that never should have been fought.

At the same time, it seems that on the big issues (the public option, the Bush tax cuts, the debt ceiling) this president is willing to allow to GOP to set the terms of the debate - the agenda on how we'll move forward as a nation - and that undermines his ability to achieve the goals he articulated in 2008.  President Obama might just get himself re-elected in 2012 as the "great compromiser" but his legacy might also include continued high unemployment and poverty, and a fractured nation that believes change and hope will never touch their lives, because what he promised in 2008 cannot be achieved with GOP policies he advances through "compromise."

The campaign of 2012 needs to be used by President Obama as a reset.  He needs to use the election to offer a vision for where we need to be as a people.  That vision has to stand in stark contrast to the Tea Party.  But didn't he do that in 2008?  Yes, but four years after Bush has left office a lot of the damage has been undone.  Troops are coming home and defense spending is coming down.  Barack Obama will finally have a chance to set the terms, led the charge, and frame the debate in ways the economic reality has constrained him from doing.  We now know his capabilities as a leader and his faults, all too well. 

In the meantime, as the 2012 draws near, I urge religious leaders across the country to use this period to point out the moral challenges facing this great nation with clarity and purpose.  We must work tirelessly to stand against those who would shred our nation's safety net while protecting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.         

Invoking 14th Amendment A Moral Option To Solve Debt Ceiling Impasse

My latest on The Huffington Post

Protect The American Dream: Call Congress And Demand Shared Sacrifice On Deficit

Tonight President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner offered to the American people starkly differnt visions for America as together we face a looming crisis that comes with August 2nd and the end of our debt ceiling - the nation's ability to borrow.

President Obama said tonight that to deal with our nation's deficit we need a balanced approach that involves shared sacrifice - including asking millionaires to pay their fair share of taxes:

Democrats and Republicans agree on the amount of deficit reduction we need. The debate is about how it should be done. Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get. How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for?

That’s not right. It’s not fair. We all want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we need to pay for as a country – things like new roads and bridges; weather satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical research.

Keep in mind that under a balanced approach, the 98% of Americans who make under $250,000 would see no tax increases at all. None. In fact, I want to extend the payroll tax cut for working families. What we’re talking about under a balanced approach is asking Americans whose incomes have gone up the most over the last decade – millionaires and billionaires – to share in the sacrifice everyone else has to make. And I think these patriotic Americans are willing to pitch in. In fact, over the last few decades, they’ve pitched in every time we passed a bipartisan deal to reduce the deficit. The first time a deal passed, a predecessor of mine made the case for a balanced approach by saying this:

“Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer.”

Those words were spoken by Ronald Reagan. But today, many Republicans in the House refuse to consider this kind of balanced approach – an approach that was pursued not only by President Reagan, but by the first President Bush, President Clinton, myself, and many Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate. So we are left with a stalemate.

Speaker Boehner unveiled his latest plan today - one that could cause the greatest increase in poverty in American history - which calls for no shared sacrifice, only continued benefits for the wealthy at the expense of middle class and low-income families.

Tonight the speaker said:

The sad truth is that the president wanted a blank check six months ago, and he wants a blank check today. That is just not going to happen. You see, there is no stalemate in Congress. The House has passed a bill to raise the debt limit with bipartisan support.

Really?

What they actually passed was a highly partisan bill that couldn't even muster half a dozen democratic votes in the U.S. House.  Now they want to pass the buck by voting for another bill that will cause Congress to have this entire debate again in just six months - instead of dealing with the problem now.

President Obama sounded like a statesman but Speaker Boehner sounded like another partisan pol.  

Like other religious leaders, I want to make sure that any agreement reached protects the middle class and the poorest among us, especially children and elders.  Over 6,000 clergy have written to President Obama with this message -  I've written him personally - and I'll share that message again with White House staff this week.

I hope Americans take up President Obama's call to reach out to Congress to demand a plan to deal with the deficit that includes new revenues and also the protection of our national safety net.  Make your call today, toll free at 888.907.1485.  Click here for more from the Half in Ten Campaign on Protecting the American Dream.

John Boehner's Budget Plan Could Create "Greatest Increase In Poverty" In U.S. History

The non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities released the following statement tonight:

House Speaker John Boehner’s new budget proposal would require deep cuts in the years immediately ahead in Social Security and Medicare benefits for current retirees, the repeal of health reform’s coverage expansions, orwholesale evisceration of basic assistance programs for vulnerable Americans.

The plan is, thus, tantamount to a form of “class warfare.” If enacted, it could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history.

This may sound hyperbolic, but it is not. The mathematics are inexorable.

• The Boehner plan calls for large cuts in discretionary programs of $1.2 trillion over the next ten years, and it then requires additional cuts that are large enough to produce another $1.8 trillion in savings to be enacted by the end of the year as a condition for raising the debt ceiling again at that time.
• The Boehner plan contains no tax increases. The entire $1.8 trillion would come from budget cuts.
• Because the first round of cuts will hit discretionary programs hard — through austere discretionary caps that Congress will struggle to meet — discretionary cuts will largely or entirely be off the table when it comes to achieving the further $1.8 trillion in budget reductions.
• As a result, virtually all of that $1.8 trillion would come from entitlement programs. They would have to be cut more than $1.5 trillion in order to produce sufficient interest savings to achieve $1.8 trillion in total savings.
• To secure $1.5 trillion in entitlement savings over the next ten years would require draconian policy changes. Policymakers would essentially have three choices: 1) cut Social Security and Medicare benefits heavily for current retirees, something that all budget plans from both parties (including House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s plan) have ruled out; 2) repeal the Affordable Care Act’s coverage expansions while retaining its measures that cut Medicare payments and raise tax revenues, even though Republicans seek to repeal many of those measures as well; or 3) eviscerate the safety net for low-income children, parents, senior citizens, and people with disabilities. There is no other plausible way to get $1.5 trillion in entitlement cuts in the next ten years.
• The evidence for this conclusion is abundant.
  • The “Gang of Six” plan, with its very tough and controversial entitlement cuts, contains total entitlement reductions of $640 to $760 billion over the next ten years not counting Social Security, and $755 billion to $875 billion including Social Security. (That’s before netting out $300 billion in entitlement costs that the plan includes for a permanent fix to the scheduled cuts in Medicare physician payments that Congress regularly cancels; with these costs netted out, the Gang of Six entitlement savings come to $455 to $575 billion.)
  • The budget deal between President Obama and Speaker Boehner that fell apart last Friday, which included cuts in Social Security cost-of-living adjustments and Medicare benefits as well as an increase in the Medicare eligibility age, contained total entitlement cuts of $650 billion (under the last Obama offer) to $700 billion (under the last Boehner offer).
  • The Ryan budget that the House passed in April contained no savings in Social Security over the next ten years and $279 billion in Medicare cuts.

