This week concluded the first phase of the campaign to place a Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment on the North Dakota ballot.  In just a few short months, North Dakota citizens collected over 85% of the required number of signatures.  The response to the call to protect religious liberty in North Dakota has been tremendous.  People from all walks of life and faith traditions signed the petitions and collected signatures.  We are especially inspired by the large number of young adults who enthusiastically supported the cause.  We extend our appreciation to the hundreds of North Dakotans who collected signatures, as well the hundreds of churches and community organizations that helped with this effort.

In the months ahead, the North Dakota Catholic Conference will work with the North Dakota Family Alliance, civic leaders, and people of all faiths and political persuasions to gather the remaining number of signatures.  We look forward to then redirecting our efforts to sharing the importance of securing religious liberty for all and the need for a Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment in North Dakota.

Following the lead of the federal government and a majority of the states, the Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment would restore protection for religious liberty to its traditional level, providing a sensible balance between the rights of individuals and legitimate government interests.  As Catholics, we are dedicated to protecting the religious rights of all persons.  As North Dakotans, we are committed to enacting a Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment.

Pope Benedict XVI will focus on religious freedom’s contribution to peace in his World Peace Day message for 2011. Read about it here.

Be sure to join the Holy Father in the commitment to religious freedom. Be sure to sign the Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment petition. If your church or parish has not circulated the petition, contact your pastor immediately. There are only a few more weeks to collect signatures!

Get all the information you need here.

We will be collecting signatures for the Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment at the Stutsman County Fair in Jamestown July 7 -10. Stop by and show your support. If you can help – even for a short while – call the North Dakota Catholic Conference office at 223-2519.

Volunteers are also needed at the Red River Valley fair July 9-17 and the state fair July 23-31. Contact the ND Family Alliance if you can help at those events.

The Louisiana legislature has passed and sent to Gov. Bobby Jindal for his signature SB 606, the Preservation of Religious Freedom Act. As reported by the Baton Rouge Advocate, final enactment came yesterday as the state Senate voted 30-6 to concur in House changes. The bill provides that state and local governments must show both a compelling interest and use the least restrictive means before they may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion, even through a facially neutral rule or a rule of general applicability.

(From the Religion Clause blog)

Here are some examples of the types of laws that could burden religious liberty without a religious liberty restoration amendment:

• A school policy that prohibits “make-up” or “cosmetics” that would burden a Catholic student’s wearing of ashes on Ash Wednesday.
• A school anti-gang policy interpreted to prohibit wearing rosaries and other religious items.
• A law requiring all medical students to receive training in abortion.
• A law that would require all medical schools and training hospitals to provide abortion training.
• A law or ordinance requiring pregnancy counseling centers to refer for abortions.
• A law or ordinance requiring pregnancy centers to display or provide information that violates their religious beliefs.
• A policy of eavesdropping on the conversations of incarcerated persons, including religious confessions.
• A state’s attorney’s practice of excluding from a jury any person who wears religious objects or jewelry.
• A policy requiring all licensed counselors to provide “relationship” therapy to same-sex couples.
• Laws that interfere with the religious aspects of maintaining church cemeteries.
• A law prohibiting employees from wearing religious garb, such as a nun’s habit, in public buildings or schools.
• An “English-only” policy prohibiting non-English religious services in government institutions (prisons, state hospital, jails, developmental center, etc.)

Each of these examples represent laws that have actually existed or been proposed.  Go here for more examples.  Without a Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment citizens have no recourse against the government in these types of cases.  That is why the passage of a Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment is so important.

Take action now!

WASHINGTON—The U.S. bishops called for steps to protect the lives of the most vulnerable, provide fairness for immigrants and guarantee conscience protections for individual and institutions in a statement on health care reform issued May 21.

The statement was offered by Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, Chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Pro-Life Activities; Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York, Chairman of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice, Peace and Human Development, and Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Immigration.

“Following enactment of the health care reform legislation, our challenge remains formidable but in some ways is simpler,” the bishops said. “Since the battle over the bill is over, the defects can be judged soberly in their own right, and solutions can be advanced in Congress while retaining what is good in the new law. Indeed, any failure to do so would only leave these genuine problems as ammunition for those who prefer total repeal of the law.”

The bishops said the current situation “provides a new opportunity for the Catholic community to come together in defense of human life, rights of conscience and fairness to immigrants so we will have a health care system that truly respects the life, dignity, health and consciences of all.”

The statement follows.

Setting the Record Straight

As the Chairmen of the three committees most directly involved in the efforts of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on health care reform, we are writing to set the record straight on some important issues raised during and after final consideration of the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” this spring.

