Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Religion in the Original 13 Colonies

From ProCon.org

By the year 1702 all 13 American colonies had some form of state-supported religion. This support varied from tax benefits to religious requirements for voting or serving in the legislature. Below are excerpts from colonial era founding documents citing these religious references.

Most instances of state-supported religion were removed before 1850, and the remaining requirements became null and void after the passing of the 14th Amendment on July 28, 1868. New Hampshire and North Carolina removed the nullified religious references from their state constitutions in 1875 and 1877 respectively.

I. Time Between Original Colonial Charter and End of State-Supported Religion
(Click on a colony to read its documents relating to state-supported religion.)


II. Text from Historical Documents Showing State Support of Religion

1. Virginia

Official Religion: Anglican/Church of England
Original Charter Date: Apr. 10,1606
Full text of The First Charter of Virginia (PDF) 15.5K
Ended Support: 1830

"Every Person should go to church, Sundays and Holidays, or lye Neck and Heels that Night, and be a Slave to the Colony the following Week; for the second Offence, he should be a Slave for a Month; and for the third, a Year and a Day."


Governor Argall's Decree
1617


"That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other."


Virginia Declaration of Rights
1776


"Section I. The opinions of men are not the object of civil government, nor under its jurisdiction; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own...

Section II. We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."


Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom
Jan. 16, 1786


"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested or burthened, in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief: but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.

And the legislature shall not prescribe any religious test whatsoever; nor confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any one sect or denomination; nor pass any law requiring or authorizing any religious society, or the people of any district within this commonwealth to levy on themselves or others any tax for the erection or repair of any house for public worship or for the support of any church or ministry, but it shall be left free to every person to select his religious instructor, and make for his support such private contract as he shall please."


Virginia Constitution
1830
2. New York

Official Religion: Anglican/Church of England
Original Charter Date: June 7, 1614
Full text of the Charter of the Dutch West India Company (PDF) 22.8K
Ended Support: 1846

"The Dutch Colony of the seventeenth century was officially intolerantly Protestant but was, as has been noted, in practice tolerant and fair to people of other faiths who dwelt within New Netherland.

When the English took the province from the Dutch in 1664, they granted full religious toleration to the other forms of Protestantism, and preserved the property rights of the Dutch Reformed Church, while recognizing its discipline.

In 1697, although the Anglican Church was never formally established in the Province of New York, Trinity Church was founded in the City of New York by royal charter, and received many civil privileges and the munificent grants of land which are the source of its present great wealth."




"THAT Noe person or persons which professe ffaith in God by Jesus Christ Shall at any time be any wayes molested punished disquieted or called in Question for any Difference in opinion or Matter of Religious Concernment"


New York Charter of Liberties and Privileges
1683


"Article XXXVIII. And whereas we are required, by the benevolent principles of the rational liberty, not only to expel civil tyranny, but also to guard against that spiritual oppression and intolerance wherewith the bigotry and ambition of weak and wicked priests and princes have scourged mankind, this convention doth further, in the name and by the authority of the good people of this state, ordain, determine, and desire, that the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall be forever hereafter be allowed, within this state, to all mankind: PROVIDED That the liberty of conscience, hereby granted, shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this state.

Article XXXIX. And whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their profession, dedicated to the service of God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their function, therefore, no minister of the gospel, or priest of any denomination whatsoever, shall, at any time hereafter, under and preference or description whatever, be eligible to, or capable of holding, any civil or military office or place within this state."


New York Constitution
1777


The New York Constitution of 1846 ended all restrictions against religious officials from holding office or being in the military.


