Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama's Poor Choice for Faith Leader
Why did a pro-choice president appoint someone to HHS who is against abortion AND birth control? Political payback?
President Barack Obama's appointment of Alexia Kelley, founder of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, as director of the Department of Health and Human Services' Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives took the pro-choice movement by surprise. On Thursday, the day that news of the appointment leaked out, Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center and a quintessential Washington insider, told me that she "hadn't heard anything about it till today, and we are trying to get to the bottom of it."
What Greenberger and others will want to know is why the post, which includes oversight of the department's faith-based grant-making in family planning, HIV and AIDS and in small-scale research into the effect of religion and spirituality on early sexual behavior, has gone to someone who both believes abortion should be illegal and opposes contraception. That's right -- Kelley's group of self-described progressive Catholics takes a position held by only a small minority, that the Catholic church is right to prohibit birth control. Were there no qualified religious experts who hold more mainstream views on family planning and abortion, views that are consistent with those of President Obama?
The HHS budget for family-planning services grants to faith-based and community groups is more than $20 million. Can pro-family-planning religious groups expect a fair deal from a director who believes that birth control, even for married couples, is immoral? Will programs that provide contraception to adolescents get funded? Obama's Feb. 5 Executive Order establishing a new Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships gave the office and its 11 satellites in federal agencies a policy role on the issues that are at the core of HHS's sexual and reproductive health work: addressing teen pregnancy and reducing the need for abortion. How can an opponent of the single most effective way to do both -- contraception -- lead that effort in HHS enthusiastically and effectively?
Through Catholics in Alliance, Kelley has sought to narrow the interpretation of common ground on abortion to efforts to reduce the number of abortions by providing women who are already pregnant with economic support for continuing the pregnancy and making adoption easier. While pro-choice advocates have been in the forefront of efforts to increase funding for women and children and for pre- and postnatal care, few researchers believe that if pregnant women get the level of support common grounders are talking about, they will jump at the chance to have babies. If one is really serious about making it possible for women to avoid abortion, contraception is the single most important component of any program.
Kelley and other moderately progressive Catholic and evangelical groups owe their pull in the Democratic Party to the disappointment of 2004. They seized on the Democratic defeat in the 2004 elections as a means to push the party to the right on sex and reproduction. Democrats, stung by their near miss in Ohio, desperate to attract swing voters, eager to prove that they were "sensitive" to religion, took the bait.
With support from George Soros and Michael Kieschnick, the founder of Working Assets and Credo Mobile, groups like Sojourners, Faith in Public Life and Catholics in Alliance entered the electoral arena. Catholics in Alliance and its sister organization, Catholics United, were active in voter registration and organizing Catholic voters in swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania in 2006 and 2008. Presenting themselves as more Catholic than the pope -- faithful to church teachings on contraception, abortion and everything else the majority of Catholics have long rejected -- the groups insisted in press release after press release that good Catholics could vote for pro-choice candidates, so long as those candidates were also working to reduce the number of abortions. After all, they admitted, it was simply not possible in the current environment to make abortion illegal, so the next best option was pushing the numbers down.
In part, Kelley's appointment is the usual political payback. Catholics and evangelicals including Kelley provided abortion cover for the president and for candidates like Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. A Democratic governor from a red state famous for the ferocity and electoral strength of its social conservatives, Sebelius won a second term in a landslide in 2006. Catholics in Alliance campaigned for her reelection. Though she faced heavy fire from the religious right when she was nominated, Sebelius is now the HHS secretary.
Kelley is a distinguished advocate of healthcare reform and the rights of poor people. For almost a decade, she worked for the Conference of Catholic Bishops on the Campaign for Human Development, a grant-making program roundly condemned by conservatives as too progressive. She entered electoral politics in 2004 when she served as the DNC liaison to the religious community. In 2005, she founded Catholics in Alliance. She has much to offer in government -- but not at HHS. There are 10 other government agencies that have faith-based offices. A far less controversial placement could have been found at Labor, Housing and Urban Development, or the Department of Education.
A heated exchange about the appointment between Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice (disclosure: I was president of CFC for 25 years) and Catholics in Alliance/Catholics United is representative of the struggle between religious progressives who support gay marriage and reproductive freedom and those like Kelley who think war and abortion are the same evil. O'Brien was the first pro-choice leader to criticize Kelley's appointment, and he went after her with a vengeance. In a press release, he called Kelley's "abortion reduction rhetoric ... simply a newly packaged antiabortion message," claimed the group used "flawed economic data to support anti-poverty measures as a means to reduce the number of abortions," and asserted the current policy fascination with "common ground" has devolved "into an abandonment of ideals."