From our first statement to Congress a year ago (http://usccb.org/sdwp/national/2009-05-usccb-health-care-statement.pdf) to Cardinal George’s March 23rd, 2010 statement about the enactment of a “profoundly flawed” final bill, the position of our Conference has been unified and consistent. Reflecting decades of advocacy on behalf of universal access to health care, the bishops were clear in calling for health care reform as a moral imperative and urgent national priority. We called for reform that would make health coverage affordable for the poor and needy, moving our society substantially toward the goal of universal coverage. We were equally clear in stating that this must be done in accord with the dignity of each and every human person, showing full respect for the life, health and conscience of all.

Specifically we insisted that the provisions of the Hyde amendment and other longstanding current laws, which forbid federal funding of abortion and of health plans that cover abortion, must be preserved in this or any new legislation. Likewise, we sought to have longstanding policies of respect for rights of conscience applied to this legislation. Americans must retain in new legislation the rights they had before its enactment. These include the full range of protections regarding the right to provide and purchase health care in accord with their religious beliefs and moral convictions. In addition, since access to basic health care is a right inherent in each human person, as acknowledged both in Catholic social teaching and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, legislation must not unfairly exclude immigrants from health coverage (January 26, 2010 Letter to the House).

Apparently, because we always presented these criteria together and insisted that each had profound moral implications, some thought the bishops might ultimately be persuaded to abandon one or the other in response to political pressures from left or right. Some hoped or feared that we would join with those who reject the need for vigorous government action to reform our ailing health care system. Others hoped or feared that, for the “greater good” of making progress on health care, we would neglect or deny the rights of the most vulnerable members of our society, including unborn children who have no voice and of immigrants.

There was never any chance that the bishops would do any of these things. We will never cease to advocate for everyone, beginning with the most needy, to have access to health care. We will never conclude that we must accept what is intrinsically evil so that some good may be achieved. Specifically we reject the argument made to us by some Catholics that expanding health care coverage justified setting aside our longstanding opposition to government participation in elective abortions or weakening rights to life and freedom of conscience. Catholic teaching rejects any idea that the weakest or “disposable” members of society must be forgotten to serve alleged “greater goods.” Arguments of this sort undermine the common good. Our vision of the common good embraces the good for each and every member without exception, beginning with those who are weakest and most vulnerable.

Ultimately the House of Representatives approved a health care reform bill that the bishops welcomed for substantially meeting most of the principles and goods we were espousing. We hoped to address final concerns as the legislation moved forward. However, the Senate rejected the House legislation, including the key elements that we supported, and produced a bill that abandoned the very principles that we espoused: no expansion of abortion, protections for freedom of conscience and the rights of immigrants. With these foundational principles rejected, it was then announced that no further substantive changes were possible. From that moment on, the bishops were clear and consistent in saying that this “take it or leave it” offer was morally unacceptable and politically divisive. Whatever might be the positive aspects of the Senate bill, we had no choice but to oppose the Senate version as a matter of principle. As bishops we must faithfully proclaim the truth. We must defend the rights of the unborn and the weakest and most vulnerable among us. We must oppose the advance of elective abortion in our society, especially the use of government authority and funding to advance it, and we must speak out in favor of the rights of freedom of conscience for persons and institutions. We urged Congress to vote against this version of the bill, with the hope that together we could find a way to address our legitimate concerns in a bill which would thus have broader appeal and greater support. Unfortunately, the political will to do so did not emerge.

The final result is legislation that expands health care coverage, implements many needed reforms, and provides welcome support for pregnant and parenting women and adoptive families. Unfortunately it also perpetuates grave injustices toward immigrant families and makes new and disturbing changes in federal policy on abortion and conscience rights. We have documented the legislation’s serious flaws in several analyses available on the bishops’ web site, www.usccb.org/healthcare.

Since final passage of the legislation, we have been disturbed and disappointed by reactions inside and outside the Church that have sought to marginalize or dismiss legitimate concerns that were presented in a serious manner by us. Our clear and consistent position has been misrepresented, misunderstood and misused for political and other purposes. Our right to speak in the public forum has been questioned. Our teaching role within the Catholic Church and even our responsibility to lead the Church have come under criticism. All of us must be open to different points of view and recognize the legitimacy of serious criticism. However, whether from within or without the Catholic community, very often these critics lacked an understanding of these particular issues or of the moral framework that motivated our positions. Others did grasp the seriousness of the issues we were attempting to address. Yet other priorities, in our judgment, led them to accept an inaccurate reading of the proposed legislation. They gave credence to analyses by those who were likewise dedicated to minimizing important concerns so as to pass the legislation. In the end, they made a judgment that the moral problems in the new law – for example, the fact that the federal government, for the first time in decades, will now force Americans to pay for other people’s elective abortions – simply are not serious enough to oppose a particular health care reform bill.

