Gary North

This is my response to Jim Wallis's editorial, "Our Moral Choice," published in Sojourners (March 8, 2006).

Jim Wallis spoke at a rally on Capitol Hill on March 7. The rally was called "Rally to Protect America's Priorities." It was sponsored by the Emergency Campaign for America's Priorities, ACORN, and the U.S. Student Association.

I checked the Web sites for each organization. The Emergency Campaign's is www.actnow.org. ACORN's is www.acorn.org. The Student Association's is www.usstudents.org. Not one of them is either explicitly or implicitly Christian. Not one mentions Christianity or religion on its site. All three are political action organizations that espouse the welfare state platform of the Democratic Party. This tells us something about Mr. Wallis's constituency.

At his most recent rally on Capitol Hill, which was held last December, only 115 people showed up. This time, he invited non-Christians in order to make the rally appear larger. Or perhaps they invited him. The editorial is not clear on this point.

At this rally, he said:

I want to begin with what the Religious Community said all last year: A budget is a moral document! That was our clarion cry in the 2006 budget debate. If some political leaders haven't got the message yet -- just wait until this year.

Note that the "Religious Community" is both capitalized and undefined. It sounds big. But is it anything more than a few relatively small mailing lists? When we are talking about religious community, we should be talking about Focus on the Family, Concerned Women of America, and viewers of TBN and "The 700 Club." Congress pays attention to that religious community, which can deliver the votes.

You see, we believe that fiscal choices, economic choices are also moral choices and, for us, even religious choices. Who is important? And who is not? What is important? And what is not? Who do we most value? And who don't we value at all? They are fiscal choices, but also moral and religious matters.

Indeed, fiscal choices are moral choices. Fiscal choices by politicians are deeply moral choices regarding who gets the revenue collected by threat of government violence, and who pays the lion's share. The moral foundations of politics are clear, an answer to this question" "How many votes in November will my vote to spend more government money cost me in my district, compared to how many votes it will gain me?" Anyone who expects greater moral insight than this from a Congressman is living in a fantasy world.

Jesus actually got uncharacteristically judgmental about these kinds of choices. He said, "As you have done to the least of these, you have done to me." Are you paying attention yet, members of Congress?

Jesus spoke these words to individuals, who had their own money to spend. He did not speak to politicians, who were ready to spend other people's money. The context of Jesus' words was the final judgment of individuals. God (the king) says:

For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me (Matthew 25:35-36).

This does not imply that Congress is expected to visit prisoners. It also does not imply that Congress is supposed to use the politics of plunder to benefit poor people and their agents, the Federal bureaucrats who administer the welfare programs.

Because of moral pressure -- much of it from the religious community who every day care for the poor that our national politics neglect -- last year's budget almost didn't pass. It took a fast trip home from Dick Cheney to pass the budget in the Senate and, in the House, the final budget measure only passed by a few votes. Some elected officials were making new moral choices.

First, it was political pressure, not moral pressure, that Cheney faces. Second, there is no evidence that the tiny group of 115 people, including Mr. Wallis, who gathered on Capitol Hill last December had any influence at all. A group that small that has worked for months to "get out the troops" is announcing for all to see: "We don't have the votes."

But the White House and the Republican leadership seem not to have gotten this message from the religious community, by the look of the new budget they now propose. I thought we were supposed to be their base?

The Christian Right is their base. The tiny, politically impotent Left-wing Christian pressure group that Mr. Wallis represents has to rely on secular political action groups that are in the camp of the Democrats in order to gather a crowd.

Ask your typical Republican voter in a fundamentalist or evangelical church if he has ever heard of Jim Wallis. The answer will be no. Ask him if he has heard of Jerry Falwell or James Dobson. The answer will be yes. Jerry Falwell and James Dobson were not in attendance at Mr. Wallis' rallies.

These are all moral choices. Those with the power to make budget proposals have made their moral choices; and so will we. They are choosing to bestow more windfalls of benefit on their wealthy donors -- that's their moral choice. We will stand up for the low-income families that we know and serve and whom they will again ignore -- no, assault -- that's our moral choice.

