mr. chairman , i rise in opposition to the offered amendment . 
it seems to me in our country right now we have an all-out assault on faith-based groups . 
just this week , a court in my home state of louisiana ruled that school boards were prohibited from having voluntary school board member-led prayers to begin their meetings . 
now , this very chamber , the supreme court , and many government entities begin their proceedings with a prayer ; and along that line i see nothing wrong with us inviting faith-based groups to be partners with the government in training tomorrow 's workforce . 
to me , this debate should be about one and only one thing , and that is how do we provide the most effective training for our future workers ? 
nobody here is arguing that we should have an unlevel playing field . 
nobody here is arguing for favoritism for faith-based groups . 
rather , we are simply saying , let us level the playing field . 
let us invite those who are motivated by faith to help us to train displaced workers , to train tomorrow 's workforce . 
in my home state of louisiana , faith-based groups have done a wonderful thing . 
they have provided health care to those who needed it ; they have provided education , housing and shelter to those whose needed it the most . 
what is next ? 
if you extend the logic of this amendment , what might be next might be those catholic hospitals not being able to accept medicare patients . 
what might be next might be the baptist hospitals not being allowed to participate in our state 's medicaid program . 
we are not asking for special treatment . 
all we are saying is let us build on a bipartisan precedent , a precedent set in the civil rights act , a precedent reaffirmed under president clinton under four different bills . 
let us build on that bipartisan precedent of opening the doors and allowing faith-based groups to participate as equal partners . 
people of faith pay taxes as well in this country . 
we are not arguing for special treatment ; we are just arguing for a level playing field . 
four different times this congress saw fit to open those doors to faith-based groups . 
four different times president clinton signed into law four different measures designed to protect the interests and rights of faith-based groups . 
today this bill that we are going to approve later on the floor today simply takes another step forward . 
it simply says to the faith-based community , we will not discriminate against you . 
we will not require you to give up your employment rights guaranteed or granted to you by the 1964 civil rights act . 
to quote members from the other side , senator kerry and senator clinton , those that have stood before for freedom and plurality , they themselves say , senator clinton in her own words says , `` there is no contradiction between support for faith-based initiatives and upholding our constitutional principles. '' senator kerry says , `` i know there are some that say that the first amendment means faith-based organizations ca n't help government . 
i 've never accepted that . 
i think they are wrong. '' in this instance , i find myself in agreement with both senator kerry and senator clinton . 
the first amendment is not designed to protect government , not designed to protect us from faith ; it is rather designed to separate church and state . 
it is , rather , designed to protect faith from government , not the other way around . 
so i think we need to stop closing the door to people of faith . 
we need to stop discriminating against those groups that are motivated by their religious beliefs to help the weakest in society . 
i rise in opposition to this amendment . 