We regret that this approach carried the day, as some overlooked the clear evidence or dismissed careful analysis and teaching on the morality of these matters. But making such moral judgments, and providing guidance to Catholics on whether an action by government is moral or immoral, is first of all the task of the bishops, not of any other group or individual. As Bishops, we disagree that the divergence between the Catholic Conference and Catholic organizations, including the Catholic Health Association, represents merely a difference of analysis or strategy (Catholic Health World, April 15, 2010, “Now That Reform Has Passed”). Rather, for whatever good will was intended, it represented a fundamental disagreement, not just with our staff as some maintain, but with the Bishops themselves. As such it has resulted in confusion and a wound to Catholic unity.

Following enactment of the health care reform legislation, our challenge remains formidable but in some ways is simpler. Since the battle over the bill is over, the defects can be judged soberly in their own right, and solutions can be advanced in Congress while retaining what is good in the new law. Indeed, any failure to do so would only leave these genuine problems as ammunition for those who prefer total repeal of the law. In this context we do not need agreement among lawmakers that the problems are serious enough to oppose the legislation – we only need agreement that the problems are real and deserve to be addressed. This provides a new opportunity for the Catholic community to come together in defense of human life, rights of conscience and fairness to immigrants so we will have a health care system that truly respects the life, dignity, health and consciences of all. We urge Catholics, members of Congress of all parties and others of good will to join us in advancing this worthy goal.

Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston Chairman, Committee on Pro-Life Activities

Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre Chairman, Committee on Domestic Justice, Peace and Human Development

Bishop John Wester of Salt Lake City Committee on Migration

Act Applies Hyde Amendment to New Funds Fixing Health Care a Legislative Goal of U.S. Bishops

WASHINGTON—Congress should support a bipartisan bill that will remedy the abortion and conscience flaws in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), according to the Chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities. In a May 20 letter to Congress, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston said PPACA was an important step toward ensuring access to health coverage for all Americans but was “profoundly flawed in its treatment of abortion, conscience rights, and fairness to immigrants.” He urged members to support H.R. 5111, sponsored by Reps. Joseph Pitts (R-PA) and Dan Lipinski (D-IL) with 91 other House members, and added, “Efforts to ensure that our health care system truly serves the life, health and conscience of all will be a legislative goal of the Catholic bishops in the months to come.”

This legislation, wrote Cardinal DiNardo, “will bring PPACA into line with policies on abortion and conscience rights that have long prevailed in other federal health programs” by ensuring PPACA funds are covered by the Hyde Amendment, along with other provisions.

Cardinal DiNardo said those who believe President Obama’s executive order addressed these concerns should support the new bill, as the legislation would codify and strengthen the order. H.R. 5111 addresses abortion and conscience issues not taken up in the executive order, and remedies its reinforcement of “problematic aspects of the Act, such as its providing federal subsidies for health plans that cover abortions,” he said.

With PPACA now passed into law, Cardinal DiNardo said, “Problems of abortion and conscience in the legislation can be addressed on their own merits, not greeted by false charges that any such effort must be aimed at preventing passage of the Act.” He added, “If these genuine problems are not addressed in their own right, they will be taken up and used as ammunition by those who favor repealing PPACA outright, which would eliminate the positive as well as negative aspects of the new law.”

He also reiterated the bishops’ call for “a reformed health care system that respects the life, health and conscience of all.”

Full text of the letter follows:

May 20, 2010

Dear Member of Congress:

With the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), our country took an important step toward ensuring access to health coverage for all Americans. However, as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has explained in past letters and analyses, the final Act approved on March 22 was profoundly flawed in its treatment of abortion, conscience rights, and fairness to immigrants (see www.usccb.org/healthcare). Efforts to ensure that our health care system truly serves the life, health and conscience of all will be a legislative goal of the Catholic bishops in the months to come.

Reps. Joseph Pitts (R-PA) and Dan Lipinski (D-IL) with 91 other House members have made a significant contribution to this important task, by co-sponsoring bipartisan legislation to remedy PPACA’s serious problems on abortion. This legislation (H.R. 5111), based on the health care reform bill approved by the House last fall, will bring PPACA into line with policies on abortion and conscience rights that have long prevailed in other federal health programs.

H.R. 5111 will do the following:

(1) Ensure that all funds authorized or appropriated by PPACA are covered by the longstanding policy of the Hyde amendment against funding abortions except in cases of life endangerment or rape/incest. The Act currently appropriates billions of dollars in new funds for health services without limiting use of these funds for elective abortions.

