DiIulio’s Bully Pulpit
The unattractive side of “compassionate conservatism.”

By NR’s John J. Miller & Ramesh Ponnuru
March 8, 2001 1:45 p.m.

e've defended John DiIulio, head of President Bush's office on faith-based charities, from unfair criticisms before. But it must be said that in his speech to the National Association of Evangelicals yesterday, DiIulio displayed the unattractive side of "compassionate conservatism": namely, the hectoring moralism to which it lends itself. Responding to conservative Christian leaders who have expressed concern that participation in government programs might corrupt church-run groups, DiIulio remarked, "In all truth and grace, and speaking now only for myself and as a fellow Christian, I would call upon the National Association of Evangelicals to (as we say on the inner-city streets) get real — and get affiliated church leaders to get real — about helping the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, and others among the least of these…. It's fine to fret about 'hijacked faith,' but to many brothers and sisters who are desperately ministering to those needs of those who the rest of us in this prosperous society have left behind, such frets would persuade more and rankle less if they were backed by real human and financial help…. 'Hijacked faith' can take many forms, few more harmful than the self-hijack that honors the poor in 'word or speech' alone, if that."

One need not have exquisitely sensitive church-state antennae to wonder if a government official ought to be lecturing churches about what they ought to be doing — and while DiIulio may describe himself as speaking only for himself and as a Christian, the NAE didn't invite him to speak in that capacity. Besides, the question of what long-run impact public-policy changes will have on the health of America's civil society is not an intramural dispute among conservative Christians anyway. It's a question that people of different faiths or no faith can take up, and the duties entailed by faith are not the only considerations that matter in answering it. Support for the president's faith-based initiative — at least that part of it that requires discretionary grants to religious charities, as opposed to its indirect tax credits and deregulation — is waning on the Right. DiIulio's speech yesterday will not do anything to stop it from waning.

Flipping the Byrd
Roll Call reports today that liberal Democrats in the House, and especially members of the black caucus, are upset with Senate Democrats for not coming down harder on Robert Byrd for using the n-word on national television. Mississipi Democrat Bennie Thompson, for example, said, "I'm sure they will downplay the statement. But I'm also sure none of those senators are black." Thompson added that black caucus members would be looking carefully at Byrd's votes. Will Byrd now rethink his earlier comment about supporting conservative judicial nominees?

Byrd could become a bigger headache for the Democrats if they get their wish — expressed more and more openly — and Republican senator Strom Thurmond passes away. If he's replaced by a Democrat, the Democrats would control the Senate. But even if he isn't, the president pro tem of the Senate would be…Robert Byrd.

Tepid Tax Talk
Larry Lindsey, director of the National Economic Council, tells Don Lambro in today's Washington Times, "I wish in the first year we could have had a bigger tax cut." Asked if the tax cuts will rescue the economy, he responds, "I don't have an opinion. I think they could help."