Mr. Wallis loves to talk about "we." But who are "we"? How many "we's" are there? Not many, if the size of his rallies are evidence.

They are choosing the corruption of rewarding the special interests who pay for them -- that's their moral choice.

The evil of modern politics is that everyone is pressured into becoming a member of some special interest group. The politics of plunder forces each of us to defend himself from the tax man.

We will defend those who have the most need -- that's our moral choice.

Does this sound familiar? From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. Use Google to see who said this first.

Here is what the biblical prophet Isaiah says about their moral choices: "Woe to the legislators of infamous laws, to those who issue tyrannical decrees, who refuse justice to the unfortunate and cheat the poor among my people of their rights, and make widows their prey and rob the orphan."

Isaiah's warning was directed against those rulers who committed robbery through State power. Mr. Wallis obviously defines "robbery" as not stealing from one political group and giving the loot -- minus government handling charges -- to another political group. His is the politics of plunder. The outlook of the politics of plunder is that it is theft not to steal. It is the politics of Robin Hood. "I steal from the rich and give to the poor -- minus 50% for handling." It is the revised commandment: "Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote."

Last Dec. 14, 115 Christians who work with the poor every day, interrupted their works of compassion to come to the Capitol-to pray, preach, and prophesy. And we were taken to jail. Mary Nelson, from Chicago, looked up at the congressional staff and members looking out their windows and invited them, "Come walk with us."

Generally, a rally that pulls only 115 people is considered a well-intentioned fizzle on Capitol Hill. I was a Capitol Hill staffer 30 years ago. That tiny a rally would have been ignored by Congress. It was ignored last December, too.

Due in part to the pressure from religious community -- we saved food stamps from cuts.

I think it was the farm bloc lobby that saved food stamps from cuts.

Now, the proposed cuts [in] stamps are back. People should know that many of those arrested last December voted for George Bush, some twice. Now they get arrested to protest his moral choices. They were his base, they are no longer.

Oh, woe! An unnamed percentage of 115 people have departed from Mr. Bush's base. Somehow, I suspect that this will not bother him, given the fact that he will not be running again.

The media noted that the words religious, Christian, even evangelical, are no longer just alongside the words abortion and gay marriage, but now alongside words like food stamps, health care, and education. Get used to it.

Which media? When? Where? With what effect? A Christian political action bloc that depends on the Left-wing media in Washington and New York City to judge who is representative of American Christianity and who is not is in deep political trouble.

When the politicians pat faith-based organizations on the back for doing such a wonderful job, they are now turning around and saying, "Stop hurting the people we work with and care about!" Come walk with us.

Here is another reason for Christian groups not to take a dime from the government. To be patted on the back by a politician is an event for great embarrassment -- far worse than being slammed for not getting on board the latest welfare State vote-buying program.

After the vote, Republicans e-mailed me, "I just want you to know that I voted against this budget and am listening to the religious community."

I hope I never receive an e-mail like that.

Overcoming poverty must be a bipartisan commitment and a nonpartisan cause. The religious community will ask Democrats to stand firm against this budget violence against poor people, to make the moral choice of favoring the poor over the rich -- which is also a biblical choice. Democrats must get religion on the budget.

Mr. Wallis' Religious Community will plead with the Democrats to do what Democrats are going to do anyway. So what?

And we will ask Republicans: Follow your conscience, not your party. Help your party make better moral choices than favoring the rich over the poor -- stop turning the biblical wisdom upside down -- and then having the nerve to claim that you are the religion-friendly party! It's time for Republicans to get religion on this budget.

This is the politics of plunder wrapped in the swaddling clothes of Christianity. It is best to keep Christianity far, far away from the politics of plunder.

We've had a year of organizing around the budget in the religious community. We are watching this debate very carefully. We will hold our elected officials accountable in 2006 and 2008 for their votes on this budget -- whether they vote for or against poor families.

Again, who are "we"? How many votes do "we" have?

If you think we were aroused last year, we were just getting started. Budgets are moral documents and we will fight this budget. And that's our moral choice.

They had 115 people at the rally last December. This time, they could gather a crowd only by joining with non-Christian political action groups. This does not point to a looming victory for the "Religious Community."