Written by Don Byrd
[UPDATE – 10/26: President Obama may be prepared to veto the NDAA if it contains the Russell Amendment language, according to a CQ-Roll Call report. The White House has not publicly issued a veto threat over this controversy, but according to the report has reached out to lawmakers with that message.]
[UPDATE – 10/25: A letter signed by 42 United States Senators urges the leadership of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to remove the Russell Amendment (Section 1094) from the National Defense Authorization Act during the final stages of conference negotiations. Here is an excerpt from the letter:
This provision would . . . allow religiously-affiliated contractors and grantees to inquire about and discriminate against employees or potential employees based on an individual’s religion. No one should be disqualified from a taxpayer-funded job based on their religion. This provision would be an affront to religious freedom for all Americans. Allowing Section 1094 to be included in the NDAA would essentially sanction federally funded religious discrimination, contradicting the First Amendment which prohibits religious exemptions like this that result in harm to others. This discrimination erodes the freedoms that our military has fought for generations to protect.]
Earlier this year, the Baptist Joint Committee joined several other religious liberty advocates in urging the defeat of legislation that would allow religious discrimination by government contractors.The Russell Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, the coalition warned, “would authorize taxpayer-funded discrimination in each and every federal contract and grant.”
The U.S. House of Representatives passed the bill with the Russell Amendment included after an effort to remove it failed 213-212 in a “chaotic” late-night vote in May. Meanwhile, the Senate version of the bill does not include such a provision. Now, negotiations over the final version of the legislation, which is required to fund the annual defense budget, have reportedly stalled in part over whether to include the Russell Amendment.
As the BJC argued, while the amendment was being considered in committee: “The government should never fund discrimination and no taxpayer should be disqualified from a job under a federal contract or grant because he or she is the “wrong” religion.”
Federal funds bring federal regulations, and appropriately so, including rules designed to protect workers from discrimination on the basis of their religion. Religious organizations receiving government grants should not be able to have it both ways, enjoying exemption from certain nondiscrimination rules while accepting taxpayer money.
Government funds represent Americans of all faiths. Congress should reject efforts to use such funds in a way that discriminates on the basis of religion.
