Faith, values, poverty, and politics

Like many Democrats, I'm a strong believer in separation of church and state. I'm not personally religious in an organized way, and too much mixing of religion and politics makes me very nervous. At the same time, I recognize that it is absolutely proper for people to act out of their own sense of values. What else are they supposed to do? I went to the Sojourners presidential forum on faith, values, and poverty, on Monday, with some trepidation and a little fascination.

I suppose if I were a different person, perhaps a less skeptical person, I might be a member of Sojourners. I certainly share at least some of their political values.



The leader of Sojourners, the Reverend Jim Wallis, and its members, are showing leadership on the issue of poverty. They are currently running a campaign called Vote out Poverty, and Monday's presidential forum, to which they invited presidential candidates John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, was just one example of their positive activism on this issue.

Wary as I am of organized religion, I nevertheless have great respect for Sojourners. I get their e-mails, and I attended their presidential forum. In the interest of full disclosure, because of John Edwards's leadership on poverty, as well as his leadership on other issues, I am a dedicated Edwards supporter, so I went into this experience with a clear bias.

If I were to interpret my life the way I think many religious people do, if I were to believe, for instance, that "The hand of God today is in every step of what happens with me and every human being that exists on this planet," as John Edwards said at the presidential forum, I think I would have to say that God took very good care of me that day.

Everything that I needed that day was somehow provided. That includes everything from very minor things, like lunch, to finding the right people to give me an overflow ticket and get me into the forum, when I arrived a few minutes late and the doors were already locked. It even included a very nice seat neighbor whose conversation helped put me at ease in a crowd where I didn't feel totally at home.

This man sitting next to me, a Republican, boasted to me about his pride in his son, who would soon be attending George Washington University and was working with the Young Democrats there. He told me "Faith is interdenominational. So is politics." He also told me he was "sick and tired of a president who thinks God is talking to him, but answers to no one."

He pointed his son out to me. The son was sitting in the front row, in the center. We watched as Elizabeth Edwards, entering the room to an enthusiastic round of applause, paused to pose for a picture with his son.

On further reflection, it's not that I disagree with the Edwards quote about the hand of God, it's just that I'm wary of becoming too cozy in a belief system. I can't help but ask, if God gets involved in human affairs, what exactly is He or She thinking? The only answer I can come up with for that, for myself, at least the only one that allows me to have any faith at all, is that God must think it's time for us to grow up and handle our own affairs. So I figure it's my responsibility to take action to fight the wrongs I see in the world.

Soon, the forum began and Reverend Jim Wallis was introduced. He said that the theme of the evening was faith, values, and with a special focus on poverty. He said there would be no endorsements, and that "the people of God should never be in the pocket of any party or candidate." Sojourners will have a Republican forum in the fall.

My response to Reverend Wallis's quote about the people of God is that I don't think I know anymore if I'm a person of God, I'm confused on that subject, but in any case, a moral leader like John Edwards can certainly borrow me at a time in our history when our country and the world is in this much trouble, and he is the only one running for president who is ready to lead.

Getting on with the forum, Wallis introduced their campaign to "vote out poverty," the goal of which is to make sure "the least of these," who are always forgotten in politics, are not forgotten this time. Good. I like that approach. I know my candidate likes that approach. We are all on the same page on this issue.

I'm not going to talk about the questions each candidate was asked point for point. If you want to read the transcript, you can find it here.

Since I've already revealed my bias, I'm not going to pretend to be objective, either. I am going to tell you exactly what I think.

Keep in mind that these are my personal opinions, and also that I'm coming from a very different perspective than probably most of the people who attended the forum. Personally, I don't care if a candidate is religious. I don't equate religion with morality.

If they are religious, however, I care about their statements on faith. I want to avoid ever again having the president of the United States be a delusional paranoid with a messiah complex. Fortunately, I think all of the Democratic candidates pass that test. None of their comments on faith gave me reason to think that any of them are out of their minds. That's a relief.

