The Troubling Side of Private-Public Partnership

I’ve written about, and spoken about, the idea of increased opportunities for governmental and nonprofit partnerships. Most of the time, it’s incredibly beneficial for efficiency, cost, and outcomes.

However, there are moments that the concept is shrouded in controversy. A recent story in the Salt Lake Tribune investigated and effectively written by an author at Pro Publica shines a light on the partnership between the state of Utah and the Church of Latter Day Saints. The Mormon faith has always taken a leading position in helping the community in Utah, which had founded around 150 years ago. However, coming out of the great recession (2008-2012), the efforts to help those who are the underserved at certain levels of income had been “pawned off” to the Church rather than on the State. In fact, there’s a written agreement as to how this would happen.

While there is no doubt that the Church has done incredibly generous and important things for their community, the anecdotal accounts in this story with the interaction between the Church and those who are needing assistance are troubling, to say the least. In multiple examples, with back up and sourced/referenced material, those needing housing or food or basic necessities, when going to the Church as directed by the state, were asked to conform to Mormon teachings. Failure to do so resulted in no aid.

I am a Constitutional believer. Specifically, there are distinct and critical elements of our republic that separate church and state. I will not argue that a private organization can set its own agenda and limitations. But when the government signs in agreement with a religious entity, reducing the amount of money necessary to take care of those in poverty, and “religious hurdles” of spiritual practice, conversion, and attendance, this violates not only the spirit of the Constitution, but more likely it’s actual words.

While I applaud any nonprofit for helping their community, I find it deplorable that a State/government entity would allow a religious nonprofit to reduce burden on state resources AND AT THE SAME TIME stymie it’s citizens based on religious conviction or performance.  Philanthropy means “love of mankind”….not “love of mankind if you pray the same way I do.”