To be sure, the House-passed Ryan budget included much larger overall entitlement cuts over the next 10 years. But that was largely because it eviscerated the safety net and repealed health reform’s coverage expansions. The Ryan plan included cuts in Medicaid and health reform of a remarkable $2.2 trillion, from severely slashing Medicaid and killing health reform’s coverage expansions. The Ryan plan also included stunning cuts of $127 billion in the SNAP program (formerly known as food stamps) and $126 billion in Pell Grants and other student financial assistance.

That House Republicans would likely seek to reach the Boehner budget’s $1.8 trillion target in substantial part by cutting programs for the poorest and most vulnerable Americans is given strong credence by the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” bill that the House recently approved. That bill would establish global spending caps and enforce them with across-the-board budget cuts —exempting Medicare and Social Security from the across-the-board cuts while subjecting programs for the poor to the across-the-board axe. This would turn a quarter century of bipartisan budget legislation on its head; starting with the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings law, all federal laws of the last 26 years that have set budget targets enforced by across-the-board cuts have exempted the core assistance programs for the poor from those cuts while including Medicare among programs subject to the cuts. This component of the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” bill strongly suggests that, especially in the face of an approaching election, House Republicans looking for entitlement cuts would heavily target means-tested programs for people of lesser means (and less political power).

In short, the Boehner plan would force policymakers to choose among cutting the incomes and health benefits of ordinary retirees, repealing the guts of health reform and leaving an estimated 34 million more Americans uninsured, and savaging the safety net for the poor. It would do so even as it shielded all tax breaks, including the many lucrative tax breaks for the wealthiest and most powerful individuals and corporations.

President Obama has said that, while we must reduce looming deficits, we must take a balanced approach. The Boehner proposal badly fails this test of basic decency. The President should veto the bill if it reaches his desk. Congress should find a fairer, more decent way to avoid a default.

Religious leaders have warned the White House and Congress that any budget agreement most project the most vunlerable Americans.

Breaking: Christian leaders meet with President, ask him to protect programs for the poor

Press Release from the National Council of Churches

Washington, July 20, 2011 - In a meeting with President Obama and senior White House staff this afternoon, national Christian leaders asked the president to protect funding for programs for hungry and poor people in the ongoing budget debate and in any deal concerning the default crisis.

All agreed that we can get our fiscal house in order without doing so on the backs of those who are most vulnerable. The shared concern was to cut the deficit in a way that protects the safety net, protects the vulnerable, and maintains our investments in the future.

Christian leaders at today's meeting included representatives from the National Council of Churches, the National Association of Evangelicals, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bread for the World, Sojourners, the Alliance to End Hunger, the Salvation Army, the National African American Clergy Network, the National Baptist Convention of America, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.

They are part of the "Circle of Protection," a nonpartisan movement that insists budgets are moral documents and that poor and vulnerable people should be protected-not targeted-in efforts to reduce long-term deficits. White House staff in the meeting included Senior Advisory Valerie Jarrett, Director of Domestic Policy Council Melody Barnes and Director of the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships Joshua DuBois.

Leaders have been urging policy makers to recognize that a commitment to protect vulnerable people is a moral-not partisan-concern. They will continue to talk with policy makers as well as educate other Christians and voters about the moral issues at stake in the budget.

"As Christian leaders, we are committed to fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice. We are also committed to resist budget cuts that undermine the lives, dignity, and rights of poor and vulnerable people," the leaders wrote in a joint statement. "Therefore, we join with others to form a circle of protection around programs that meet the essential needs of hungry and poor people at home and abroad."

The Circle of Protection statement has been signed by more than 60 heads of Christian denominations and religious organizations, and endorsed by 45 heads of development agencies as well as leaders of other faiths. The Circle of Protection movement has worked to uphold the bipartisan consensus that has long prevailed in deficit-reduction agreements-that programs serving poor and hungry people should be protected and exempted from any automatic cuts.

"As Christian leaders, we urge Congress and the administration to give moral priority to programs that protect the life and dignity of poor and vulnerable people in these difficult times, our broken economy, and our wounded world," they wrote.

National Council of Churches representatives at the meeting included the Rev. Dr. Mark Hanson, presiding bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Rev. Michael Livingston, director of the NCC's poverty initiative.

Related Link: A Pastor's Plea to The President: Protect the Poor in Budget Debate

A Pastor's Plea to The President: Protect the Poor in Budget Debate

This morning The Huffington Post published the text of a letter I sent President Obama earlier this week asking that he do everything in his power to protect those living in poverty during the budget debates now under way in Congress.  Click here to read the letter.

Tell President Obama To Protect Medicaid, Low Income Families In Budget Debate

As The New York Times noted in an editorial, health care for the poorest Americans is under attack by Congressional republicans and President Obama must stand-up to them or the consequences will be grave:

The poor and disabled people who rely on Medicaid to pay their medical bills could be in grave jeopardy in this sour I’ve-got-mine political climate.

Older Americans, a potent voting bloc, have made clear that they won’t stand for serious changes in Medicare. Medicaid, however, provides health insurance for the most vulnerable, who have far less political clout.

There is no doubt that Medicaid — a joint federal-state program — has to be cut substantially in future decades to help curb federal deficits. For cash-strapped states, program cuts may be necessary right now. But in reducing spending, government needs to ensure any changes will not cause undue harm to millions.

As Medicaid currently works, the federal government sets minimum requirements for eligibility and for services that must be covered; states can expand on services and include more people. The federal government is required to pay from half to three-quarters of the cost, depending on the wealth of a state’s population. In tough economic times, Medicaid enrollments typically soar as government revenues shrink, adding budget woes.

House Republicans led by Paul Ryan want to turn Medicaid into a federal block grant program that would grow slowly and shift more costs to states and patients. Their plan would save $771 billion over a decade. Mr. Ryan also wants to repeal a big expansion of Medicaid required by the health care reforms. All told, he would cut $1.4 trillion over 10 years — roughly a third of the more than $4 trillion in projected federal spending in that period.  

President Obama, who would retain the Medicaid expansion, has proposed a cut of $100 billion, less than 2.5 percent of projected federal spending, which would be much more manageable, though a lot will depend on how it is carried out. The great danger in proposing $100 billion in cuts at the start is that Republicans will take that as an opening bid that can be negotiated upward, toward the unreasonable Ryan-level cuts the House has already approved.

The best route to savings — already embodied in the reform law — is to make the health care system more efficient over all so that costs are reduced for Medicaid, Medicare and private insurers as well. Various pilot programs to reduce costs might be speeded up, and a greater effort could be made to rein in malpractice costs.

