ADHERENCE TO RESTRICTIONS PREVENTS RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

There was little opposition to recent legislation in the U.S. House of
Representatives that provided federal funds for churches and religious
organizations that offer drug treatment programs.

The legislation, included in the bill H.R. 4923, was approved this past
month by a significant margin, 394-27.

The bill also included several different forms of tax breaks for businesses
and individuals attempting to start new businesses or refurbish existing
businesses in low-income urban and rural areas.

The legislation singled out by certain Democrats was sponsored by U.S. Rep.
J.C. Watts, R-Okla.

Watts favored the allocation of federal funds for churches in such areas
that offer drug treatment counseling and care.

U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., opposed the legislation on the grounds that
appropriating federal funds for religious organizations was
unconstitutional.

Scott's contention would be valid, if not for certain restrictions.

The federal funds would be administered by the states, removing the federal
government from authority.

States would be permitted to create criteria for these funds. Primary among
this criteria should be that churches and religious organizations receiving
federal funds not apply religious or denominational requirements for drug
treatment.

Provided this stipulation is met, there would be no constitutional
violation.

Watts' legislation also fits the platform of GOP presidential nominee George
W. Bush, who has expressed support for an increased societal role for
churches and religious organizations in drug treatment programs.

A constitutional line does exist, but as long as states adhere to strict
requirements and guidelines placed upon churches and religious organizations
participating in drug treatment programs, communities across the nation can
benefit.