New York Constitution
1846
3. Massachusetts

Official Religion: Congregational Church
Original Charter Date: Mar. 4, 1629
Full text of The Charter of Massachusetts Bay (PDF) 29.1K
Ended Support: 1833

"Like many who arrived on these shores in the 17th century, the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay came to America seeking religious freedom… The freedom they sought, however, was for themselves and not for others. The Puritans felt called by God to establish 'new Israel,' a holy commonwealth based on a covenant between God and themselves as the people of God. Though there were separate areas of authority for church and state in Puritan Massachusetts, all laws of the community were to be grounded in God's law and all citizens were expected to uphold the divine covenant…

Very early in the Massachusetts experiment, dissenters arose to challenge the Puritan vision of a holy society. The first dissenter, Roger Williams (c.1603-1683), was himself a Puritan minister but with a very different vision of God's plan for human society. Williams argued that God had not given divine sanction to the Puritan colony. In his view, the civil authorities of Massachusetts had no authority to involve themselves in matters of faith. The true church, according to Williams, was a voluntary association of God's elect. Any state involvement in the worship or God, therefore, was contrary to the divine will and inevitably led to the defilement of the church…

Banished from Massachusetts in 1635, Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, the first colony with no established church and the first society in America to grant liberty of conscience to everyone."




"Article II. It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly and at stated seasons, to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience, or for his religious profession or sentiments. provided he doth not disturb the public peace or obstruct others in their religious worship.

Article III. And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law.

Chapter VI. Article I. Any person chosen governor, lieutenant-governor, councillor, senator, or representative, and accepting the trust, shall, before he proceed to execute the duties of his place or office, make and subscribe the following declaration, viz:


'I _______, do declare that I believe the Christian religion...'"

Massachusetts Constitution
1780


"[A]ll religious sects and denominations, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good citizens of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law."


Massachusetts Constitution, Article XI
1833
4. Maryland

Official Religion: Anglican/Church of England
Original Charter Date: June 20, 1632
Full text of The Charter of Maryland (PDF) 22.6K
Ended Support: 1867

"Article XXXIII. That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons, professing the Christian religion, are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore no person ought by any law to be molested in his person or estate on account of his religious persuasion or profession, or for his religious practice; unless, under colour of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others, in their natural, civil, or religious rights; nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent or maintain, or contribute, unless on contract, to maintain any particular place of worship, or any particular ministry; yet the Legislature may, in their discretion, lay a general and equal tax for the support of the Christian religion; leaving to each individual the power of appointing the payment over of the money, collected from him, to the support of any particular place of worship or minister, or for the benefit of the poor of his own denomination, or the poor in general of any particular county: but the churches, chapels, globes, and all other property now belonging to the church of England, ought to remain to the church of England forever...

Article XXXV. That no other test or qualification ought to be required, on admission to any office of trust or profit, than such oath of support and fidelity to this State, and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this Convention or the Legislature of this State, and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion."


Maryland State Constitution
1776


All religious requirements were eliminated in the constitution of 1867.


Maryland State Constitution
1867
5. Delaware

Official Religion: None
Original Charter Date: 1637
Chartered by the South Company of Sweden
Ended Support: 1792

"BECAUSE no People can be truly happy, though under the greatest Enjoyment of Civil Liberties, if abridged of the Freedom of their Consciences, as to their Religious Profession and Worship: And Almighty God being the only Lord of Conscience, Father of Lights and Spirits; and the Author as well as Object of all divine Knowledge, Faith and Worship, who only doth enlighten the Minds, and persuade and convince the Understandings of People, I do hereby grant and declare, That no Person or Persons, inhabiting in this Province or Territories, who shall confess and acknowledge Our almighty God, the Creator, Upholder and Ruler of the world; and professes him or themselves obliged to live quietly under the Civil Government, shall be in any Case molested or prejudiced, in his or their Person or Estate, because of his or their consciencious Persuasion or Practice, nor be compelled to frequent or maintain any religious Worship, Place or Ministry, contrary to his or their Mind, or to do or suffer any other Act or Thing, contrary to their religious Persuasion.

AND that all Persons who also profess to believe in Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the World, shall be capable (notwithstanding their other Persuasions and Practices in Point of Conscience and Religion) to serve this Government in any Capacity, both legislatively and executively..."


Charter of Delaware
1701


"That all Men have a natural and unalienable Right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates Of their own conscience and understandings; that no Man ought or of right can he compelled to attend any religious Worship or maintain any Ministry contrary to or against his own free Will and Consent, and that no Authority can or Ought to be vested in, or assumed by any Power whatever that shall in any Case interfere with, or in any Manner control the Right of Conscience in the Free exercise of Religious Worship.