While we are on the subject of the candidates answers on faith, let's talk about that some more. I'm also going to talk about my perceptions on the question of any possible pandering to a religious audience that is looking for a religious candidate.

Edwards didn't pander. If he were pandering, he might have said he believed in creationism, but he said he believed in evolution.

JOHN EDWARDS (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I believe in evolution.

O'BRIEN: What do you say to all the people -- and there are millions of people who go to church every Sunday and who are told very clearly by their pastors that, in fact, the Earth was created in six days, that it's about creationism? Are those people wrong? Are their pastors wrong?

EDWARDS: No. First of all, I grew up in the church and I grew up as a Southern Baptist, was baptized in the Baptist Church when I was very young, a teenager at the time. And I was taught many of the same things. And I think it's perfectly possible to make our faith, my faith belief system consistent with a recognition that there is real science out there and scientific evidence of evolution. I don't think those things are inconsistent. I think a belief in God and a belief in Christ, in my case, is not in any way inconsistent with that.

If he were pandering, he might have said he didn't believe in separation of church and state.

But I think there's a difference between my belief system and what the responsibilities of the president of the United States are. It is the reason we have separation of church and state.

If he were pandering, he might have said that the United States is a Christian nation.

O'BRIEN: Do you think this is a Christian nation?

EDWARDS: No, I think this is a nation -- I mean I'm a Christian; there are lots of Christians in United States of America. I mean, I have a deep and abiding love for my Lord, Jesus Christ, but that doesn't mean that those who come from the Jewish faith, those who come from the Muslim faith, those who come from -- those who don't believe in the existence of God at all, that they don't -- that they're not entitled to have their beliefs respected. They're absolutely entitled to have their beliefs respected. It is one of the basis for which our democracy was founded.

I believe that Edwards said exactly what he thinks, and what he would say to anyone when asked the same questions. I am absolutely comfortable with his answers on his religious beliefs.

Did the others pander? Perhaps. I can't tell that for sure. Maybe what they said was their honest beliefs, but I will tell you my reaction to their comments.

When asked whether God take sides in a war, Obama opened by quoting the exact same Lincoln quote that Edwards quoted in 2004. It's a good quote, and I can't technically say he stole it, since it was Lincoln's quote, not Edwards's, but I thought considering that one of his chief rivals had effectively used it in the last campaign, it showed at the very least a lack of originality.

I thought Obama's comments on faith were mostly fine, and I'm not questioning his sincerity, but I did think he perhaps avoided saying anything that might have been risky in front of that audience, and there were times when I thought he was using nice religious platitudes to avoid getting specific about the issues.

Clinton seemed to spend about half her allotted 15 minutes trying to convince people that she has a faith. She went on and on about how much she relies on her faith and how often she prays. For someone who admitted that she doesn't like to wear her faith on her sleeve, it seemed a sudden transformation, and I thought it was over the top.

I also didn't like her answer on the abortion question she was asked, because I feel certain that she wouldn't give the same answer in front of a pro-choice feminist audience.

REVEREND JOEL C. HUNTER, NORTHLAND, A CHURCH DISTRIBUTED: Hi, Senator Clinton.

Abortion continues to be one of the most hurtful and divisive facts of our nation. I come from the part of the faith community that is very strongly pro-life. I know you're pro-choice, but you have indicated that you would like to reduce the number of abortions.

Could you see yourself, with millions of voters in a pro-life camp, creating a common ground, with the goal ultimately in mind of reducing the decisions for abortion to zero?

CLINTON: Yes. Yes.

And that is what I have tried to both talk about and reach out about over the last many years, going back, really, at least 15 years, in talking about abortion being safe, legal, and rare. And, by rare, I mean rare.