The Half in Ten Campaign - a project supported by the United Church of Christ, the Center for American Progress, and others - is calling on President Obama to protect programs for those living in poverty during budget negotiations:

In these next few weeks, urge the President to stand firm on one important principle as negotiators finalize a deficit reduction plan: protect programs for low-income families and individuals and ensure that deficit reduction does not increase poverty.

Major bipartisan deficit reduction plans in recent decades have met this basic standard. In fact, all of the deficit reduction packages enacted in the 1990s not only brought down the deficit, but also reduced poverty in America. Other deficit reduction measures during this time period also excluded programs supporting low-income families from automatic budget cuts on the principle that low-income Americans should be protected.

Getting our fiscal house in order need not, and should not, mean we do so in a way that increases poverty, hardship, and inequality while financing additional tax breaks for the wealthy.

Call or email the President's office and ask him to oppose harmful cuts to low-income programs and stand by his support of fair increases in revenues to fight reckless cuts to Medicaid, food stamps, and other important services. You can contact the White House Comment Line today toll free at 1-888-245-0215. 

With critical services for our most vulnerable hanging in the balance, your voice on this issue could not be more needed or important during this time.

Click here to send a message to President Obama.

The GOP's Love Affair With Ayn Rand

What did Ayn Rand believe?  

• “What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty”
• “You love only those who deserve it”
• “Nobody has ever given a reason why man should be his brothers’ keeper”

And this is the "hero" Congressional republicans point to as they develop fiscal and social policies for our nation?

America can do better. Regardless of our faith tradition - or even whether or not we have one - the American people are more moral than this.

JPANet: Raise the Debt Ceiling & Protect our Communities

United Church of Christ Justice & Witness Ministries Action Alert

The debt ceiling sets the maximum size of the federal government debt and Congress needs to periodically raise it. Some members of Congress are refusing to support an increase in the debt limit unless huge spending cuts are also part of the "deal."

If reductions in spending follow the pattern established in the House of Representatives’ recent proposal for the federal budget, the cuts will target programs for low- and moderate-income people and essential government functions. The cuts would further harm people who are already suffering and prolong (and possibly worsen) the economic downturn.

Any conditions that are attached to an increase in the debt ceiling should target reductions in the deficit, not just cuts in government spending. Shrinking the deficit must be done through both spending cuts and tax increases on wealthy households and corporations. Tax increases as well as spending cuts must be part of any effort to reduce the deficit.

Tell Congress: raise the debt ceiling and if a “deal” is made to require spending cuts, it must also include tax increases.

Ayn Rand vs the Bible

Action Alert From Faithful America

What would inspire Republicans in the House of Representatives to vote to take away healthcare for the elderly and working families -- all while protecting tax breaks for the wealthy -- like they did just weeks ago?

Well, Paul Ryan, the author of the Republican plan, credits radical right wing author Ayn Rand as his inspiration to enter politics -- and even gives copies of her books to his staff.

So what does Ayn Rand believe?

• Altruism is evil.
• The "weak" do not deserve love.
• All religions, majority rule/democracy, and any regulations on capitalism should be destroyed.

Tell Paul Ryan to put down Ayn Rand

This is the vision that’s driving his budget proposal. We think it’s time Ryan got some new reading material, starting with a text with a moral vision that couldn’t be more different from Rand’s: the Bible.

Paul Ryan is now even defending his budget as consistent with his Roman Catholic faith -- even claiming the Catholic bishops support his proposal when in fact they have criticized its cuts to the poor.

We're not sure how Paul Ryan could think a budget out of an Ayn Rand novel could uphold faith values, so we're sending him a reminder of just what those values are.

Tell Paul Ryan to put down Ayn Rand … and pick up the Bible.

For every 1,000 signatures we get, we’ll deliver one Bible to Paul Ryan.

We’re not asking Congress to base laws on the Bible, but we do think Ryan and all the other politicians who voted for draconian budget cuts while touting their faith could use a reminder of moral principles like this:

If you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your light will rise in the darkness, and your night will become like the noonday. (Isaiah 58:10)

And this:

Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me. (Matthew 25: 40)

The contrast with Rand’s exaltation of selfishness couldn’t be clearer – help us point that out to Paul Ryan.

Click here to read and sign the petition.

Paul Ryan Tries To Spin Letter From Roman Catholic Archbishop; Religious Leaders Remain Opposed To GOP Budget

Not so fast Paul Ryan.

Today the GOP House Budget Chairman claimed support for his budget proposals from the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and said that his budget “upholds the dignity of the human person and is especially attentive to the long-term concerns of the poor.”  But none of that is true.

The truth is that his budget hurts those Jesus called the "least of these" in society and that is why so many religious leaders - including Roman Catholics - have blasted his budget proposals.

But Ryan, a Roman Catholic, received today a pastoral letter from Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan in response to a letter that Ryan sent that Catholic leader.  Ryan claims the letter offers support for the House GOP budget - a claim that media outlets like Politico are repeating:

In the two-page letter, Dolan did not come out and expressly endorse the budget, insisting that he’s a pastor, “not a politician.”

But he praised Ryan’s attention to fiscal responsibility, the role of the family, the dignity of the person and human life and attention to the poor.

The letter also clearly disputes one of the chief rallying cries against the budget: That it would hurt the poor to benefit the rich.

“In any transition that seeks to bring new proposals to current problems in order to build a better future, care must be taken that those currently in need not be left to suffer,” Dolan wrote. “I appreciate your assurance that your budget would be attentive to such considerations and would protect those at risk in the processes and programs of such a transition. While appreciating these assurances, our duty as pastors will motivate our close attention to the manner in which they become a reality.”

That's no endorsement.  In fact, the Archbishop is simply saying: we're watching and will continue and weigh in.  Archbiship Dolan refers Ryan back to a letter sent by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to members of the U.S. House of Representatives on April 13, 2010 in which they wrote:

Access to affordable, life-affirming health care remains an urgent national priority. We are not opposed in principle to block grants, but fear that some proposed changes to Medicare and Medicaid could leave more elderly and poor people without the assurance of adequate and affordable health care.  Medicaid block grants may offer states more flexibility, but could leave states with inadequate resources as costs grow or more people need health care in future recessions.  Converting Medicare into a voucher program could shift rising health care costs to vulnerable seniors and those who are poor without controlling these costs. We also fear the human and social costs of substantial cuts to programs that serve families working to escape poverty, especially food and nutrition, child development and education, and affordable housing.   