That all Persons professing the Christian Religion ought forever to enjoy equal Rights and Privileges in this State..."


Delaware Declaration of Rights and Fundamental Rules
1776


"Article 22. Every person who shall be chosen a member of either House, or appointed to any office or place of trust... shall take the following oath:


'I _______, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, One God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old Testament and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration.'

Article 29. There shall be no establishment of any religious sect in this State in preference to another; and no clergyman or preacher of the gospel, of any denomination, shall be capable of holding any civil office in this state, or of being a member of either of the branches of the legislature, while they continue in the exercise of the pastoral function."


Delaware State Constitution
1776


"No religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, under this State."


Delaware Constitution, Article I, Section 2
1792

6. Connecticut

Official Religion: Congregational Church
Original Charter Date: Jan. 14, 1639
Full text of The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut (PDF) 10.6K
Ended Support: 1818

"[O]ur said people, Inhabitants there, may bee soe religiously, peaceably and civilly Governed as their good life and orderly Conversacon may wynn and invite the Natives of the Country to the knowledge and obedience of the onely true God and Saviour of mankind, and the Christian faith, which in our Royall intencons and the Adventurers free profession is the onely and principall end of this Plantacon."


Connecticut Colony Charter
1662


"Article I. Section 3. The exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever be free to all persons in this State, provided that the right hereby declared and established shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or to justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the State.

Article I. Section 4. No preference shall be given by law to any Christian sect or mode of worship.

Article VII. Section 1. It being the duty of all men to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the Universe, and their right to render that worship in the mode most consistent with the dictates or their consciences, no person shall by law be compelled to join or support, nor be classed with, or associated to, any congregation, church, or religious association; but every person now belonging to such congregation, church, or religious association, shall remain a member thereof until he shall have separated himself therefrom, in the manner hereinafter provided. And each and every society or denomination of Christians in this State shall have and enjoy the same and equal powers, rights, and privileges; and shall have power and authority support and maintain the ministers or teachers of their respective denominations, and to build and repair houses for public worship by a tax on the members of any such society only, to be laid by a major vote of the legal voters assembled at any society meeting, warned and held according to law, or in any other manner."


Connecticut Constitution
1818
7. New Hampshire

Official Religion: Congregational Church
Original Charter Date: Aug. 4, 1639
Full text of the Agreement of the Settlers at Exeter in New Hampshire (PDF) 5.08K
Ended Support: 1877

"Article III. When men enter into a State of society they surrender up some of their natural rights to that society, in order to ensure the protection of others...

Article IV. Among the natural rights, some are in their very nature unalienable, because no equivalent can be given or received for them. Of this kind are the RIGHTS OF CONSCIENCE...

Article V. Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship GOD according to the dictates of his own conscience and reason; and no person shall be hurt, molested, or restrained in is person, liberty, or estate for worshipping God in the manner most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience, or for his religious profession, sentiments, or persuasion; provided he doth not disturb the public peace or disturb others in their religious worship.

Senate. Provided, nevertheless, That no person shall be capable of being elected a senator who is not of the Protestant religion...

House of Representatives. Every member of the house of representatives... shall be of the Protestant religion...

President. [H]e shall be of the Protestant religion."


New Hampshire Constitution
1784


"And be it further enacted, that each religious sect or denomination of Christians in this State may associate and form societies, may admit members, may establish rules and bylaws for their regulation and government, and shall have all the corporate powers which may be necessary to assess and raise money by taxes upon the polls and ratable estate of the members of such associations, and to collect and appropriate the same for the purpose of building and repairing houses of public worship, and for the support of the ministry; and the assessors and collectors of such associations shall have the same powers in assessing and collecting, and shall be liable to the same penalties as similar town officers have and are liable to--Provided that no person shall be compelled to join or support, or be classed with, or associated to any congregation, church or religious society without his express consent first had and obtain--Provided also, if any person shall choose to separate himself from such society, or association to which he may belong, and shall leave a written notice thereof with the clerk of such society or association, he shall thereupon be no longer liable for any future expenses which may be incurred by said society or association--Provided also, that no association or society shall exercise the powers herein granted until it shall have assumed a name and stile by which such society may be known and distinguished in law, and shall have recorded the same in a book of records to be kept by the clerk of said Society, and shall have published the same in some newspaper in the County where such society may be formed if any be printed therein, and if not then in some paper published in some adjoining County."


The Toleration Act, Section 3D
1819


"House of Representatives. Article 14. Amended 1877 deleting requirement that representatives be Protestants.

Senate. Article 29. Amended l877 deleting requirements that senators be Protestant."


New Hampshire Constitution
1990
8. Rhode Island

Official Religion: None
Original Charter Date: Mar. 14, 1643
Full text of the Patent for Providence Plantations (PDF) 7.56K
Ended Support: 1842

"That [the inhabitants], pursueing, with peaceable and loyall minces, their sober, serious and religious intentions, of goalie edifieing themselves, and one another, in the holy Christian faith and worship, as they werepersuaded; together with the gaining over and conversion of the poor ignorant Indian natives, in thoseparts of America, to the sincere profession and obedience of the same faith and worship...

true pietye rightly grounded upon gospell principles, will give the best and greatest security to sovereignetye, and will lay in the hearts of men the strongest obligations to true loyaltye: Now know bee, that wee beinge willinge to encourage the hopefull undertakeinge of oure sayd lovall and loveinge subjects, and to secure them in the free exercise and enjovment of all theire civill and religious rights, appertaining to them, as our loveing subjects; and to preserve unto them that libertye, in the true Christian ffaith and worshipp of God...

That our royall will and pleasure is, that noe person within the sayd colonye, at any tyme hereafter, shall bee any wise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question, for any differences in opinione in matters of religion, and doe not actually disturb the civill peace of our sayd colony; but that all and everye person and persons may, from tyme to tyme, and at all tymes hereafter, freelye and fullye have and enjoye his and theire owne judgments and consciences, in matters of religious concernments...

and to direct, rule, order and dispose of, all other matters and things, and particularly that which relates to the makinge of purchases of the native Indians, as to them shall seeme meete; wherebv oure sayd people and inhabitants, in the sayd Plantationes, may be soe religiously, peaceably and civilly governed, as that, by theire good life and orderlie conversations, they may win and invite the native Indians of the countrie to the knowledge and obedience of the onlie true God, and Saviour of mankinde..."


Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations
July 15, 1663


"Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; and all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burdens, or by civil incapacitations, tend to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness; and whereas a principal object of our venerable ancestors, in their migration to this country and their settlement of this state, was, as they expressed it, to hold forth a lively experiment that a flourishing civil state may stand and be best maintained with full liberty in religious concernments; we, therefore, declare that no person shall be compelled to frequent or to support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatever, except in fulfillment of such person's voluntary contract; nor enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in body or goods; nor disqualified from holding any office; nor otherwise suffer on account of such person's religious belief; and that every person shall be free to worship God according to the dictates of such person's conscience, and to profess and by argument to maintain such person's opinion in matters of religion; and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect the civil capacity of any person."


Rhode Island Constitution, Article I, Section 3
1842
9. Georgia

Official Religion: None
Original Charter Date: 1732
Full text of the Charter of Georgia (PDF) 24.2K
Ended Support: 1798

"Article VI. [R]epresentatives... shall be of the Protestant religion...

Article LVI. All persons whatever shall have the free exercise of their religion; provided it be not repugnant to the peace and safety of the State; and shall not, unless by consent, support any teacher or teachers except those of their own profession."

Georgia Constitution
1777


Article I. Section 3. The 'representatives... shall be of the Protestant religion...' requirement was removed.

"Article IV. Section 5. All persons shall have the free exercise of religion, without being obligated to contribute to the support of any religious but their own."


Georgia Constitution
1789


"Article IV. Section 10. No person within this state shall, upon any pretense, be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshipping God in any manner agreeable to his own conscience, nor be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith and judgment; nor shall he ever be obliged to pay tithes, taxes, or any other rate, for the building or repairing any place of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes to be right, or hath voluntarily engaged. To do. No one religious society shall ever be established in this state, in preference to another; nor shall any person be denied the enjoyment of any civil right merely on account of his religious principles."


