Raymond Denecke

Oklahoma City, OK

February 11, 2008

Greg DiNapoli, Deputy Director

Center for Faith-based and Community Initiatives

Federal Emergency Management Agency

500 C Street SW

Washington, D.C. 20472

RE: Department of Homeland Security

Proposed Rule: *Nondiscrimination in Matters Pertaining to Faith-based
Organizations*

Docket ID: DHS-2006-0065

Mr. DiNapoli:

I am writing to express my concerns regarding the above referenced
proposed rule. I do not support the Department's efforts to provide
faith-based organizations with Federal funding for disaster
recovery/repair assistance. Faith-based organizations should not receive
Federal funds for any such initiatives. Read broadly, faith-based
organizations qualify for Federal funds under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. 42 U.S.C. 5172. In my
view, these organizations should not be eligible for such funds under
this Act, nor should the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
promulgate rules that expand the eligibility of faith-based
organizations to receive Federal funds.

DHS suggests that this proposed rule does not offend the First
Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of religion. The
accuracy of this proposition is debatable; however, the proposed rule
will create a relationship between the government and faith-based
organizations that should not be created, or at least, should be
accompanied by specific safeguards to ensure that such relationship does
not undermine the Constitution in any way. Despite the enthusiasm of
some who may welcome this effort, I believe that this relationship, if
created and allowed to continue, will be attenuated by bureaucratic
red-tape on the government's part and the interjection of religiosity by
the faith-based organizations while providing disaster assistance.

I realize that the Supreme Court may uphold a government grant of aid to
the secular activity of a faith-based organization, provided the funds
are used only for nonreligious purposes. *See Tilton v. Richardson*, 403
U.S. 672, 680 (1971). Seemingly, the proposed rule covers this holding
in new 6 C.F.R § 19.4(a). Section 19.4(a) provides that
"\[o\]rganizations . . . may not engage in inherently religious
activities. . . ." However, in section 19.4(b) allows faith-based
organizations "to engage in inherently religious activities," provided
those activities are separate from the "programs . . . supported by
direct DHS funds." 6 C.F.R. § 19.4(b)(1). Furthermore, §19.4(c) explains
that this provision is not violated when a faith-based organization
informs persons of its religious activities. 6 C.F.R. § 19.4(c). The
language of this provision is very curious.

If DHS does not provide funds to faith-based organizations, the
organizations would not have the opportunity to reach people who are
adversely affected by a disaster. Accordingly, faith-based organizations
would not have the opportunity to invite these people so affected to
participate in worship and other such inherently religious activities.
So, where Federal funds provide an outlet for faith-based organizations
to reach people to whom they can preach, even outside the DHS supported
program, the language of the proposed section fails. If § 19.4(a) is to
be effective, there must be some provision to police how these
organizations interact with the beneficiaries of governmental
assistance. There is no fine line between "religious" and
"nonreligious." The proposed rule is too convenient. The funds are to be
used for nonreligious purposes, yet faith-based organizations, through
the grant of Federal funds to provide disaster relief assistance, are
given access to a number of people who may be vulnerable due to their
circumstances. And to ensure that the line is not muddled further, DHS
should remove subsections (b) -- (c) of 6 C.F.R. § 19.4.

DHS states that the faith-based organization must have a secular purpose
in order to receive Federal funds. Religion should be neither advanced
nor inhibited by a government program. In the case of this proposed
rule, DHS follows only one of those propositions. It does not inhibit
religion. In fact, DHS advances religion by permitting these faith based
organizations to maintain their religiosity while administering a
federally funded program. *See* 6 C.F.R. § 19.4(b)(1) & (2), (c)
(aforementioned discussion); *see also* 6 C.F.R. § 19.6 (permits
faith-based organizations to "carry out \[their\] mission, including . .
. expression of its beliefs"). While some may argue that the expression
of one's beliefs do not advance religion, the context of religious
beliefs expressed before disaster victims may advance such beliefs to
the point where some disaster victims are persuaded to religion when
they otherwise may not have been inclined.

One comment to this proposed rule states that 6 C.F.R. §§ 19.6 and 19.7
prevents the government from interfering with the day to day operations
of the faith-based organizations. Because faith-based organizations are
essentially working on behalf of the government during its disaster
relief assistance, faith-based organizations should not receive any
special protections or some other incentive. However, section 19.7
states that a faith-based organization will not be required to forfeit
its ability to discriminate on the basis of religion in hiring. 6 C.F.R.
§ 19.7(a). Logically, a faith-based organization, in the discharge of
its federally funded disaster relief assistance, should have no problem
hiring people to help or volunteer regardless of their religion. And
because the government allows faith-based organizations to continue to
discriminate on the basis of religion while receiving Federal funds to
participate in social programs, one can easily see that religion
continues to be advanced by this proposed rule. If religion is not a
significant element in deciding what organizations to grant funds, then
DHS should require that the faith-based organizations forfeit their
ability to discriminate in hiring. So, while the government may not be
interfering with the day to day operations of faith-based organizations,
such desire to include the faith-based organizations is causing the
government to compromise itself and its principles regarding the First
Amendment's instruction that "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion. . . ."

Respectfully,

Raymond Denecke