International assistance is an essential tool to promote human life and dignity, advance solidarity with poorer nations, and enhance global security. It supports a wide range of life-saving programs, including: drugs to combat diseases; assistance to poor farmers and orphans; food aid for starving people; aid to victims of natural disasters; and help to refugees fleeing for their lives.  The House Resolution appears to cut the foreign operations budget by more than a third. We do not support the entire foreign operations budget, but we strongly support poverty-focused international assistance. A cut of this magnitude is likely to devastate poverty-focused efforts and the people who depend on them.  We support continuing reform of foreign assistance to make it even more effective for the poorest people in the poorest places on earth. 

In short, the U.S. Conference of Catholics Bishops oppose the heart of the GOP's budget.

The conference is even represented as an endorser of a Circle of Protection Campaign - a coalition of faith groups fighting to protect anti-poverty programs from being cut.

Roman Catholic Academic Leaders To Speaker John Boehner: GOP Budget Immoral

As U.S. House Speaker John Boehner prepares to deliever the commencement address at the Catholic University of America the National Catholic Reporter has published a story about a group of prominent Catholic academic leaders at that institution and others that have written the House speaker to express concern that his efforts to cut programs for low-income Americans are "at variance from one of the Church’s most ancient moral teachings."

Boehner is Roman Catholic.  

The letter states, in part:

From the apostles to the present, the Magisterium of the Church has insisted that those in power are morally obliged to preference the needs of the poor. Your record in support of legislation to address the desperate needs of the poor is among the worst in Congress. This fundamental concern should have great urgency for Catholic policy makers. Yet, even now, you work in opposition to it.

The 2012 budget you shepherded to passage in the House of Representatives guts long-established protections for the most vulnerable members of society. It is particularly cruel to pregnant women and children, gutting Maternal and Child Health grants and slashing $500 million from the highly successful Women Infants and Children nutrition program. When they graduate from WIC at age 5, these children will face a 20% cut in food stamps. The House budget radically cuts Medicaid and effectively ends Medicare. It invokes the deficit to justify visiting such hardship upon the vulnerable, while it carves out $3 trillion in new tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. In a letter speaking on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop Stephen Blaire and Bishop Howard Hubbard detailed the anti-life implications of this budget in regard to its impact on poor and vulnerable American citizens. They explained the Church’s teachings in this regard clearly, insisting that:

A just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons. It requires shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs fairly.

Specifically, addressing your budget, the letter expressed grave concern about changes to Medicaid and Medicare that could leave the elderly and poor without adequate health care. The bishops warned further:

We also fear the human and social costs of substantial cuts to programs that serve families working to escape poverty, especially food and nutrition, child development and education, and affordable housing.

Representing the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishops Hubbard and Blaire have now endorsed with other American Christian leaders a call to legislators for a “Circle of Protection” around programs for the poor that you, Mr. Speaker, have imperiled. The statement of these Christian leaders recognizes the need for fiscal responsibility, “but not at the expense of hungry and poor people.” Indeed, it continues, “These choices are economic, political—and moral. As Christians, we believe the moral measure of the debate is how the most poor and vulnerable people fare. We look at every budget proposal from the bottom up—how it treats those Jesus called ‘the least of these’ (Matthew 25:45).”

Mr. Speaker, we urge you to use the occasion of this year’s commencement at The Catholic University of America to give fullest consideration to the teachings of your Church. We call upon you to join with your bishops and sign on to the “Circle of Protection.” It is your moral duty as a legislator to put the needs of the poor and most vulnerable foremost in your considerations. To assist you in this regard, we enclose a copy of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Published by the Vatican, this is the “catechism” for the Church’s ancient and growing teaching on a just society and Catholic obligations in public life.

Click here to add you name to the Circle of Protection and join these Roman Catholic leaders in standing up to the harsh and immoral budget policies put forth by Speaker Boehner and his colleagues. 

"Christian Leaders Unite to Protect Poor People in Budget Debate"

Press Release from the National Council of Churches

Washington, DC, April 27, 2011 – Evangelical, Roman Catholic, mainline Protestants, African-American, and Latino Christian leaders have joined together to defend the lives and dignity of poor and vulnerable people in the current budget debate. The release of this joint statement marks the strongest and most unified Christian voice in the budget debate. Signed by more than 50 Christian leaders, it states:

“As Christian leaders, we are committed to fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice. We are also committed to resist budget cuts that undermine the lives, dignity, and rights of poor and vulnerable people. Therefore, we join with others to form a Circle of Protection around programs that meet the essential needs of hungry and poor people at home and abroad.”

In a press call today, heads of diverse Christian organizations said that politicians in both parties have failed to bring moral leadership to the budget debate. In the words of the Christian leaders:

“These choices are economic, political—and moral. As Christians, we believe the moral measure of the debate is how the most poor and vulnerable people fare. We look at every budget proposal from the bottom up—how it treats those Jesus called “the least of these” (Matthew 25:45). They do not have powerful lobbies, but they have the most compelling claim on our consciences and common resources. The Christian community has an obligation to help them be heard, to join with others to insist that programs that serve the most vulnerable in our nation and around the world are protected.”

Congress will reconvene Monday, May 2, after a two-week recess. The FY 2012 budget and raising the ceiling on the national debt will top its agenda. According to the Christian leaders’ statement:

“Budgets are moral documents, and how we reduce future deficits are historic and defining moral choices. As Christian leaders, we urge Congress and the administration to give moral priority to programs that protect the life and dignity of poor and vulnerable people in these difficult times, our broken economy, and our wounded world.”

The leaders outlined eight principles for ethical decision-making that must be considered in a moral budget. These include protecting and improving “poverty-focused development and humanitarian assistance to promote a better, safer world” and ensuring that budget discussions “review and consider tax revenues, military spending, and entitlements in the search for ways to share sacrifice and cut deficits.” They also call for a focus on creating jobs since “decent jobs at decent wages are the best path out of poverty, and restoring growth is a powerful way to reduce deficits.”

The leaders said that it is the “vocation and obligation of the church to speak and act on behalf of those Jesus called ‘the least of these.’” This basic principle has provided a unifying point for Christians that gets past the partisan politics dominating Capitol Hill. Plans are being made to hold political leaders accountable for protecting programs that serve poor and vulnerable people and for using moral principles to make budget decisions.

For a full list of signatories and the complete statement, please visit www.circleofprotection.us

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

President Obama Offers Moral Vision, Faith Leaders Must Press For More

Faith leaders in the United States should applaud President Obama for offering a moral vision for the nation while carefully monitoring how the White House and Congress proceed.

My response to President Obama's budget speech in The Huffington Post.

GOP Sets Fire To Matthew 25; Will President Obama Put Out The Flames?

The GOP's budget proposals - which I've already called immoral - keep getting worse.  Their latest fiscal blueprint, offered up by U.S. Congressman Paul Ryan, would continue tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans while cutting $4 trillion from the budget over ten years - 3/4 of which will come from programs meant to support the most vulnerable in America.  The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports: 

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget plan would get about two-thirds of its more than $4 trillion in budget cuts over 10 years from programs that serve people of limited means, which violates basic principles of fairness and stands a core principle of President Obama’s fiscal commission on its head.