CFC backed up its assertions about the anti-family-planning and antiabortion agenda of Kelley and Catholics in Alliance with a report titled "The Trouble With Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good." The report asserted that the Catholic Alliance's "position on abortion is firmly planted on the far right ... In its own words: 'Catholics in Alliance is pro-life. We support full legal protection for unborn children as a requirement of justice and as a matter of essential human rights.'" In a 2006 Voter Guide, Catholics in Alliance made a disturbing equation between war and abortion, saying that Catholics need to "build the essential conditions for a culture of life, to end affronts to human life such as poverty, abortion, torture and war."
Statements like this undercut the alliance's claim that its efforts at common ground seek to end the "culture war" that surrounds abortion. In response to the Catholics for Choice press release, Jennifer Goff, a spokeswoman for Catholics in Alliance, said her group "is working toward reaching common ground in order to make real progress on the moral and political challenges our country faces instead of resorting to spurious attacks launched by those who are more concerned with inflaming the culture wars than effecting positive change." Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United, characterized O'Brien's opposition and the CFC report as "simplistic," "incendiary" and "a roadblock to progress."
O'Brien's most serious charge against Kelley is that under her leadership Catholics in Alliance used "flawed economic data to support anti-poverty measures as a means to reduce the number of abortions." The misuse of research to promote ideology is a serious charge and if true would disqualify Kelley from an appointment that requires adherence to evidence-based policy setting. During the Bush administration, ideology was often a substitute for science, especially in the reproductive health field. Obama has promised a return to scientific integrity.
The charges relate to an August 2008 study by Penn State political science professor Joseph Wright commissioned by Catholics in Alliance. Called "Reducing Abortion in America: The Effect of Socioeconomic Factors," the study is a perfect example of advocacy research gone awry. It claims that analysis of state level data on abortion from 1982 to 2000 shows that spending money on programs for job creation, primary and prenatal healthcare, and the nutrition program known as WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) substantially reduced abortion rates in states where such measures were taken. Given Kelley's opposition to family planning, it's the only hope she has that a credible argument could be made that abortions can be significantly reduced without family planning.
In November, following the elections, the study was removed from the Web site and later replaced with a new version that plays down the claims of significant reductions in abortion rates based on spending for programs such as WIC. The new version attempts to correct a series of serious methodological and interpretation errors in the original study. Social science researchers on both sides of the abortion issue expressed concerns about the study, and one coauthor, Professor Michael Bailey of Georgetown University, removed his name from the revised report. Given the serious methodological weaknesses of the first study, there is little reason to assume a second take by the same author can be trusted.
Pro-choice leaders other than O'Brien have not yet commented on the Kelley appointment; most are still reeling from Dr. Tiller's murder. One hopes they will turn their attention to this appointment and demand a review of Kelley's qualifications for this post. Pro-choice groups also contributed to the president's election. They deserve appointees who agree with the platform on which the president ran. The pro-choice movement's recommendations for pro-choice appointees to the faith-based office's advisory council were ignored. Now, after the Kelley appointment, the mission going forward must be to ensure that any additional staff members appointed to faith-based centers in Cabinet-level agencies reflect the pro-choice, pro-family-planning values of the administration. As Greenberger and others try to get to the bottom of the Kelley appointment, greater oversight of, and consultation on, future appointments need to be secured.

26 Comments so far
Show AllMore even than the eight years of Bill Clinton, the eight years of George Wanker Bush turned the Democratic party into a pack of shuffling collaborators with official government mediocrity, insanity and criminality. But the money is awfully good.
This is so depressing I can't even read the whole article.
All I can say is: %^&(%#@%!!!!!
I wonder if the Obama team has people reading sites like this and is aware that people are saying these things. Is the Progressive wing of the population so inconsequential and lacking in leverage that they can continue to blow off our point of view with impunity?
My Magic Eight-Ball™ says "Signs Point to Yes".
· Yr Obd't Servant
Do you mean? Can they blow off less than 1% of the electorate? Yes. The answer is, yes.
Not quite. They have managed to dirty up and marginalize the labels, but on the issues, afraid not, the majority of Americans views are actually progressive from single payer to gay marriage.
