Posted on 11/19/2021 8:24:57 AM PST by SeekAndFind
To hear the Biden administration talk about it, there’s something for literally everybody in the 2,000-plus pages of the $1.8 trillion Build Back Better spending packages. After all, you’ll get tax breaks if you want to buy an electric bike, and there will be federal money available to you if you work as a doula, as my PJ Media colleague Rick Moran pointed out recently.
But there’s one group that won’t benefit from the largesse that Build Back Better offers if the bill passes as-is: child care facilities affiliated with religious institutions.
The New York Times is reporting that lobbyists are trying to talk Congress into stripping a provision from Build Back Better that would prevent religious preschools and child care centers from receiving their share of the gargantuan funds.
The provision at issue is a standard one in many federal laws, which would mandate that all providers comply with federal nondiscrimination statutes. Religious organizations, whose child care programs are currently exempt from some such laws, argue that it would effectively block many of their providers from participating, while civil rights advocates contend it is long past time for such institutions to comply.
Some of the faith groups are pressing lawmakers to scrap or modify the nondiscrimination language, asserting that it would essentially shut them out of the new federal program unless they made major changes to the way they operate. For instance, it could bar federal funds from going to programs that refused to hire a gay employee, gave preference to applicants of their faith or failed to renovate their facilities to accommodate disabled students.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
It is a BAD IDEA for faith based groups to want to get government fund.
Better to be like the Amish... or Christian Colleges that refuse government money ( and thus government mandated rules and morals ) like Grove City College.
When the Church starts BANNING Federal Officials from thier Churches and Services, they will change thier minds.
They don't need it and it has strings attached, so FUJB!.................
I don’t think the federal government should be paying for child care.
Moms could work 3 10-hour days one week and 4 10-hour days on the alternate week. That’s an average of 35 hours per week. On their days home, they could take care of another child as well as their own on a reciprocal basis.
Deep State hates competition.
The federal government isn’t going to be paying for child care for all moms.
When the church’s get out of being locked into 501 c 3 things will change, since they are in contract with the government as a 501 c 3, there’s a lot of things they can and cannot do.
One of them is become a political action Church which, depending on what side of the aisle you are a political action Church for depends on how much you get eyeballed for being a political action Church.
To be honest I don’t agree with 501 c 3 churches. It paints a false picture of the tithe if one can turn right around and use it as a deduction on next year’s taxes, that shows that certain percentages of people do give at a 501 c 3 church for the tax deduction.
Biden ministration is using “religious organizations” to handle and process & relocate illegal immigrants.
So never.
Better a millstone tethered around one’s neck and cast into the sea.
I know it’s a silly question, but where does the Constitution give the federal government authority to do anything about childcare (or a lot of stuff it does)?
Any organization taking federal funding is run by idiots. It is nothing but a trap, and should be ended completely, across the board.
Stuart Varney said this morning that the BBB Bill lists and was scored by the CBO with the Child Care provision for only one year at $130B. That means the total would be $1.3T for 10 years. A cheap trick by the House Demons.
Pray for our Country.
“I know it’s a silly question, but where does the Constitution give the federal government authority to do anything about childcare (or a lot of stuff it does)?”
Article IV, Section 3:
“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States....”
There should be a complete separation between church and state.
If Politician’s children were banned from applying,it would allow for more voucher families to be accepted.
"[...] a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." —Justice Louis Brandeis, Laboratories of Democracy.
And the constitutionally powerful states would find new revenues for practical, religion-associated spending if they grew some and put a stop to the big, bad, but still constitutionally limited power federal government regularly stealing state revenues by means of unconstitutional federal taxes, taxes that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
"Article I, Section 9, Clause 7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Insights welcome.
The ultimate remedy for unconstitutionally big, alleged election-stealing, Democratic Party-pirated federal and state governments oppressing everybody under their boots...
Consider that all the states can effectively “secede” from the unconstitutionally big federal government by doing the following.
Patriots need to primary federal and state elected officials who don't send voters email ASAP that clearly promises to do the following.
Federal and state lawmakers need to promise in their emails to introduce resolutions no later than 100 days after start of new legislative sessions that proposes an amendment to the Constitution to the states, the amendment limited to repealing the 16th and ill-conceived 17th Amendments.
Again, insights welcome.
Jefferson would strongly disagree....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.