The plan of Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, who co-chaired President Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, established, as a basic principle, that deficit reduction should not increase poverty or inequality or hurt the disadvantaged. The Ryan plan, which the chairman unveiled in a news conference, speech, and Wall Street Journal op-ed today, charts a different course, turning its biggest cannons on these people.

So what exactly does the GOP hope to cut while they protect tax cuts for millionaries?

$2.17 trillion in reductions from Medicaid and related health care. The plan shows Medicaid cuts of $771 billion, plus savings of $1.4 trillion from repealing the health reform law’s Medicaid expansion and its subsidies to help low- and moderate-income people purchase health insurance.

$350 billion in cuts in mandatory programs serving low-income Americans (other than Medicaid).  The budget documents that Chairman Ryan issued today show that he is proposing $715 billion in cuts in mandatory programs other than Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, but do not specify how much will be cut from various programs (although they imply that cuts in the food stamp program will be large). In this analysis, we make the conservative assumption that savings from low-income mandatory programs (other than Medicaid) would be proportionate to their share of spending in this category. Thus, we derive the $350 billion figure from the fact that about half of mandatory spending other than for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security goes for programs for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. This likely substantially understates the cuts that the plan would make in low-income programs. The Ryan documents show that $380 billion in cuts would come from programs in the income security portion of the budget (function 600), and the overwhelming bulk of the mandatory spending in that category goes for low-income programs. The documents also show $126 billion in mandatory cuts in the education, training, employment, and social services portion of the budget (function 500), which, based on the discussion in those documents, would likely come mainly from cuts in the mandatory portion of the Pell Grant program for low-income students.

$400 billion in cuts in low-income discretionary programs. The Ryan budget documents show that he is proposing $1.6 trillion in cuts in non-security discretionary programs, but again do not provide details about the size of cuts to specific programs. (The documents do identify some major low-income program areas, including Pell Grants and low-income housing, as prime targets for cuts.) Here, too, we make the conservative assumption that low-income programs in this category would bear a proportionate share of the cuts. Thus, we derive the $400 billion figure from the fact that about a quarter of non-security discretionary spending goes for programs for low- and moderate-income individuals and families.

You'll continue to see the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Council of Churches, among others, work to oppose these cuts because:

There is no greater concern among the churches of Christ than for those in this nation who live in poverty. This could hardly be otherwise because Jesus himself lived among the poor: loving them, eating and drinking with them, healing them, and speaking words of justice and assurance that God's own love for the poor is unsurpassed.

This question is what will President Obama will do?  We know what we need him to do.  But as we await his speech this Wednesday on the economy it appears that he is letting the GOP set the agenda.  His Wednesday address needs to offer up a vision for America that is starkly different from the GOP's and inline with his historic 2008 campaign.

Government Shutdown Must Be Avoided But Federal Budget Must Protect Poor, Advance Common Good

Has the issue of whether or not the federal government will shut down later tonight really come down to this?

If Congress fails to reach a budget deal, the government will shut down at midnight tonight — an event that would hinder economic recoveryand withhold payment to soldiers. But congressional leaders are at loggerheads over one issue: family planning. Though it has zero impact on the federal budget, House Republicans are insisting that Democrats agree to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood or make billions more in cuts.

via ThinkProgress

From the Roman Catholic Church to the United Church of Christ - two denominations that disagree on the issue of abortion - the issue has been clear, as it has from religious leaders across the country with the exception of the far fringes of the religious right, the federal budget must promote the common good, help people lift themselves out of poverty, protect the middle class, and advance efforts to reverse the impact of human caused climate change.

Republicans should stop trying to use the budget to advance their campaign to undermine women's health care and environmental protections - and President Obama and congressional Democrats need to forcefully protect health care, anti-poverty efforts, community development programs, and the hard won successes from the president's economic policies that are finally turning the economy around after eight years of GOP rule.

Portland Stand With Planned Parenthood Rally from The Rev. Chuck Currie on Vimeo.

JPANet: The Federal Budget and the Common Good

Message from the Justice & Witness Ministries of the United Church of Christ

The founding principles of the United States, declared in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution, include not only protecting our people from domestic strife and defending the nation in times of war but also establishing justice and promoting the general welfare. While we like to define ourselves by these ideals of fairness and generosity, we have spent much of our history trying to make the reality resemble the words.

In a “Resolution for the Common Good,” General Synod 25 reminds us: “Our Christian faith speaks directly to public morality and the ways a nation should bring justice and compassion into its civic life.  In the story of the last judgment, Jesus tells us that nations will be judged by how they care for their most vulnerable citizens, those Jesus describes as, ‘the least of these who are members of my family.’  This story in Matthew (Matthew 25: 34-35) is not about personal salvation; rather it is presented as a story of the judgment of nations.” 

Today in our economy we are called once again to address the disparity between our ideals and today’s reality of rapidly widening inequality—our poorest neighbors living invisibly and un-cared-for among us. 

Our economy and the federal budget are inextricably tied to the well being of our society. In an effort to support learning, reflection and prayer about these complex issues we have assembled a four week exploration of the budget and its many facets.

This week we are reflecting on the budget, budget cuts, and the common good. We hope you will join us on this journey.

Related Link: House GOP Cuts are Theologically Immoral

"Budgets: Can’t cut moral responsibility to save lives, say faith leaders"

Press Release from Church World Service

WASHINGTON./NEW YORK--As the Senate moves towards compromise on massive cuts as outlined in House bill H.R. 1, humanitarian agency Church World Service and leading faith groups say that, even as lawmakers address current financial challenges, the United States has a moral responsibility to maintain the nation’s capacity to save lives in the United States and internationally.

In letters sent yesterday and today to members of Congress, CWS and other religious leaders are raising their voices "against the proposed deep cuts in FY2011 discretionary domestic and poverty-focused foreign aid spending."

In a Monday letter to the Senate, Church World Service Executive Director and CEO John L. McCullough urged lawmakers to oppose the House cuts for fiscal year 2011 and enact funding for global disaster assistance and poverty-focused development assistance "at least at the level of the President’s request." Such programs are "less than one percent of the U.S. budget," McCullough noted, and cutting them will "not help solve the nation’s fiscal problems," but instead will "harm American long-term interests."

The House bill represents "a devastating blow for millions of children and adults struggling to overcome hunger and poverty and to rebuild from crises," McCullough added.

CWS, faith coalition entreat Congress today 

The faith coalition reminded lawmakers that "unchecked increases in military spending combined with vast tax cuts helped create our country’s financial difficulties and restoring financial soundness requires addressing these root imbalances."

