WASHINGTON (AP) - Campaigning for the White House last year, President Bush (news - web sites) vowed repeatedly to summon the ``armies of compassion'' in every community to attack the nation's social ills.
Now, after struggling through a thicket of constitutional and political objections, the White House is looking to the Republican-controlled House to make a down payment on his pledge with legislation that gives religious groups involved in social service access to millions in federal funds.
``We feel pretty good about the vote,'' Rep. J.C. Watts (news - bio - voting record), R-Okla., said Tuesday after meeting with Bush on the day before a scheduled House debate on the measure. The bill also extends limited tax breaks to charitable donors. Bush, Watts added, ``has led this effort with great passion and great conviction.''
But on the eve of the debate, opponents stepped up their arguments that the measure runs afoul of the First Amendment requirement for separation of church and state and would open the door to discrimination against gays and others in hiring.
``It is very unfortunate that the White House is not taking advantage of the opportunity to prove to the American people that it is not brokering away the nation's civil rights laws in a back room,'' said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news - bio - voting record), D-N.Y. Nadler, a leading critic of the bill, has sharply criticized the administration over reports it briefly agreed to support a federal regulation waiving state and local discrimination laws in exchange for the Salvation Army's support of its bill.
Republican officials expressed confidence they had the votes to prevail when the roll was called, and the measure includes several changes designed to water down legislation initially introduced in the House.
The bill allows religious charities to compete for government grants in an expanded list of federal programs, including housing, domestic violence and hunger relief. Recipients of aid could not be required to attend worship services or religious instruction. The organizations themselves would be permitted to retain religious names, charters and symbols on building walls.
In addition, groups would be permitted to make hiring decisions based on religion, without regard to state or local laws on the subject, a provision that critics say could lead to discrimination against gays and others.
The bill also contains $13 billion in tax breaks over the next decade designed to encourage charitable giving, far smaller than the measures that Bush called for last winter.
The measure would permit taxpayers who do not itemize their taxes to deduct up to $25 in charitable contributions a year, rising to $100 in 2010.
First as a candidate who declared himself a ``compassionate conservative'' and now as president, Bush has been an enthusiastic supporter of so-called charitable-choice legislation. ``I want to rally the armies of compassion that exist in every community across America,'' then-candidate Bush said in campaign remarks made by remote hookup last year to B'nai B'rith, a Jewish service organization.
Both sides sought to demonstrate support in the run-up to the vote.
Recipients of funds ``clearly can't proselytize. They clearly can't do religious services. But if you walk in and there's a crucifix on the wall, you can leave it on the wall,'' said Rep. Tony Hall (news - bio - voting record) of Ohio, the leading Democratic supporter of the measure.
But the bill has drawn criticism from liberals raising questions about separation of church and state as well as the potential for discrimination, and from church groups fearful of government entanglement.
``We applaud the president's recognition of religion's vital role in addressing social ills,'' J. Brent Walker of the Baptist Joint Committee said on Tuesday at a news conference attended by officials of numerous groups opposed to the bill. ``But we think religion will be hurt, not helped, by redirecting billions of dollars to pervasively religious ministries of the government's choosing.''
Laura Murphy of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) said if the legislation is signed into law, ``Congress and the administration will have, in one dramatic change, laid waste to the crucial civil rights protections put in place during World War II under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.''