I can agree with the goal of abortion being safe, legal, and relatively rare. I think it's unrealistic, however, to have a goal of zero decisions for abortion, at least until a lot of other problems are solved. I'm talking about problems like imperfect birth-control, imperfect self-control, lack of care for unwanted or parentless children, rape, serious medical complications in pregnancy, and overpopulation. I think until all of those problems are solved, there will be some decisions for abortion, and I'm glad that women have the option to make that choice.

If Clinton thinks that zero decisions for abortion should be the "ultimate" goal, after all those questions are solved, that's one thing. My problem with her answer then becomes that it would've been courageous of her to say so more clearly, but she didn't. I just don't believe that she would say in front of a pro-choice feminist audience that she has a goal of zero decisions for abortion. In this case, I personally think she was pandering.

Let's move on to the special topic of the presidential forum, poverty.

Here are excerpts from all three candidates statements on poverty that were posted by Sojourners on YouTube:




Personally, it came as no surprise to me that Edwards was the only candidate who sounded like he knew what he was talking about on the issue of poverty. He's the only one who has been consistently talking about this issue, and he talks about it everywhere he goes. He has laid out a detailed plan for eliminating poverty in the United States in the next thirty years. He has done serious research and work on the issue. As he said in the forum:

EDWARDS: Well, let me first say thank you to you, Jim, and to Sojourners for its great leadership on this, what I think is a great moral issue facing this country today and I would add to that, this the is the cause of my life. It is the reason after the last election that I went back to the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, started a poverty center. It is the reason I've traveled around the world doing humanitarian work.

It is the reason I helped lead minimum wage campaigns in six states. It's the reason I've helped organize thousands of workers into unions. And before we ever got into politics, it's the reason that I was involved with urban ministries, faith-based groups, doing work to help the poor and one of the reasons that Elizabeth and I did a lot of other things, starting after school centers for kids who need playgrounds, libraries, et cetera.

So I think there's a very long and consistent pattern of this being the cause of my life. And I might add everything I can do, everything in my power that I'm able to do, I will do to drive the issue of poverty in this presidential campaign so that everyone is required to talk about it. Because I think it is the great moral issue of our time. I've committed, actually, to an agenda of eliminating poverty over the next 30 years.

I think it's a completely achievable agenda. There are lots of components to that agenda. Making work pay, having a living wage, making sure that workers can organize themselves into unions, having decent housing for families that don't have it, having true universal health care, helping kids be able to go to college, which is why I started a college for everyone program for kids in a very poor section of eastern North Carolina. And I believe this is an agenda that should be the agenda -- one of the agendas -- part of the agenda of the president of the United States, so there's not much doubt about where I am on this issue.

I have respect for my colleagues who are running for the presidency, but I will say this is not an issue -- and I say this to everyone in the audience. This is not an issue that I just talk about when I come to you. This is an issue I talk about all over America in front of all kinds of audiences because it's part of who I am. It's who I am as a human being. And I will say this. This is such a part of my life that whatever happens in this presidential campaign, as long as I am alive and breathing, I will be out there fighting with everything I have to help the poor in this country. I can promise you that.

When Obama's turn to talk about poverty came up, Jim Wallis asked him the following question:

If you were the president, what kind of moral and political imagination would you bring to finding some real solutions? And try and give us some specifics.

Obama spent what seemed to be at least half of his 15 minutes on this question. For most of that time, he wove sweet rhetoric based on religious ideals, with no policy specifics at all. Toward the very end, he did mention a few semi-specific ideas on education, raising the minimum wage, and giving ex-offenders a second chance. I was glad he had at least a few ideas, but it was hardly impressive.

The last question he was asked, which he almost didn't have time to answer, because he had spent so much time on what seemed to me to be platitudes, was about outrageous executive salaries. Here is the question and answer in its entirety:

O'BRIEN: I know. I get it. But you have one minute left to answer this question. It's an online question from Sojourners, and we actually are obligated to ask this. They invited online support, and the question came from Reverend T. Randall Smith. He's a senior pastor at Deer Park United Methodist in Deer Park, Texas. He asked this: "Executive salaries are increasing by 300 percent in recent years. Ordinary workers' salaries remain stagnant."

