|
|
April 9, 2004/Nisan 18 5764, Vol. 56, No. 29
Funding for security
New federal legislation may benefit local Jewish organizations
MATTHEW E. BERGER
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
With Jewish organizations divided over the use of federal homeland security funds to protect Jewish sites, supporters believe they have found a way to assuage concerns over church-state separation.
The United Jewish Communities, which is spearheading the effort to garner federal funds for high-risk non-profit organizations, is touting a plan to give the federal dollars directly to contractors, who would perform security upgrades at Jewish and other vulnerable sites.
"By having the flow of money go from the federal government to the contractor, there no longer will be church-state concerns," said Charles Konigsberg, vice president for public policy at UJC, the umbrella organization of North American Jewish federations.
But some Jewish groups concerned that the program may trample on church-state separation aren't supporting UJC's efforts.
"It's a gimmick to avoid the issue," said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. "It's still going to be synagogues, churches and mosques asking for money."
"We have concerns any time money goes from the government to religious institutions," said Bill Straus, regional director of the ADL.
But at the same time, ADL is devoted to security, he added. "We want all houses of worship to be safe and secure," said Straus.
However, ADL would never want to "forsake one of the core values of this organization - keeping church and state separate," to preserve security, he noted.
On April 1, lawmakers introduced bills in both houses of Congress authorizing $100 million to upgrade security at high-risk, nonprofit institutions. The legislation is expected to have bipartisan support, though it's unclear whether there is enough money for the proposal in the national budget.
Under the plan, nonprofit sites would seek qualification from their states' homeland security departments. Each state then would submit a prioritized list of sites to the Department of Homeland Security.
The federal government would decide which sites to fund and would enter into contracts with security firms that would administer the work.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who is sponsoring the bill in the U.S. House of Repre-sentatives with Rep. George Nethercutt (R-Wash.), said he would not have supported direct federal aid to religious institutions but feels the suggested mechanism is acceptable.
"It's exactly equivalent to what we do in getting a cop outside a synagogue on Rosh Hashana or Yom Kippur," Nadler said.
The bill, to be sponsored in the Senate by Sens. Arlen Spector (R-Penn.) and Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), would provide some of the $1 billion that sponsors estimate is needed to secure nonprofit institutions.
After last year's bombings of synagogues in Istanbul and Casablanca, Nadler said, he believes the government has an obligation to help secure U.S. sites that are vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Konigs-berg said he believes the new system would expedite the process because money would be given directly to those performing the work.
Unfortunately, the Valley of the Sun Jewish Community Center is a target for terrorists, said Mark Shore, VOSJCC president.
"It is important to have the best technical equipment we can have" for the sake of security, he said. Having additional funding from the Department of Homeland Security would be attractive, he added.
However, some lawmakers remain concerned that using contractors would make the process more bureaucratic - and that issue may put a hitch into UJC's plans to roll-out the program.
Some groups also argue that the use by synagogues or day schools of federal funds, even if they come through a middle man, violates the constitu-tional separation of church and state.
The legislation is less problematic than direct contracting with religious institutions to provide religious services and pro-grams, said Eleanor Eisen-berg, executive director of the Arizona Civil Liberties Union. For example, it does not provide funding to a house of worship to carry out religious education and does not fund a soup kitchen, where people can get a meal, but only if they listen to a sermon, she said.
Jewish groups have been discussing the issue with the UJC for months, and several organizations were pushing for the community to promote loan guarantees for Jewish sites rather than direct aid. The proposed bill includes loan guarantees as an alternative to federal funding. That would allow Jewish sites to pay for the improvements themselves, but over time and at a more affordable rate.
However, UJC believes its approach is more in keeping with the needs of its member federations, which face rising security costs because of increased fears of terrorism and the perception of rising anti-Semitism worldwide.
How the proposed funding will be used is "open to discussion," said Adam Schwartz, executive vice president of the Jewish Fed-eration of Greater Phoenix. A "coordinated effort" by local synagogues and other Jewish institutions may be able to develop a security plan to allow limited funding to go further, he noted.
Federation is attempting to get a better idea of what local Jewish organizations have done to improve security, said Cathy Wolf, director of the federation's Jewish Com-munity Relations Council. Part of the legislation deals with granting funding to assess the quality of an organization's security, and part concerns funding security improvements, she explained. Wolf said she believes funding for assessments is more pressing.
UJC has garnered support from the American Jewish Congress, Orthodox Union and United Synagogue of Con-servative Judaism.
Outside the Jewish com-munity, the legislation is backed by, among others, the American Red Cross, YMCA of the USA and the American Hospital Association.
The legislation is meant to help "any number of or-ganizations and institutions that are soft targets," places where people gather, said Wolf
The American Jewish Committee, Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism and Jewish Council for Public Affairs still are reviewing the suggested provisions.
"While we certainly appreciate the new realities this legislation seeks to address, we continue to have concerns about its application to houses of worship and other pervasively sectarian insti-tutions," said Mark Pelavin, the RAC's associate director. "We are working closely with the bill's sponsors, and our leadership is in the process of reviewing the most recent draft of the legislation."
Even Jewish groups that are not inclined to support the legislation aren't expected to oppose it actively because of the community's pressing security needs.
"We will continue to raise the concerns," Foxman said. "Will I be testifying against it? Probably not.''
In recent years, federal disaster aid and historical-preservation money have gone to all classes of Jewish institutions, though there is debate about whether Jewish institutions should accept such funds.
The Bush administration has pushed faith-based initia-tives and other initiatives to allow religious groups to seek federal dollars. While the Orthodox community has embraced such proposals enthusiastically, most Jewish groups either have opposed them or have been am-bivalent.
Some Jewish groups have complained that UJC has rushed the effort without allowing enough discussion in the Jewish community on the legislation's ramifications. Sources said UJC wanted to have the legislation introduced before it brings its leadership to Capitol Hill to lobby in April.
Editor Barry Cohen contributed to this article.
|
