DATE: Wednesday, September 3, 1997          TAG: 9709030021

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B10  EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Editorial 

                                            LENGTH:   79 lines

CHRISTIAN COALITION THE LATEST WISH LIST THE GROUP SUPPORTS LEGISLATION TO CRACK ON RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION AND TO END THE TAX CODE'S MARRIAGE PENALTY.

The recently announced legislative agenda of the Christian Coalition contains several good ideas and a few clinkers.

Foreign policy: The Coalition endorses the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act being sponsored by Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va. The act would create a White House office dedicated to tracking religious persecution worldwide, imposing sanctions on offending governments and seeking ways to grant asylum to victims.

Clearly the idea is worth exploring. Opposing such villainy is of a piece with American traditions. Whether a White House office would expedite matters or simply create more bureaucracy is a question worth asking.

Certainly asylum ought to be routinely granted for those victimized as a result of their faith. And sanctions against offending governments are a legitimate use of American power. Unfortunately, the proposed legislation makes their imposition automatic. More judgment needs to be permitted.

Relations with governments are complex. Sometimes pragmatic considerations make it impossible or unwise to insist on moral absolutes. Stalin's Soviet state oppressed religion, but his cooperation in defeating Hitler's Germany was essential. What to do?

It is also reasonable to worry that rigidly requiring sanctions in cases of persecution will simply lead to hypocritical fudging of the facts. The law now requires countries to be actively fighting drug traffic to receive U.S. aid, but those failing in the job are regularly certified.

That said, putting a little soul in our statecraft isn't amiss. Jimmy Carter's emphasis on human rights in foreign policy was mocked by proponents of realpolitick and led to some embarrassments, but also helped point out that diplomacy can't be dollars and cents alone. The question is how to do it while avoiding obvious pitfalls.

Tax policy: The Coalition calls for an end to the marriage penalty that subjects some married couples to more taxation than they would endure if single. The marriage penalty is wrong, and the Coalition is right - it should have been fixed long ago.

The Coalition calls for reduction of individual tax rates across the board, but that's only possible if reams of exemptions, loopholes, credits and deductions are eliminated. Cutting taxes if it causes a return to huge deficits isn't an improvement. Indeed, mortgaging the country's future is immoral.

The Coalition's desire to cut rates is at odds with a package of tax reforms that constitute new loopholes, deductions and credits.

A $500 charitable tax credit to reward citizens who give time or money to worthy cases? Worth considering. Empowerment zones to encourage investment in impoverished communities? Of course. Expanding IRAs to permit tax-free saving that could be applied to fund private or home schooling? Fine, so long as the reduced tax revenue is made up in some way. Any tax reform should, at worst, be revenue neutral. For every tax cut, a corresponding spending cut is needed. Until specific cuts are proposed, it is impossible to know whether a plan is a good idea or not.

Church-state issues: Several proposals skate near the edge of the church-state divide. The Coalition calls for scholarships that would allow federal money to be used by inner city parents to route their children away form failing public schools and into private and parochial schools. This is a step toward public funding of private education in the K-12 years. Such scholarships are routine in higher education, but expanding them to public school crosses a line and raises questions. The subject deserves careful debate.

Less controversial is a proposal to amend the Public Health Service Act to permit faith-based social-service programs - such as drug rehabilitation - to be eligible for public funding. In principle, this seems unobjectionable. In practice, careful monitoring would be needed to see that the money was used as advertised. Abuse is easy to imagine.

Finally, the Coalition calls for a new Constitutional Amendment to protect the religious speech of Americans. But an Amendment already exists to do just that - the First. The Coalition doesn't like some recent Supreme Court rulings on the subject, but amending the Constitution every time the high court hands down an objectionable ruling is untenable.

In general, however, the group's emphasis on specific, practical government reforms deserves respectful attention and careful scrutiny.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu