Written by Don Byrd
Politico reports that the new slate of President Obama’s council of faith-based advisers has not yet met, more than a year after the original group produced its reports and disbanded. Some former members are suggesting that an active council may have helped the President avoid the missteps leading to the contraception coverage controversy that still roils much of Washington.
“It would have been the council’s role to weigh in, and we did individually,” said Arturo Chavez, an original council member and president of the Mexican American Catholic College in San Antonio. “There was a failure somewhere in really weighing the consequences of this, and I don’t think the president was advised sufficiently about the consequences with the faith community.”
…
The White House maintains that the impact of the inaugural council already has been vast.More than 70 percent of the council’s recommendations, detailed in the March 2010 report, have been fully or partially implemented, according to the White House. Those recommendations include opening the government’s 13th faith-based and neighborhood partnerships center at the Environmental Protection Agency and encouraging the president to hold annual Father’s Day events at the White House to honor exemplary fathers.
The remaining significant church-state policy issue regards religious discrimination in employment by organizations receiving faith-based funding from the government, but that issue was taken off the Council’s table by the White House. Are there reasons left for a formal council? Why appoint a new one?