The religious leaders say discretionary programs that serve the poor and vulnerable "are a very small percentage of the budget, and they are not the drivers of the deficits. Cutting discretionary programs will devastate those living in poverty at home and around the world, cost jobs, and in the long run will harm, not help, our fiscal situation."

"While ‘shared sacrifice’ can be an appropriate banner, those who would be devastated by these cuts have nothing left to sacrifice," they said.

McCullough’s caution to the Senate on Monday reflected the vantage point of a humanitarian agency that daily works with hunger, poverty and people displaced by conflicts and climate migration. He said cuts to bilateral and multilateral programs for clean technology, disaster risk reduction and adaptation funding for communities suffering climate change impacts "will cost us much more in the future when the U.S. may be required to respond to once-preventable disasters threatening to destabilize vulnerable countries."

CWS states that only minimal savings would result from H.R. 1’s proposed 67 percent cut in International Disaster Assistance (IDA) and the proposed 45 percent cut in Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA).

"These are not worth the loss of life, human suffering and destabilizing impact of discontinuing programs that provide emergency health, safe shelter, and clean water for millions of survivors of conflicts, human rights abuses and natural disasters," said McCullough.

CWS similarly urges that the Office of Refugee Resettlement budget, stagnant for decades, should not be additionally cut, to prevent additional burdens on already-strapped state and local governments to assist refugees.

CWS and McCullough also urge preserving a level of funding as outlined by President Obama’s FY2011 request for "sustainable, life-saving global agriculture, nutrition and food aid programs [CR1]."

Leaders of U.S. churches who signed today’s letter to Congress along with CWS’s McCullough include:

Rev. Donald H. Ashmall, Council Minister, International Council of Community Churches; Dr. Carroll A. Baltimore, Sr., President, Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc.; Rev. Geoffrey A. Black, General Minister and President, United Church of Christ; Bishop Larry M. Goodpaster, President, Council of Bishops, The United Methodist Church; Rev. Mark S. Hanson, Presiding Bishop, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; Rev. M. Linda Jaramillo, Executive Minister, United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries; The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop and Primate, The Episcopal Church; Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, General Secretary, National Council of Churches USA; Arthur M. Larrabee, General Secretary, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends; Bishop Chuck Leigh, President, Apostolic Catholic Church; Roy Medley, General Secretary, American Baptist Churches USA; Stanley J. Noffsinger, General Secretary, Church of the Brethren; Gradye Parsons, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church USA; Stephen M. Veazey, President, Community of Christ; and Dr. Sharon E. Watkins, General Minister and President, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in the United States and Canada.

Related CWS Action Alert: Tell Congress not to cut humanitarian foreign aid

"Put the Poor First in Federal Budget Decisions Say Catholic Bishops"

Roman Catholic leaders are among those opposing cuts in federal anti-poverty funding.  The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops recently called on Congress to protect the most vulnerable in society:

On behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), we call on Congress to place the needs of the poor, the unemployed, the hungry, and other vulnerable people first, in setting priorities in the Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Appropriations Resolution. Decisions on how to allocate opportunities and burdens in setting budget priorities are more than economic policies -- they are significant moral choices. Meeting essential human needs is a compelling ethical and fiscal priority. The health, stability and well being of our nation depend on these decisions. A moral measure of the budget is how it treats “the least of these” at all stages of life from conception until natural death.

Current proposals call for drastic reductions in non-security related programs that serve the poor and vulnerable. In a time of economic crisis, the poor and vulnerable are in greater need of assistance, not less. Preserving the national security of the country is without doubt imperative, but we cannot secure the nation while at the same time furthering the insecurity of the poor and vulnerable in our midst.

We support reasonable solutions and strategies to address the federal deficit that will ensure stability and security for future generations. However, we advocate for a balanced approach that is just and works to preserve the well-being of poor and vulnerable people. Congress should adopt a spending plan for the remainder of FY 2011 that ensures adequate funding for programs that offer opportunity and help to the poor, children, seniors, and people with disabilities and other vulnerable persons. Congress should help to alleviate the burden of the vulnerable, not make it worse...

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference offers examples of possible considerations that reflect some of our concerns with the proposed plan:

• The USCCB calls on Congress to work to ensure adequate health care coverage to those in need. The proposed $1 billion cut to Community Health Centers will deny health care to nearly ten million poor and vulnerable people including mothers and children at risk. These centers are often the only access to health care for tens of millions of people in our country.
  
  
• The bishops affirm their long-standing position that safe, affordable and decent housing is a human right. At a time of record foreclosures, increasing homelessness and rising housing costs, the proposed cut of $2.3 billion to affordable housing programs is not justifiable in light of the housing crisis for low and moderate income families. 

• Reducing job training programs by a proposed $1.75 billion does not make sense at a time of high unemployment and low job creation. Further, this will prolong the economic pain of the very people seeking adequate training to re-enter the job market. Many of those most affected by job loss are less-skilled workers who need additional training and skill development to re-enter the workforce. Congress must ensure funding for and support efforts to strengthen and improve these quality training programs with successful outcomes.
  
  
• We are deeply concerned by cuts in FY 2011 refugee funding that the bill would make.  More specifically, the bill would cut available funding in FY 2011 for domestic refugee resettlement programs operated by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) by $77 million, or 10.5 percent relative to FY 2010 appropriations.  And it would cut funding for refugee admissions and overseas refugee assistance programs in the Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) account that is operated by the Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) by $827 million, or 44.8 percent, relative to FY 2010 appropriations.  USCCB believes that cuts to these accounts, which have been historically under-funded, would have a devastating effect on refugees, Afghan and Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa recipients, victims of torture and trafficking, unaccompanied alien children, and other vulnerable populations served by PRM, ORR, and the communities across the country that welcome these populations. 
  
  
• As you consider the FY 2011 Continuing Appropriations Bill, we urge you, at a minimum, to maintain the funding for the MRA and ORR accounts at the FY 2010 total enacted level. To do otherwise would have a devastating impact on those displaced persons around the world who are almost entirely dependent on the international system for life-saving assistance, as well as to those who we have offered the life-saving assistance of admission to the United States.

The spending choices of Congress have clear moral and human dimensions; they reflect our values as a people. We are not policy makers, but pastors and teachers. But, we remind Congress that the poor and vulnerable have a priority claim on our limited, although still substantive, financial resources. In efforts to pass a responsible spending resolution for the remainder of FY 2011, decisions should be made that not only reflect a commitment to national and long term fiscal security but demonstrate justice, compassion and fairness. Our plea, then, is simple: Put the poor and vulnerable first as you consider how to spend limited federal resources.