(2) Prevent federal funds from subsidizing health plans that cover abortions beyond the Hyde exceptions, so PPACA will follow the policy that already governs Medicaid and Medicare, Children’s Health Insurance Program, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and other programs where federal funds combine with other funds to support health coverage. Like the Stupak amendment approved by the House last fall, this will not prevent anyone from purchasing a health plan covering abortions (or separate coverage for abortion itself) with nonfederal funds.

(3) Restore the conscience provision on abortion approved by the House last November (sec. 259 of H.R. 3962), modeled on the Weldon amendment that has been part of the annual Labor/HHS appropriations bills since 2004. This will ensure that federal, state and local governmental entities receiving federal funds under PPACA may not discriminate against health care providers who decline involvement in abortion. PPACA’s clause allowing states to require provision of services in some cases (sec. 1303(d)) will also be subject to this conscience clause.

(4) Close a loophole in the Act’s non-preemption clause on state laws (sec. 1303(c)(1) of PPACA), so state laws restricting abortion or protecting conscience rights will not be preempted by PPACA. Currently the Act only protects state laws related to abortion coverage or procedural requirements for abortions.

(5) Clarify PPACA’s clause on preserving other federal laws (sec. 1303(c)(2)) so laws restricting abortion or abortion coverage as well as laws on conscience rights are preserved.

Some may assume these goals are already achieved through President Obama’s executive order of March 21 on abortion funding in PPACA. To the extent that this is so, of course, it is not an argument against H.R. 5111, because it would merely codify those elements of the President’s policy. However, the executive order does not address, or claim to address, several of the problems cited above. On other issues it even reinforces problematic aspects of the Act, such as its providing federal subsidies for health plans that cover abortions. Of course the Act’s policy of merely “segregating funds” within such plans violates the federal abortion policy governing every other federal program, and still forces every American who purchases such plans to pay for other people’s abortions.

The executive order also claims to apply the Hyde Amendment to the funds that PPACA authorizes and appropriates for Community Health Centers, although the Act clearly does not apply the Hyde Amendment to these funds. The question here is whether the President has the legal authority to do so, given a long line of federal court decisions construing similar statutes to fund abortion services unless Congress has explicitly stated otherwise. When courts have handed down such decisions, it has sometimes taken years of litigation and debate to resolve the issue – years during which federal funds were used for hundreds of thousands of abortions a year. Given this history, we should not gamble these lives on a guess as to how a federal judge will respond to the first lawsuit seeking a federally funded abortion at a Community Health Center. This serious problem requires a statutory solution.

With the enactment of PPACA, the task of keeping the federal government out of the abortion business can now be pursued with less distraction from other issues and agendas. Problems of abortion and conscience in the legislation can be addressed on their own merits, not greeted by false charges that any such effort must be aimed at preventing passage of the Act. To the contrary: If these genuine problems are not addressed in their own right, they will be taken up and used as ammunition by those who favor repealing PPACA outright, which would eliminate the positive as well as negative aspects of the new law. In short, to support this legislation, members of Congress need not agree that these changes are essential to make the Act acceptable – though that is our conviction. They need only agree that the changes are worthwhile.

I therefore urge members of both parties who support rights of conscience and the policy of the Hyde amendment to support and co-sponsor H.R. 5111. Please help give us a reformed health care system that respects the life, health and conscience of all.

Sincerely,

Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo Chairman, Committee on Pro-Life Activities

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

The North Dakota Catholic Conference is in need of volunteers to help gather signatures for the Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment at the Bismarck Diocese Centennial Celebration, June 11-13 at the Bismarck Civic Center.

Volunteers must be a qualified North Dakota voter.  If you can help for any period of time, please contact the North Dakota Catholic Conference office at 701-223-2519.

The Secretary of State has approved for circulation a petition to put a religious liberty restoration amendment on the state ballot.

This amendment would re-establish the high level of protection for religious liberty that existed everywhere before a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision.  Congress restored the original standard and for all federal laws with the passage of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993.  It then restored the protection for most cases involving land use and institutionalized persons in 2000.  About half of the states, through legislation or state court action have restored the protection for cases involving their state laws.  The North Dakota Religious Liberty Restoration Amendment would extend this same level of protection to North Dakota.

We are confident that Catholics across the state are eager to defend religious liberty by supporting this amendment.

We must collect 25,688 signatures in order to place the amendment on the November ballot.  To accomplish this task, we need every parish to collect signatures during the next few weeks.

Materials for gathering signatures are online at: http://ndcatholic.org/rlra/

These items should answer most questions that may arise.  If not, please contact the North Dakota Catholic Conference office.  You can also contact our coalition partner, the North Dakota Family Alliance  (www.ndfa.org/ndreligiousliberty.php,  701-346-0676)

More information about the amendment will be distributed as the campaign moves forward.