House Poised to Debate School Prayer Amendment

A coalition of religious groups and church-state watchdogs are stepping up their opposition to a controversial school prayer amendment to the U.S. Constitution as the House of Representatives appears prepared to vote on the measure.

The so-called Religious Freedom Amendment, sponsored by Rep. Ernest Istook (R- Okla.), would pave the way for government subsidy of religion, prayer in schools and other forms of religious expression on public property.

The House Judiciary Committee was expected to approve the measure this week and then pass it on to the full House.

While talk about such an amendment, opposed by Jewish groups across the political and religious spectrum, has been going on for a few years, this would mark the first time a school prayer amendment has come up for consideration by the entire House of Representatives.

Despite support from congressional Republicans and the House leadership, most observers believe the measure will fall well short of the two-thirds majority necessary for passage.

In fact, a Democratic member of Congress organizing opposition to the measure was expected to publicize this week his progress in rounding up votes to kill the measure, sources said.

Rep. Chet Edwards (D-Texas) has made defeat of the measure a top priority, aggressively educating members of Congress about the bill’s implications.

Nonetheless, a coalition of religious groups opposing the measure mounted a counteroffensive Tuesday, as clergy representing an array of religious denominations spoke out against the proposed amendment.

There is no movement in the Senate for such an amendment, further diminishing prospects that it will be approved by Congress and passed on to the states for the necessary three-fourths ratification.

Most observers see the House’s action as an effort to put members of Congress on record on the issue during an election year — a goal sought by the Christian Coalition, which has made no secret of the fact that it wants to include each lawmaker’s vote on the measure in its voter guides.

“I think they want the vote to take place whether or not they’re likely to prevail,” Richard Foltin, legislative director and counsel of the American Jewish Committee, said of the proponents, adding that they appear to have made a “judgment that there’s political capital to be made from it.”

Church-state watchdogs, including most Jewish groups, have consistently derided the measure as unnecessary and dangerous, charging that it runs headlong into the wall separating church and state.

Opponents further emphasize that the First Amendment already protects religious expression, including voluntary prayer in public schools.

“We cannot improve on the Constitution,” said David Harris, Washington director of the American Jewish Congress.

In a letter to members of the House Judiciary Committee, Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, said, “As American Jews, we strive to protect our religious liberty through effective prohibitions on the establishment of religion and we stand in firm opposition to any measure, including the Istook Amendment, that might alter our most treasured `first freedom.'”