Should religious organizations that receive federal funds for public social service programs be allowed to use religious criteria in hiring staff to carry out those programs? This controversial issue has appeared in several bills in the House of Representatives since being dropped from the CARE Act, passed by the Senate in the spring. On June 25th, the 62nd anniversary of President Franklin Roosevelt’s groundbreaking Executive Order banning hiring discrimination by defense contractors, Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) introduced H.R. 2605, a bill that would overturn Section 4 of President Bush’s December 2002 Executive Order exempting religious groups from the non-discrimination requirement. The Scott bill has 25 co-sponsors. The White House and its allies in the House have been pushing for the religious discrimination provision through language passed in the Workforce Investment Act and Head Start reauthorization, and language in the pending Community Economic Development Expertise Enhancement Act. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) has promised to propose it during reauthorization of the AmeriCorps program. Last week, Rep. Chet Edwards (D-TX) introduced an amendment to the Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriation bill that would have banned such discrimination, which failed by a 32-27 vote in the Appropriations Committee. In the debate on the amendment, Republicans claimed a ban on discrimination in hiring would “torpedo” the President’s faith-based initiative, presumably because faith-based groups would not seek grants if forced to comply with the same standards as other grantees. However, faith-based organizations have been receiving federal funds and complying with civil rights laws for decades. On June 24th, the White House published a policy paper urging implementation of the religious discrimination provisions. The White House paper suggests that sexuality may also be a religous issue that employers may consider when hiring. OMB Watch has joined with religious and civil rights organizations in supporting Rep. Scott’s legislation. See our statement in support of HR 2605.