To mark IDC Herzliya’s 20th anniversary, we spent a day following Prof. Uriel Reichman, IDC’s founder and president, and Jonathan Davis, VP for External Relations, around its delightful campus.
Last week the House of Representatives approved, by a vote of 354 to 72, a bill that would specifically permit the use of federal money to rebuild synagogues, churches and mosques damaged by Superstorm Sandy. In October Congress allocated $60 billion, part of which was designed to finance recovery efforts of non-profit institutions. However, the Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) has routinely denied the applications of houses of worship for disaster relief on the ground that the First Amendment forbids the use of public funds for religious purposes. So legislation was introduced to reverse this FEMA policy. The measure now goes to the Senate where the outcome is not yet clear.
The legislation provides that “a church, synagogue, mosque, temple or other house of worship, and a private non-profit facility operated by a religious organization” would be eligible for disaster aid “without regard to the religious character of the facility or the primary religious use of the facility.”
It would seem the legislation makes eminent common sense. Why exclude religious entities from general remedial programs available to not for profits generally? It is not as if religious institutions are being singled out for special largesse. If Congress decides that it is in the public interest to bring about large-scale restorations, such as roof and sidewall repair, by what logic can one exclude religious institutions that are in exactly the same position as non-religious entities? After all, religious institutions are entitled to, for example, police and fire protection just like their non-religious counterparts.
Indeed, if anything, we should be looking for ways to provide all similarly situated victims of natural disasters the means to rebuild and reenter society. Ironically, most religious institutions were in the forefront of providing early assistance to their battered neighbors.
We therefore find it troubling that Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who represents some of the devastated areas, not only voted against the remedial legislation but actually stood up in the House of Representatives and voiced his opposition: “Direct government funding of churches, synagogues, and mosques has always been held to be unconstitutional, and the decisions of the Supreme Court establishing that principle remain good law to this day.”
With all due respect, Mr. Nadler is mixing apples and oranges and offering a simplistic application of earlier Supreme Court decisions. This is certainly true in light of recent Supreme Court legitimization of special education programs for parochial school children and publicly funded vouchers redeemable at religious schools. More important, even he conceded that some scholars would disagree with his conclusions on constitutional imperatives.
We think it is the special responsibility of elected officials representing devastated areas to seek assistance for all constituents rather than discriminate against some of them.
About the Author:
If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.
Comments are closed.
As Arabs murder and maim Jews, Jordan’s leaders bark the blood libel of “Israeli aggression.”
Perhaps attacking a terrorist’s legacy broadly and publicly would dissuade others from terrorism?
R’ Aryeh yelled “Run, I’ll fight!” Using a chair against terrorists to buy time so others could flee
The “Media” didn’t want us to know what a kind, giving, loving young woman Dalia was.
A “Palestine” could become another Lebanon, with many different factions battling for control.
Maimonides himself walked and prayed in the permissible areas when he visited Eretz Yisrael in 1165
Having a strong community presence at the polls shows our elected officials we care about the issues
Israel’s Temple Mount policy prefers to blames the Jews-not the attackers-for the crisis.
When Islam conquered the Holy Land, it made its capital in Ramle of all places, not in Jerusalem.
I joined the large crowd but this time it was more personal; my cousin Aryeh was one of the victims.
Terrorists aren’t driven by social, economic, or other grievances, rather by a fanatical worldview.
The phrase that the “Arabs are resorting to violence” is disgraceful and blames the victim.
Tuesday, Yom Shlishi, a doubly good day in the Torah, Esav’s hands tried to silence Yaakov’s voice.
Because of the disparate nature of the perpetrators, who are also relatively young, and given the lack of more traditional targets and the reverence Palestinians have for their homes, one now hears talk of Israel returning to a policy of destroying the houses of terrorists’ families.
Last year the Obama administration sought to minimize civilian deaths from drone strikes by generally requiring that missile attacks be limited to instances where Americans were directly threatened and there was a “near certainty” that no civilians would be killed.
Toward the end of Operation Protective Edge this past summer, the president was unusually vocal about Israel’s so-called disproportionate use of force and alleged lack of compliance with international humanitarian law.
There was no accompanying caption, but the cartoon could not help but feed the anti-Semitic canard that Israel was responsible for 9/11.
An accomplished Torah scholar and ardent adherent of Bobov chassidus, he was renowned for his self-effacing dedication and skills as an international lawyer and law professor
The fact that the United States government after World War II sought to take advantage of the expertise of German scientists, even those known to have contributed to the Nazi war effort, is well known and largely accepted as having been necessary for America’s national defense. (Wernher von Braun is perhaps the most famous and […]
Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/editorial/congressman-nadler-disappoints/2013/02/20/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online: