A Republican legislative agenda on religion issues will be of
interest with Bush in the White House and Republicans in effective control of
both houses of Congress, posited the Religious Action Center's Saperstein.
"We'll see whether they'll try to ram through things of fundamental
concern to key constituencies in their party," he said. For instance, the
religious right, he claimed, wants "nothing more" than to see what is
known as the Istook, or Religious Freedom, amendment (RFA) to the U.S.
constitution passed.
Originally introduced in 1997, the RFA would open the door to greater
maneuverability in the area of public school prayer.
Christian Legal Society senior legal counsel Kim Colby speculated that
"with margins as close as they are in the House and Senate," Istook's
amendment, if introduced, would probably not get very far. "I can't see it
being given serious attention when there are many other difficult things
for [Congress] to deal with. Why go into a fight you would be unlikely to
win and one that would be messy?"
In the area of foreign policy, many scholars believe the Clinton
administration has done well to integrate religious freedom concerns in
America's dealings with other nations, especially in the wake of the
International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which created the U.S.
Commission on International Religious Freedom and the position of religious
freedom ambassador-at-large, among other structures within the U.S. State
Department meant to track and promote religious freedom around the world.
Commission chair Elliott Abrams praised the two annual reports on religious freedom released to date by the State Department as required by the 1998 act. But he said, "We have not as yet been able to integrate our desire to promote religious freedom into foreign policy." U.S. policy toward China, for instance, does not reflect religious freedom concerns at present, he claimed.
In order to expand America's promotion of religious freedom, Abrams
argued, Bush's administration will need to bring to the table "a deep
personal commitment on the part of leading officials."
Saperstein, who also serves on the commission, contended that an expansion
of religion's role in foreign policy would include priorities such as
raising the issue of religious freedom systematically in U.S. dealings
with other nations; developing a "comprehensive strategy to get other
nations to join us;" "getting the [State Department] report
into the hands of foreign service officers in other nations; and seeking
coalitions to deal with issues in other countries that are problematic."
University of Richmond's Al-Hibri, also founder of Karamah: Muslim Women
Lawyers for Human Rights, urged the incoming administration to ensure that
a multitude of voices are included in dialogue and fact-finding about
international religious freedom issues and pertinent policy-making
decisions.
She observed that the Clinton administration had reached out to the
American Muslim community in symbolic ways, for instance, initiating some
conversation with Muslim leaders. "This is a modest beginning," she
offered. "But an administration really concerned could follow up these
efforts more substantively, which would be good for America."
As the U.S. expands its dealings with other nations over concerns about
religious freedom, it is important to be "as balanced in our judgments as
we can," offered Doug Johnston, president and founder of the International
Center for Religion and Diplomacy in Washington, D.C., even as practices
that demand criticism or condemnation present themselves. An incoming
administration, he said, should strive to recognize any positive steps
countries may be taking. "Other countries don't like being beaten over the head, but it becomes far more palatable if we also recognize any good things they may be doing."
"While it is now accepted that religious freedom is a touchstone of U.S.
foreign policy," Johnston argued, "it is incumbent upon policy makers to
incorporate more fully in their deliberations religious and other cultural
concerns."