Yes, because progressives generally tend not to work on Wall Street--meaning money talks.
Obama: "ugh, who cares?" I do believe that our pres is just another democrat with a slightly darker hue. Had high hopes, but now I'm just getting high--er I mean by. Should know by now that black doesn't mean anything after Clayton Powell and Condolissa Rice. The "Progressive" wing has been blowing us off for decades. This time I hope heads will roll (literally), but I'm not holding my breath. Corrupt, all is corrupt.
Mother of God, it appears that George W Bush has been reincarnated. What's next? I'm reaching the point where there is nothing left to surprise me from Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama ends up appointing Cheney to investigate himself. Well, actually, I'd be surprised if Obama appointed anyone to investigate Cheney.
Over and over, I'm reading about one campaign promise reversed after another. Maybe I should reread his promises and find out how many are left to break. I'm sure after he's done they will all be broken. But not to worry. I'm sure he will find new ways to please the rabid right wing and the corporations who clearly own him and betray mainstream Americans. We're being sold down the river, folks. Maybe he's operating on the political principle that voters have short memories, or just the reality that the media will protect his rear end by not telling anyone what he's doing. At least as long as he continues to please their corporate masters.
Is anyone aware of one single comment from Obama on the murder of Dr. Tiller? I mean, I don't want to be unfair here, and I don't watch the Propaganda Machine (MSM).
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Sioux Rose
BE FOR: Your post makes me think that maybe right here on CD, with a lawyer or two in our midst we should draw up a legal initiative that holds a president in contempt (and legally accountable) if he betrays his word on at least 3 serious campaign promises. Since when did dishonesty qualify a person for leadership or command?
It's so disgusting to have to deal with this rise of authoritarianism in our midst. All this fig leaf cover (right to life) is PR for the war state, as it makes it SEEM actually interested in the well-being of some human beings, in this case the unborn acting as talisman to diffuse the public's focus on the willful and continuous bombing and dismembering of the already born... as in children of lands targeted by our ever-compassionate MIC.
When Obama asked that right wing minister to give a talk at his opening presidential ceremony I smelled a rat. Now one has to wonder if Sotomayer will push the court further right on the abortion debate. So much is lining up against civil liberties. These fascist-lite operators need to keep the religious faithful to their cause regardless of the fact that they're so vehemently selling them out by increasing the likeihood of terrorist blowback in our homeland, while also stealing from the treasury to pay the bankers so there won't be any crumbs left to subsidize the existing social welfare programs. Didn't the nazis also champion anit-abortion policies? Fascism comes in a variety of costumes, but appears to follow the same basic M.O.
"Since when did dishonesty qualify a person for leadership or command?"
Um... since the first amphibian crawled out of the slime?
Joe
Why can't the christ-tards keep their vile, murderous, anti-human, stupid superstition out of my government? Isn't it enough they don't pay taxes and shear the moronic?
It appears Obama has all the basis covered save for one.
His appointments range from conservatives like Guiethner in the financial industry - Gueithner is a hold over from the Bush Admin. Jackson who heads the EPA and in one hundred days authorized 24 or 28 permits for Mountain Top removal. A former Senator from Colorado who has taken the Grey Wolf off of the endangered species list to satisfy corporate ranching concerns. Former Generals like McChrystal a Cheney clone conducting black ops in Iraq now heading up Afghanistan. And just about every former Clinton appointmen occupying everything else. Now we get word via this article of the appropriateness of this appointment for the task of serving woman issues while not holding the ideology for the job.
The only appointment void of the President's consideration is a progressive.
Sioux
BODHI: As the magnitude of evidence mounts that we are living a continued political charade disguised as a presidency, I wonder how the Obama apologists will play this one? Some of them must be delusional now from having to talk themselves into the same optimistic hopeful line, increasingly resembling a drunk Dorothy convincing herself there is a route back to Kansas if only she'd tap those ruby slippers together enough times in the right rhythmic order.
sioux, nice metaphor with the Wizard of Oz. In that story it is Toto who pulls back the curtain to reveal that the secret of the Wizard. It did not take too long for the disciples to learn Obama's secret. I admit he had me hoodwinked. It won't happen next time unless he gets his head out of his ass. I won't make the same mistake again.
Sioux Rose
BODHI: I feel devastated by current events. There has always been evil, and always been pressing issues; but I don't recall a time when the leaders rewarded only the culprits and left everyone else to deal with the cancers, poverty, homelessness, war, violence, weapons, unjust criminal justice system, and imploding ecosystems... maybe we are all just "free slaves" now, and guaranteed about as much status and influence as warrants that position.