Georgia Constitution
1798
10. North Carolina

Official Religion: Anglican/Church of England
Original Charter Date: Mar. 24, 1663
Full text of the Charter of Carolina (PDF) 23.6K
Ended Support: 1875

"Article XIX. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences.

Article XXXI. That no clergyman, or preacher of the gospel, of any denomination, shall be capable of being a member of either the Senate, House of Commons, or Council of State, while he continues in the exercise of pastoral function.

Article XXXII. That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.

Article XXXIV. That there shall be no establishment of any one religious church or denomination in this State, in preference to any other; neither shall any person, on any presence whatsoever, be compelled to attend any place of worship contrary to his own faith or judgment, nor be obliged to pay, for the purchase of any glebe, or the building of any house of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes right, of has voluntarily and personally engaged to perform; but all persons shall be at liberty to exercise their own mode of worship: -- Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to exempt preachers of treasonable or seditious discourses, from legal trial and punishment."


North Carolina Constitution
1776


All religious references and requirements were eliminated in the constitution of 1875.


North Carolina Constitution
1875
11. South Carolina

Official Religion: Anglican/Church of England
Original Charter Date: Mar. 24, 1663
Full text of the Charter of Carolina (PDF) 23.6K
Ended Support: 1868

"Article XXXVIII. That all persons and religious societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, and that God is publicly to be worshipped, shall be freely tolerated. The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State. That all denominations of Christian Protestants in this State, demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal religious and civil privileges. To accomplish this desirable purpose without injury to the religious property of those societies of Christians which are by law already incorporated for the purpose of religious worship, and to put it fully into the power of every other society of Christian Protestants, either already formed or hereafter to be formed, to obtain the like incorporation, it is hereby constituted, appointed, and declared that the respective societies of the Church of England that are already formed in this State for the purpose of religious worship shall still continue Incorporate and hold the religious property now in their possession. And that whenever fifteen or more male persons, not under twenty-one years of age, professing the Christian Protestant religion, and agreeing to unite themselves in a society for the purposes of religious worship, they shall, (on complying with the terms hereinafter mentioned,) be, and be constituted, a church, and be esteemed and regarded in law as of the established religion of the state, and on a petition to the legislature shall be entitled to be incorporated and to enjoy equal privileges. That every society of Christians so formed shall give themselves a name or denomination by which they shall be called and known in law, and all that associate with them for the purposes of worship shall be esteemed as belonging to the society so called. But that previous to the establishment and incorporation of the respective societies of every denomination as aforesaid, and in order to entitle them thereto, each society so petitioning shall have agreed to and subscribed in a book the following five articles, without which no agreement or union of men upon pretense of religion shall entitle them to be incorporated and esteemed as a church of the established religion of this State:

Ist. That there is one eternal God, and a future state of rewards and punishments.

2d. That God is publicly to be worshipped.

3d. That the Christian religion is the true religion.

4th. That the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are of divine inspiration, and are the rule of faith and practice.

5th That it is lawful and the duty of every man being thereunto called by those that govern, to bear witness to the truth."


South Carolina Constitution
1778


"Article VIII, Section 1. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever hereafter be allowed within this State to all mankind, PROVIDED, That the liberty of conscience thereby declared shall not be construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of this State."


South Carolina Constitution
1790


14th Amendment to US Constitution was ratified by South Carolina in July 1868. The US Supreme Court ruled that this amendment ended state support of religion in all US states in ruling of Gitlow v. New York, 1925


12. Pennsylvania

Official Religion: None
Original Charter Date: Feb. 28, 1681
Full text of the Charter for the Province of Pennsylvania (PDF) 20.5K
Ended Support: 1790

"Section. 2. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their Own consciences and understanding: And that no man ought or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry, contrary to, or against, his own free will and consent: nor can any man, who acknowledges the being of a God, be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account or his religious sentiments or peculiar mode of religious worship: And that no authority can or ought to be vested in, or assumed by any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or In any manner controul, the right of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship.

Section 10... shall each [representative] before they proceed to business take... the following oath or affirmation:


'I do believe in one God, the creator and governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration.'