Specific policies -- and you have one minute. How do you address that, haves and have-nots?"

OBAMA: Well, we've got a bill in right now that says at minimum, shareholders should take a look at these executive pay scales, and they should be able to vote on whether these are appropriate or not. That I think would provide some constraint.

I also would like to see executives recognize that when they're getting as much in one day as their average worker is getting in an entire year, that there is a moral element to that. That that's problematic.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: But look, America is a land of success, and that's terrific. We just want to make sure that people are sharing in the burdens and benefits of this global economy.

Unbelievable. His answer on the problem of obscene executive salaries is that shareholders should vote on them, and that executives should just not be greedy. Yeah. That sounds like a viable solution. Since executives are often the largest shareholders, is voting on executive pay really going to be effective? And asking corporate executives just to decide not to be greedy is not a solution at all.

Clinton was not asked any direct question about poverty, so perhaps it's not fair to complain that she didn't talk about it. Knowing that it was of primary concern in that forum, however, she should have found a better way to work something in. In fact, the only poverty related issue that she spoke on was health care. This is the extent of her comments on that issue:

Take health care. I think we could get almost unanimous agreement that having more than 45 million uninsured people, nine million of whom are children, is a moral wrong in America. And I think...

O'BRIEN: One minute, Senator.

(APPLAUSE)

O'BRIEN: One minute, Senator.

CLINTON: I think we could reach that agreement, and then we would have to start doing the hard work of deciding what we were going to do to make sure that they were not uninsured, because an uninsured person who goes to the hospital is more likely to die than an insured person. I mean, that is a fact.

So, what do we do? We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground.

Perhaps if Senator Clinton had not spent so long trying to prove that she was a good Christian, she might have found time to talk about poverty.

I can't tell how the Sojourners audience reacted to all of this, because I'm not sure I know. I know that they applauded very enthusiastically for all the candidates. They were an extremely appreciative audience. I hope that their questions about the candidates were answered.

I enjoyed the forum very much. The questions were different than the ones that are usually asked. The responses were interesting. I didn't expect it to change my mind, and it didn't. It was not surprising to me in any way that in a forum that was at least partially about poverty, John Edwards shone.

The nice man sitting next to me, the Republican, told me after the forum was over that he had seen a physical transformation in John Edwards over the past three to four months. He said that now John is looking much more presidential.

As long as he's breathing: John Edwards’ commitment

John Edwards has said he'll continue to fight to lift people out of poverty and help working people, as long as he's breathing. His commitment to it runs so deep that he opened a poverty center at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, started a college for everyone program to send poor kids to college, co-edited a book of essays by poverty experts, has traveled the country to work with unions to organize workers, and last year he gave the proceeds of a book and at least 28% ($350,000) of his $1.25 million earned income to charities like Habitat for Humanity and International Rescue Committee. He's not afraid to get his hands dirty, either. On more than one occasion, he's participated in Habitat for Humanity building projects in the ninth ward of New Orleans.



Edwards is the only presidential candidate with a comprehensive universal health care plan. He’s the only candidate with a plan for fighting poverty.

In this diary, I’ll quote from just a few of the many sources around the tubes showing Edwards’ commitment to lifting people out of poverty and to helping working Americans.

Videos:

Edwards and Danny Glover in New Orleans

Edwards: "What are we going to do about at least 37 million -- that's the government's estimate -- at least 37 million of our own people, who wake up every day worried about feeding and clothing their children? Because, I don't know about you, but I think it says something about the character of our country, how we treat those among us who are literally worried just about surviving."





Edwards speaking to the IAFF




Edwards: "I have been all over this country organizing workers into unions, because I believe in my heart and soul, if we want to grow the middle class in this country, if we want to strengthen the middle class, if we want to lift millions of Americans out of poverty, the most important piece of that, certainly one of the most critical pieces of it, is to grow the union movement."