When the year 2000 came rolling by and Bush set the clock back on human progress and decency by several centuries, I figured Obama entered to at least try to change certain things. I never imagined he'd go along and give all this evil a new face for endorsement. Criminal neglect and depraved indifference are words too kind to encompass the scope of all that's being forced apart in every sector of society and nature. WE do not have another 4-8 years to direct towards complicity with the agents of destruction, as opposed to collectively working towards therapeutic solutions. Now I think the momentum is too great to turn the ship around, and it will find itself ambushed on the rocks of karma, just as many around the world find it a ripe time to exact THEIR justice.
Between now and 2012 a number of powerful prophetic trajectories ripen. Business as usual will be anything but. In the long run, a good thing for human beings; in the short run, duck and cover.
The mere existence of an office of "Faith-Based Initiatives" sets the US apart from sane secular governments.
The speaker of the sermon on the mount demands that people sit down & shut up so his papa can reward them after a lifetime of suffering. 'Faith-based "charity" is the opposite of giving without strings -- it's money-laundered evangelism.
What in the world is a "Faith-Based" anything doing being part of the Federal Government? What happened to separation between church and state?
We would not have any soup kitchens or homeless shelters if it were not for the churchs and "faith based" organizations. The Feds long ago have abandoned the poor to fend for themselves, and so a few churches have taken up the slack.
At least SOME people take their faith & Biblical admonitions to serve the "least of these" seriously.
Oh, and these faith based groups have been doing this for 40 years or more- so it's not just an Obama thing.
Some are directly linked to county social serivce programs. Some are outright missions that give a sermon before each meal. Some are not.
There is a wide variety.
Check it out in your town. I bet you'd be surprised at how much has been shifted over to churches to do.
Which is what the Churches always wanted, it keeps the relevant. Let's say the churches didn't step up 25-30 years ago, we would of had riots in the streets *again* just like there were in the 1960s and the government would have had to provide token support to preserve law and order Given how politics are played, by now the poor would be better off than where they are today.... and the churches far less relevant.
The rise of the "Nanny" state kills the stewardship of gawd and his faithful, and yes I know how the church of the excrement eating Christ has it's fingers in everything, including LGBT rights and environmentalism. I refuse to have anything to do with any group that welcomes the faithful.
If this woman is against contraception, she is out of step even with her own Catholic constituency. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard an otherwise devout practicing Catholic woman say something like "If they want me to keep having kids, they better be ready to support them." Birth control beyond abstention and rhythm is widely practiced among Catholic women.
Contraception is the best way to help families plan responsibly. Contraception is the best way to prevent abortions. Nobody should use his or her office in government to force a woman to bear more children than she wants.
Note: Michelle and Barack have two children. Accomplished how? Intrusive question? Yes, very rude, I agree. But why should poor women be subject to same sort of intrusion?
Joe
'Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, as director of the Department of Health and Human Sacrifices'
Egad! I see that the Inca sacrificed young girls and now the Catholic Church can balance it out with the sacrifice of young boys.
The progressives are only 1%???
I would argue a higher number. Up to 14% were considering Nader but 13% voted for Obama anyway.
I believe that decision made the "progressives" inconsequential.
Time and time again, on every major progressive issue, Obama fails to deliver and often takes a regressive position.
Never again I hope.
Are you with me?
one has a better choice for the person to run said office.
nobody.
shut the damn thing down.
exactly, who needs faith-based anything
When the Doctor tells Alexia Kelly that if she has another pregnancy she could die and her Catholic Religious Leaders insist she will offend the God she loves if she uses contraception and her husband says no permanent abstinence-natural family planning does not work-and the state says no abortion, then let her tell us that contraception and abortion are intrinsically evil and cannot be justified even to save the woman or girls life. Either the Catholic Church is wrong about their ban on abortion and contraception even to save a woman's or girl's life or they are wrong about their God being All Just, and All Good. Their God is a monster if they are speaking for God. Obama is beginning to scare me with this Catholic fundamentalist connection.What part of Reproductive Health Care do they not understand? It is about HEALTH CARE stupid. Many women today require C-Sections and cannot medically have a baby every year for the rest of their fertile lives.There are so many health problems women encounter when pregnant. Somehow this fact is ignored.