And no further or other religious test shall ever hereafter be required of any civil officer or magistrate in this state."


Pennsylvania Constitution
1776


"That no person, who acknowledges the being of God and a future state of rewards and punishments, shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this commonwealth."


Pennsylvania Constitution, Article IX, Section 4
1790
13. New Jersey

Official Religion: None
Original Charter Date: Mar. 12, 1702
Full text of the Surrender from the Proprietors of East and West New Jersey, of Their Pretended Right of Government to Her Majesty (PDF) 14.7K
Ended Support: 1844

"XVIII. That no person shall ever, within this Colony, be deprived of the inestimable privilege of worshipping Almighty God in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; nor, under any pretense whatever, be compelled to attend any place of worship, contrary to his own faith and judgment; nor shall any person, within this Colony, ever be obliged to pay tithes, taxes, or any other rates, for the purpose of building or repairing any other church or churches, place or places of worship, or for the maintenance of any minister or ministry, contrary to what he believes to be right, or has deliberately or voluntarily engaged himself to perform.

XIX. That there shall be no establishment of any one religious sect in this Province, in preference to another; and that no Protestant inhabitant of this Colony shall be denied the enjoyment of any civil right, merely on account of his religious principles; but that all persons, professing a belief in the faith of any Protestant sect, who shall demean themselves peaceably under the government, as hereby established, shall be capable of being elected into any office of profit or trust, or being a member of either branch of the Legislature, and shall fully and freely enjoy every privilege and immunity, enjoyed by others their fellow subjects."


New Jersey Constitution
1776


"There shall be no establishment of one religious sect in preference to another; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust; and no person shall be denied the enjoyment of any civil right merely on account of his religious principles."


New Jersey Constitution, Rights and Privileges, Article I, Section 4
1844

Saturday, October 16, 2010

New Book Confirms Obama Socialist Connections

Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

He is also the author of "Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism".


In his new book, (which references the New Zeal blog) Mr Kurtz confirms President Barack Obama's long time links to the US's largest marxist organization, Democratic Socialists of America.

In a new article in National Review Online , Mr Kurtz confirms something I first speculated on here, that Barack Obama had attended D.S.A.'s annual Socialist Scholar's Conferences in New York, in the early 1980s.
On the afternoon of April 1, 1983, Barack Obama, then a senior at Columbia University, made his way into the Great Hall of Manhattan’s Cooper Union to attend a “Socialist Scholars Conference.” There Obama discovered his vocation as a community organizer, as well as a political program to guide him throughout his life.

The conference itself was not a secret, but it held a secret, for it was there that a demoralized and frustrated socialist movement largely set aside strategies of nationalization and turned increasingly to local organizing as a way around the Reagan presidency — and its own spotty reputation. In the early 1980s, America’s socialists discovered what Saul Alinsky had always known: “Community organizing” is a euphemism behind which advocates of a radical vision of America could advance their cause without the bothersome label “socialist” drawing adverse attention to their efforts.

A loose accusation of his being a socialist has trailed Obama for years, but without real evidence that he saw himself as part of this radical tradition. But the evidence exists, if not in plain sight then in the archives — for example, the archived files of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which include Obama’s name on a conference registration list. That, along with some misleading admissions in the president’s memoir, Dreams from My Father, makes it clear that Obama attended the 1983 and 1984 Socialist Scholars conferences, and quite possibly the 1985 conclave as well. A detailed account of these conferences (along with many other events from Obama’s radical past) and the evidence for Obama’s attendance at them can be found in my new book, Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism.

The 1983 Cooper Union Conference, billed as a tribute to Marx, was precisely when Obama discovered his vocation for community organizing. Obama’s account of his turn to community organizing doesn’t add up. He portrays it as a mere impulse based on little actual knowledge. But that impulse saw Obama through two years of failed job searches. Clearly he had a deeper motivation. The evidence suggests he found it at the Socialist Scholars conferences, where he encountered the entrancing double idea that America could be transformed by a kind of undercover socialism, and that African Americans would be the key figures in advancing community organizing.
Kurtz also confirms another New Zeal thesis, that the cross class, multi-racial movement that put Obama in the White house, was modeled on the the communist/socialist backed alliance that made far-left Harold Washington mayor of Chicago in 1983.