Edwards at Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO (full speech):

Edwards: "I think we desperately need comprehensive labor law reform in this country. And I want to be very clear with all of you about what I believe. I think if someone can join the Republican Party by signing their name to a card, any worker in America ought to be able to join a union by doing exactly the same thing. That's democracy in the workplace." (standing ovation).

"And, before you sit down, we ought to ban the hiring of permanent replacements for strikers and make that the law of the land."

Walk A Day In My Shoes: John Edwards/Elaine Ellis

Elaine Ellis: "I will remember the Senator as a very nice person. I think that he is eager to learn the fact that health care workers need more attention from the government. It was a good day all around."

Will You Stand Up? (excerpt from speech to DNC)

Edwards: "We can not walk away from our people. We can not walk away from the heart and soul of what the Democratic Party is and should be."

John Edwards – Rural Recovery in Iowa

Edwards: "We want to help family farmers, and the best way to help family farmers, in my judgment, is to create a level playing field, and that means cracking down on and being tougher on these big conglomerate, corporate farming operations."

John Edwards – Iowa Women’s Town Hall

Edwards: "If we really want to empower women in this country, if we want to give force to the women's movement in this country, then we want women to have self-esteem, and strength, and respect, and they can't continue to not have health care coverage, or live in poverty, or get paid $.77 on the dollar for doing the same work men are doing. That's not right!"

John Edwards and the Minimum Wage

Before he announced his candidacy for president, John Edwards worked on successful campaigns to get the minimum wage raised in six states.



Danny Glover: "Somebody that cares about working people, somebody who cares about the right for working people to organize and cares for the right for working people to have a decent wage and benefits: Senator John Edwards!"

Edwards on college costs

at town hall in Newton, Iowa 3/10/2007



Edwards on his college for everyon program: "There was no government money in it. I raised the money for it, got the community involved. This is what we did. We said to every kid in the area, if you graduate from high school, and you're qualified to be in college, and you commit to work at least 10 hours a week while you're there, we pay for your tuition and books. It was pretty much that simple."

Articles:

The Post Gets It Wrong: Edwards’ Poverty Policy Is Just What’s Needed, by Jared Bernstein

Quote: Here’s what he gets. It’s not just that those baking the pie ought to get fair slices. It’s not even the simple fact that too many poor people are playing by the rules yet still struggling to make ends meet with terribly insufficient incomes. Nor is it the glaringly obvious fact that kids who grow up poor have tremendous disadvantages that it is in all of our interests to avoid.

All those are true and important. But what Edwards gets—and you really want a president who feels this in his or her bones—is that these inequities undermine America. They quietly, slowly, and perniciously erode people’s support for our system of democracy and free markets. Untreated, they lead to distrust and defunding of government, diminished participation in the political system, protectionism and nativism, and a means-spiritedness that is as divisive as it is pessimistic. And I’d argue strongly that this is exactly where we’re headed.

More Piling on the Post’s Edwards and Poverty Article, by Greg Anrig, Jr.

Quote: What’s “new” and “fresh” that Edwards should be praised for is the political courage to focus the public’s attention on this subject after decades of neglect and a set of ideas that, based on research and experience -- as opposed to focus groups and right-wing salesmanship – have the best chance of making significant progress.

John Edwards wants a new Labor Movement (Fortune)

Quote: "The difference between union and non-union is literally the difference between poverty and middle class," Edwards told Fortune. "Hotel workers, restaurant workers, home health workers, hospital workers - at last count there are some 50 million people who work in the service economy. Those jobs aren't going anywhere else. They have to be done in the United States."

Senator Edwards Walks a Day in My Shoes by Elaine Ellis

Quote: Everyday, I provide basic care for nine residents who need attention from the time they wake up to the time they go to sleep. I've been doing this for eighteen years, and while it might look easy on TV, I'm sure the Senator will now be able to tell you otherwise.

