TESTIMONY

Clarence E. Hodges, Ph.D.

Vice President

Seventh-day Adventist Church of North America

Subcommittee on the Constitution

Committee on the Judiciary

U.S. House of Representatives

May 12, 1999

Mr. Chairman, honorable Committee Members and distinguished panel members, I was honored by the invitation to appear and testify before this distinguished Committee regarding H.R. 1691, the "Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999." With human rights in general as the centerpiece of our foreign policy, I have appreciated my country's support for religious freedom around the world.

During my service as Deputy Assistant Secretary at the U.S. Department of State in two presidential administrations, it was my privilege to promote freedom in such countries as apartheid South Africa, communist Nicaragua, the Soviet Union, and communist Poland. I was pleased to be a part of the process of helping to advance our own policy beyond constructive engagement in apartheid South Africa after visiting from one end of that great country to the other, promoting freedom and visiting with leaders of all racial groups.

During the sixties and seventies, I was honored to have been elected on several occasions to leadership positions in a variety of civil rights organizations, including the NAACP and CORE, the Congress of Racial Equality. This, the greatest nation on earth, has at times moved too slowly in advancing the cause of freedom in this great land while trying to help others achieve this great blessing in other lands.

I am here today to urge support for H.R. 1691 in the interest of religious liberty protection. Since the June 1997 ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court declaring the Religious Freedom Restoration Act unconstitutional, we have experienced a backward move in the area of religious freedom.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has an impressive history in seeking religious freedom for all. Our resources have been expended not just for our members and our institutions but for all as religious discrimination against one is tantamount to religious discrimination against all. It is only a matter of time. We operate hundreds of hospitals and health care facilities and the second largest private or parochial school system in the world.

We have often experienced discrimination in the issuance of zoning and building permits. In just one active case in the State of Illinois, we have done severe damage to our legal reserve funds as we try to keep a faith based school (one which believes in God and country) open. This is due to the loss of RFRA. Zoning boards seem not to be aware of the contributions religion makes to the national economy. They have given no thought to the schools, churches, community centers, and hospitals which are built, furnished, staffed, and maintained by religious organizations.

Prior to 1998, bankruptcy courts were seeking to deplete the bank accounts of religious organizations by recovering contributions made by persons who later sought bankruptcy protection. This was due to the loss of RFRA. The problem has been partially corrected by the courageous leadership of key members of this Committee and the 105^th Congress with the enactment of H.R. 2604. I call for continuation of the process by enacting H.R. 1691.

Too many employers in both the public and private sectors saw the striking down of RFRA as a signal for "open season" on religious freedom. Religious discrimination in the workplace has led to thousands of complaints. Sometimes, even today, racial and gender discrimination is hidden behind religious discrimination because religious discrimination is perceived as less objectionable. Jobs have been lost, mortgages foreclosed, evictions activated, cars and furniture repossessed, children withdrawn from college, health care benefits lost, and families broken due to this attitude which emanated from the loss of RFRA. The courts support the concept of religious freedom as embodied in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and CFR 1605. However, without RFRA, it often takes in excess of ten years to achieve final confirmation of freedom and rights. The economic and social suffering for families for such a period of time confirms the freedom delayed in freedom denied.

We may speak lightly of government burdens on a person's religious exercise. The lessons I learned during my twenty years of public service in both the legislative and executive branches stressed that government's compelling interest is both to lighten burdens and to avoid being the burden. Individuals should not be forced by government employers to choose between their religion and their employment. Government should not be a part of the problem. This bill allows government to accomplish its mission with the least possible burden or restriction, if any.

Religious institutions relieve government burdens and improve the quality of life for all citizens. Communist economies collapsed, in large part, because they did not allow religious institutions to provide social services, health care, and education as freedom allows in America. To minimize the burdens on religious institutions is to maximize the relief these institutions can give to government.

Mr. Chairman, it is time to send a new signal. It is time for the world to see that we are not only a military super power but a moral super power, leading the world to higher heights in the area of human rights than we have gone before. Thank you for your consideration and for your support of religious liberty.