The 1983 conference took place in the shadow of Harold Washington’s first race for mayor of Chicago. Washington was not only Obama’s political idol, he was the darling of America’s socialists in the mid-1980s. Washington assembled a “rainbow” coalition of blacks, Hispanics, and left-leaning whites to overturn the power of Chicago’s centrist Democratic machine. Washington worked eagerly and openly with Chicago’s small but influential contingent of socialists, many of whom brought the community organizations and labor unions they led onto the Washington bandwagon.

America’s socialists saw the Harold Washington campaign as a model for their ultimate goal of pushing the Democrats to the left by polarizing the country along class lines. This socialist “realignment” strategy envisioned driving business interests out of a newly radicalized Democratic party. The loss was to be more than made up for through a newly energized coalition of poor and minority voters, led by minority politicians on the model of Harold Washington. The new coalitions would draw on the open or quiet direction of socialist community organizers, from whose ranks new Harold Washingtons would emerge. Groups like ACORN and Project Vote would swell the Democrats with poor and minority voters and, with the country divided by class, socialism would emerge as the natural ideology of the have-nots.
Mr Kurtz also specifically names two leading D.S.A. members Frances Fox Piven and Peter Dreier as driving the strategy that eventually brought Obama to power.

Interestingly Frances Fox Piven was also a leader of the radical New Party, which Obama joined in Chicago in the mid 1990s and was later an endorser of Progressives for Obama in 2008.
Figures pushing this broader strategy at the 1983 Socialist Scholars Conference included ACORN adviser Frances Fox Piven and organizing theorist Peter Dreier, now a professor at Occidental College and an adviser to Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. That is to say, Obama’s connection to socialist ideologues didn’t end with his recruitment into the ranks of community organizers. It began there and blossomed into a quarter century of intricate relationships with both on-the-record and in-all-but-name socialists.
Kurtz also brings in Obama's former pastor, the marxist and D.S.A. connected Rev. Jeremiah Wright and the father of Black liberation theology, the also D.S.A. allied James "white man is the Devil" Cone.


I’ve spent the last two years in the archives unraveling the connections. Here are a few. By the mid-1980s, James Cone, Jeremiah Wright’s theological mentor, had struck up a close cooperative relationship with the DSA. Cone and a prominent follower spoke at the conferences Obama attended. Shortly after the 1984 conference, Cone joined Reverend Wright in Cuba, where they expressed support for the Cuban social system as a model for the United States. Wright touted his Cuba trips to his congregation for years. Obama would have quickly discovered Wright’s ties to the liberation theologians he’d first learned of at the Socialist Scholars conferences. The connection helps explain Obama’s choice of Wright as his pastor.
Mr Kurtz also devotes a lot of space to Obama and the D.S.A. controlled Midwest Academy, D.S.A. "friend" Heather Booth and Obama's pro-Soviet political patron, Alice Palmer.
A little-known Chicago training institute for community organizers, the Midwest Academy, is in many ways the key to Barack Obama’s political rise. The Midwest Academy was closely allied to the DSA, which sponsored the Socialist Scholars conferences in New York. Most Midwest Academy leaders remained quiet about their socialism. Inspired by the success of the American Communist “Popular Front,” and by 19th-century American reformers who used populist and communitarian language to achieve socialist ends through incremental legislative means, the Midwest Academy’s leaders advocated a strategy of stealth.

Officials from the Midwest Academy network trained Obama, supplied him with funds, and got him appointed head of Illinois Project Vote. Years later, Obama sent foundation money to the Midwest Academy. Barack and Michelle Obama ran a project called “Public Allies” that was effectively an extension of the Midwest Academy. Alice Palmer, the Illinois state senator who chose Obama as her successor, was once a high official in the Midwest Academy network. Several Midwest Academy leaders advised Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Academy founder Heather Booth is now a key figure in coordinating grassroots support for the president’s budget, health-care, and financial-reform plans.
Stanley Kurtz sums up the article with an explanation of why Obama's hidden socialist ties are so important.
As I detail at length in Radical-in-Chief, deceptions and glaring omissions about his radical past reach far beyond Obama’s involvement with the Socialist Scholars conferences and the Midwest Academy. Archival documents reveal that Obama lied during the 2008 campaign about his ties to ACORN. New evidence confirms that Obama has hidden the truth about his relationships to Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers. The unknown story of Obama’s deep involvement with a radical group called UNO of Chicago is revealed. The claims of candidate Obama and his mentors that he shunned Saul Alinsky’s confrontational tactics turn out to be a sugary fairy tale. The obfuscating techniques of Obama’s memoir, Dreams from My Father, are exposed.