Sometimes I feel like nursing assistants like me are at the bottom of the health care debate, but we are the ones who are holding everything up. We know what's wrong, and we know what we need to do to fix things. If politicians listened to us, then we might be able to get some real changes.

Walk a Day in My Shoes by SEIU

Quote: As part of SEIU’s program to ensure that presidential candidates experience firsthand what life is like for working people in America, Sen. John Edwards on April 11th walked a day in the shoes of SEIU member Elaine Ellis.

Protecting Homeowners and Fighting Predatory Mortgages

Quote: Homeownership is the foundation of the American Dream. For most families, the equity they build up in their home is a source of security and the primary source of their wealth. But for millions of families, the dream of homeownership is slipping away. Home foreclosure filings rose to 1.2 million in 2006 — a 42 percent jump — due to rising mortgage bills and a slowing housing market. In Iowa, 3,445 families experienced foreclosure last year, up 64 percent from 2005. Nationally, as many as 2.4 million subprime borrowers have either lost their homes or could lose them in the next few years. Problems in the housing market could weigh down the economy.

Can Edwards win with an ‘us vs. them’ pitch? (USA Today) March 14, 2007

Quote: Murphy, 50, likes Sen. Barack Obama but says the Illinois freshman "hasn't been around long enough." New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is "too much of a Washington politician." Edwards, he says, "is pretty down to earth and knows what's going on with people at my income level."

David Kuo: Is John Edwards for Real? (Beliefnet)

Kuo: “I believe John Edwards. I believe his passionate statements on behalf of the poor. I believe that the faith he says animates him is real. I believe that he has made quiet and selfless trips to care for the suffering around the world. I believe he knows what poverty is like and that his faith in Jesus requires him to care for the poor. I believe that those who criticize him for living in a huge house while talking about the poor should shut up - by that standard should only the sick get to talk about health care? I really, truly, absolutely believe John Edwards.”

Rural Recovery plan

Quote: "Rural America has been ignored for too long," said Edwards. "Across America, too many small towns have turned into ghost towns. We need to help small towns and rural communities create and keep new businesses and good jobs, and we need a President who will make sure all our communities have good schools, good health care and the support systems they need. As President, I will make sure rural America is never left behind."

Working Society

Quote: Edwards has outlined a Working Society initiative to lift 12 million Americans out of poverty in a decade and beat poverty over the next 30 years. In the Working Society, everyone who is able to work hard will be expected to work and, in turn, be rewarded for it.

More Than Just Talk by Bob Herbert, New York Times

Quote: Mr. Edwards, who announced his campaign for the presidency in the Ninth Ward, has stood by his commitment to make poverty one of his big campaign issues. I mentioned that poverty has not gotten much attention from the national media, and asked why middle-class Americans should care about the issue.

"First, you should care because it's a moral issue," he said. "It tells us something about the character of our country. And, by the way, I think most people do care about it. And second, you should care because if you want to see the American economy grow and strengthen over time, the strength and breadth of the middle class is a critical factor. When we have middle-class families struggling on the edge, falling into poverty or near poverty, those things weaken the American economy."

John Edwards: ‘My Faith Came Roaring Back’

Edwards: What I intend to continue to do, though, if I can bring us full circle back to the beginning of this discussion, is no matter whether anyone asks, no matter whether any other candidate ever raises the issue, as long as I'm alive and breathing and as long as I am a presidential candidate, I will be speaking up for the little guy. And I think that a lot of that has been lost in American politics for strategic political reasons. And their voice needs to be heard--desperately needs to be heard. And if I do nothing else, their voice will be heard through me.

Think a rich guy can't care about poverty or working Americans? John Edwards cares about as much as another rich guy: FDR. That's right. I'm comparing him to the president who effectively ended poverty for millions of American families. Edwards will not rest until he does the same.