The letter was signed by Bishop Stephen E. Blaire, Chairman, Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

My experience over the years has been that the Roman Catholic Church has been one of the strongest voices for economic justice.  We saw that again this week when the United States Conference of Catholics Bishops sided with union leaders against the Wisconsin governor.  Clearly, except for on the far fringes of the religious right, faith leaders (even those divided over questions concerning abortion and gay marriage) are clearly committed to fighting those in Congress who would harm the "least of these" in society while offering tax breaks to the wealthiest.

GOP leaders are attempting not only to cut programs for the FY12 budget but also to roll back anti-poverty programs this year despite record poverty levels.  Their actions would harm the common good of our nation.  The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is providing much needed moral guideance in opposing these cuts.  

Related Post:  House GOP Cuts Are Theoligcally Immoral 

"The G.O.P.’s Abandoned Babies"

The GOP - the "pro-life" party - has shown their hypocrisy on the political wedge issue of abortion with the adoption of the GOP-controlled House budget.  Charles M. Blow writes in The New York Times:

Republicans need to figure out where they stand on children’s welfare. They can’t be “pro-life” when the “child” is in the womb but indifferent when it’s in the world. Allow me to illustrate just how schizophrenic their position has become through the prism of premature babies.

Of the 33 countries that the International Monetary Fund describes as “advanced economies,” the United States now has the highest infant mortality rate according to data from the World Bank. It took us decades to arrive at this dubious distinction. In 1960, we were 15th. In 1980, we were 13th. And, in 2000, we were 2nd.

Part of the reason for our poor ranking is that declines in our rates stalled after premature births — a leading cause of infant mortality as well as long-term developmental disabilities — began to rise in the 1990s.

The good news is that last year the National Center for Health Statistics reported that the rate of premature births fell in 2008, representing the first two-year decline in the last 30 years.

Dr. Jennifer L. Howse, the president of the March of Dimes, which in 2003 started a multimillion-dollar premature birth campaign focusing on awareness and education, has said of the decline: “The policy changes and programs to prevent preterm birth that our volunteers and staff have worked so hard to bring about are starting to pay off.”

The bad news is that, according to the March of Dimes, the Republican budget passed in the House this month coulddo great damage to this progress. The budget proposes:

• $50 million in cuts to the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant that “supports state-based prenatal care programs and services for children with special needs.”

• $1 billion in cuts to programs at the National Institutes of Health that support “lifesaving biomedical research aimed at finding the causes and developing strategies for preventing preterm birth.”

• Nearly $1 billion in cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for its preventive health programs, including to its preterm birth studies.

This is the same budget in which House Republicans voted to strip all federal financing for Planned Parenthood.

It is savagely immoral and profoundly inconsistent to insist that women endure unwanted — and in some cases dangerous — pregnancies for the sake of “unborn children,” then eliminate financing designed to prevent those children from being delivered prematurely, rendering them the most fragile and vulnerable of newborns. How is this humane?

It isn't humane and it isn't pro-life.

My belief is that most people outside the political class who term themselves pro-life do so because they believe in the sanctity of life.  Those people must stand up now to the GOP and affirm that life doesn't end at birth.

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ, which has taken pro-choice positions on the issue of abortion, is also deeply concerned about life.  Our General Synod has affirmed, for example, "the sacredness of all life, and the need to protect and defend human life in particular" and encouraged "persons facing unplanned pregnancies  to consider giving birth and parenting the child, or releasing the child for adoption, before abortion."

Our denomination has also been a strong supporter of programs for children.  We live out the Biblical mandate to care for the "least of these" through volunteerism, donations, faith-based social service programs, and public policy efforts.

What is needed now is for those who are "pro-life" and "pro-choice" to stand together with the understanding that we are all 'pro-child."  That is the common ground we share.  And together we must fight these proposed cuts to our federal budget that would harm children and increase abortions.  

You cannot be "pro-life" and support the GOP's budget.

Related Post:  House GOP Cuts Are Theoligcally Immoral

"Church World Service, other agencies urge lawmakers to spare humanitarian spending from budget cuts"

Action Alert from Church World Service

In an attempt to halt U.S. budget cuts that could be "devastating" to disaster victims, displaced people and refugees throughout the world, Church World Service has joined several humanitarian agencies in appealing to lawmakers now deliberating the nation's proposed spending plan for 2011.

In a February 22 letter to House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority leader Eric Cantor and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, CWS and leaders of the nation's foremost faith-based and humanitarian agencies made the case that draconian cuts outlined in H.R. 1 would severely hinder the capacity of the United States to mount effective humanitarian response efforts around the world.  Read more.

Take action:  Contact your Senators and Representative urging them not to cut humanitarian and poverty-focused foreign assistance for the remainder of FY 2011.  Send your message now.

Mall Abortions? GOP Budget Thinking Explained.

My op-ed in The Huffington Post tried to explain the impact of the proposed budget cuts put forth by the GOP controlled House. But Jon Stewart does it better:

The Daily Show - Mother F#@kers
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Daily Show - Mother F#@kers - Stork Bucks
Tags: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Mall abortions?  

The reality, as was said at a rally here in Portland held to support the mission of Planned Parenthood, is quite different.  Planned Parenthood provides critically needed health care services that prevent the need for abortion and promote the common good.

Portland Stand With Planned Parenthood Rally from The Rev. Chuck Currie on Vimeo.

What I Told KPOJ About The GOP's Proposed Budget Cuts

This morning I was on KPOJ talking about the GOP's budget proposal in the U.S. House and my op-ed this week in The Huffington Post regarding the proposed cuts.  You can download the podcast below:

Download 2-23-11 hr 2 POJ-cast

(some browsers - like Firefox or Google Chrome - will allow you to simply click on the link and listen...otherwise click with the RIGHT mouse button on the hyperlink and choose “Save Target As” and save to your desktop or other folder – once downloaded click on the file to listen).

Now On ITunes

You can now subscribe to my podcasts on ITunes by clicking here. 

My Favorite Weather Forecast Of All Time

This will go down as my favorite weather forecast of all time (issued today for Portland and the Willamette Valley):

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE VALLEY FLOORS WILL SEE A SIGNIFICANT SNOWFALL IN THE MID TO LATE WEEK TIME FRAME...BUT IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT LITTLE OR NO SNOW WILL FALL.

If the President and Congress need to cut something in the federal budget the National Weather Service might not be missed all that much (just joking...no need to send me angry e-mails questioning my commitment to fortune telling weather monitoring).

House Republicans Continue Assault On Women; Religious Leaders Oppose De-funding Planned Parenthood

House Republicans passed legislation this week that would bar federal funding for Planned Parenthood ("including contraception, which is basic preventive health care"). Planned Parenthood's 820 health centers across the nation...

...provide a wide range of safe, reliable health care — and more than 90 percent is preventive, primary care, which helps prevent unintended pregnancies through contraception, reduce the spread of sexually transmitted infections through testing and treatment, and screen for cervical and other cancers. Caring physicians, nurse practitioners, and other staff take time to talk with clients, encouraging them to ask questions in an environment that millions have grown to trust.

Planned Parenthood also provides critical public health education to communities:

Planned Parenthood is a respected leader in educating Americans about reproductive and sexual  health. We deliver comprehensive and medically accurate information that empowers women, men, teens, and families to make informed choices and lead healthy lives. Planned Parenthood is proud of its vital role in providing young people with honest sexuality and relationship information in classrooms and online to help reduce our nation’s alarmingly high rates of teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. More than 1.2 million youths and adults participate in Planned Parenthood educational programs every year.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice issued the following statement in response to the House vote:

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice and its 40 member denominations and religiously affiliated organizations – including the Presbyterian Church USA, United Church of Christ, Catholics for Choice, and Union for Reform Judaism – are deeply troubled by the cuts to family planning services and to Planned Parenthood clinics that were passed today by the U.S. House of Representatives. These services are used by more than 5 million women and men each year.

Given the many other options available to the Republican leadership, cutting these services should not have been the priority of our government. At a time when so many people continue to suffer from the poor economy, eliminating critical preventive health services will do even more damage to struggling families.

But most troubling is that these cuts show a callous disregard for the well-being of women and families. Responsible parenthood reflects our highest values as people of faith and as a nation. The family planning services provided by Planned Parenthood clinics and the Title X program (the nation’s family planning program) are part of the foundation of the strong, family-oriented society that we seek.

As a coalition sustained by our faith and pursuit for social justice, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice asks: Where is the justice in destroying services that support responsible behaviors and healthy life styles? The answer is obvious: there is no justice and no compassion. These cuts must be stopped by the Senate because they are morally indefensible.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice is the national interfaith coalition of denominations that officially support reproductive choice on religious grounds, with more than 20 million members, including the Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church USA, United Church of Christ, two agencies of the United Methodist Church, the Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist movements of Judaism, and the Unitarian Universalist Association, and Catholics for Choice and other independent and religiously affiliated organizations.

As a minister in the United Church of Christ, I will continue to speak out in support of Planned Parenthood and their critical mission of providing health care.  This attempt to strip away the rights of women to make their own reproductive health care choices cannot be allowed to stand.  Abortion is not the only issue at stake (over 90% of Planned Parenthood's work has nothing to do with abortion).  Without Planned Parenthood we will see an increase in STDs and teen-pregnancies, for example, and that will harm the common good of our nation.  

"Federal Budget Must Create Jobs and Support Our Communities"

United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries Action Alert

President Obama has just completed his federal budget proposal. Now Congress begins the difficult task of crafting the budget. The stakes for all Americans could not be higher. With nearly one in five potential workers either unemployed or working part time when they want full-time hours, the federal budget must promote job creation.

Depending on its provisions, the federal budget could strengthen the economy and put people back to work, or it could weaken or even reverse the gains that have been made over the past year. Congress must make funding job creation its top priority while also maintaining a strong safety net of programs to support the poor and unemployed.

Some argue we cannot afford to create jobs when the deficit is so large. Actually, we cannot afford not to. Most of the deficit (over three-fifths) is due to the economic downturn and related bailouts and stimulus measures.  These expenditures will disappear when the economy is fully recovered. Only when millions of the unemployed are back at work, making money, paying taxes, and no longer relying on safety net programs will the deficit fall to manageable levels, at least in the short term. In the years ahead the deficit will balloon again, largely driven by high health costs. Funding job creation will raise employment and shrink the deficit.

Most of the budget cuts currently being proposed in Congress do not address the immediate cause of the deficit, the economic downturn, nor the longer term problem, escalating health costs. Congress must make funding job creation a budget priority, and this will also reduce the deficit.  Moreover, shrinking the deficit when the economy is fragile risks further layoffs or even another recession.

Act now! Send a letter to the editor of your local paper: the budget must promote job creation and maintain the critically important safety net for the poor and unemployed.

"A budget that leaves out families is like a valentine that leaves out love"

Press Release from Faith in Public Life

Valentine's Day message from prominent Christian, Jewish leaders to political leaders on proposed massive budget cuts

February 14, 2011

National Christian and Jewish leaders are sending a Valentine's Day message today to elected officials, responding to proposed budgets cuts that slash spending on critical, life-saving programs for women, children, and families. Their message: A budget that leaves out families is like a valentine that leaves out love.

Rabbi Steve Gutow, President and CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs; Sr. Simone Campbell, Executive Director of NETWORK, a National Catholic Social Justice Lobby; and Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, General Secretary of the National Council of Churches, are rallying around three specific proposed cuts to programs that are critical to keeping families healthy.

These prominent national faith leaders are opposing cuts proposed by Congressional leaders to Community Health Centers, which provide primary health care to millions of low- and middle-income families in underserved communities; Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which provides food assistance to low-income women and their children; and Maternal and Child Health Block Grants, which give low-income pregnant women, mothers and their children access to health care.

"As Americans celebrate Valentine's Day, vital programs that support families and the most vulnerable now face drastic budget cuts. Sound fiscal judgment makes perfect sense, but cutting the heart out of effective programs that help mothers, children and hard-working citizens is both cruel and misguided," said Sr. Simone Campbell, executive director of NETWORK. "House Republicans are attacking our nation's safety net at a time when millions are struggling to find work and put food on the table. This ideological assault undermines human dignity and the shared values that make our nation flourish. Both Congressional leaders and the Obama administration, which has proposed its own cuts to important programs, need to start showing real moral leadership to ensure that vulnerable families are protected during efforts to balance the budget."

Faith leaders, who have long advocated for health care and other vital assistance for poor and working-class families, expect moral leadership from our elected officials. As political leaders take on the challenge of tackling the deficit, the faith community is demanding solutions that don't unfairly target the most vulnerable members of our society.

On Valentine's Day, faith leaders hold their political leaders accountable for remembering families in need with the budget, just as love is a critical component of any valentine.

"As we observe a holiday that embodies love, millions of Americans struggle to find employment and afford health care for themselves and their loved ones. Particularly in rural and underserved communities, the hardships and unmet needs are immense," said Rabbi Steve Gutow, president and CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and Michael Kinnamon, general secretary of the National Council of Churches. "Draconian budget cuts that take away sorely needed investment in these communities are morally inexcusable, and cutting off resources today in low-income and rural communities will weaken our nation in the long run. Such policies are at best a penny-wise and pound-foolish approach to the challenges our nation faces."