The pattern of misdirection upon which President Obama’s political career has been built has its roots in the socialist background of community organizing. ACORN, Reverend Wright, and Bill Ayers were all routes into that hidden socialist world, and that is why Obama has had to obscure the truth about these and other elements of his past. More important, the president’s socialist past is still very much alive in the governing philosophy and long-term political strategy of the Obama administration.

As we move into the first national election of the Obama presidency, Americans are confronted with a fateful choice. Either we will continue to be subject to President Obama’s radical and only very partially revealed plans for our future, or we will place a strong check on the president’s ambitions. Knowing the truth about Obama’s past is the best way to safeguard our future.

Stanley Kurtz's book will be a must read for every serious student of the Obama phenomenon. Buy your copy today.

BUSTED! Conyers Meets With Marxists - How Democrat Politics REALLY Works

This may be one of the most important articles New Zeal has ever posted. Please read it. Digest it. Act on it.

This post proves a point I have long made: that Democratic Congressmen are willing to collude with marxists in order to promote socialist legislation and to influence the political direction of the United States.

This is how the modern Democratic Party actually works - in partnership (often junior partnership, at that) with hard core marxists.

Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D MI), chair of the powerful House Judiciary Committee has been caught on tape, meeting with members of the U.S.'s largest marxist organization Democratic Socialists of America.

The tape clearly shows Conyers treating the marxists as friends. He continually refers to the gathering as "we", as he urges the comrades to rally behind his "beloved 44th president", Barack Obama.

The tape, posted on the D.S.A. Vimeo site, was filmed before the recent One Nation Rally in Washington DC, and shows Conyers speaking to a meeting of D.S.A. members in what appears to be an hotel room.

The website clearly states that this is a D.S.A. meeting and Conyers is introduced to the gathering by D.S.A. National director Frank Llewellyn. Prominent Boston D.S.A. member David Duhalde appears on the right, behind Llewellyn, wearing a beard, black T shirt and a cap.




In the first few seconds, Conyers is introduced by Frank Llewellyn as the "only congressman endorsed by Martin Luther King".

Llewellyn then notes Conyers' "long support for HR 676, the single payer Bill that this organization [D.S.A.] has long supported".

Quentin Young, Barack Obama

D.S.A. has indeed "long supported HR 676", which sprang from the "single payer" health care movement midwived by Chicago physician and D.S.A. member Quentin Young - a close personal friend of both John Conyers and President Barack Obama.

At about 34 seconds Llewellyn states, "many might not know that John is in the process of introducing sweeping legislation to address the jobs crisis - which is certainly one of the most important crises we face and one of the reasons why we're all here today."

At 60 seconds Conyers starts talking, addressing Frank Llewellyn by name and then says,
"Its good to know that a lot of my Michigan and Detroit and Grosse Point people are here. David Green, and Dave and Herman and probably others."
David Green is a leader of both Michigan and national D.S.A. Green visited Cuba in 2009 and proved his marxism with this statement in the Spring 2007 issue of D.S.A.'s Democratic Left.
"What distinguishes socialists from other progressives is the theory of surplus value. According to Marx, the secret of surplus value is that workers are a source of more value than they receive in wages. The capitalist is able to capture surplus value through his ownership of the means of production, his right to purchase labor as a commodity, his control over the production process, and his ownership of the final product. Surplus value is the measure of capital’s exploitation of labor

Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production. Our immediate task is to limit the capitalist class’s prerogatives in the workplace...

In the short run we must at least minimize the degree of exploitation of workers by capitalists. We can accomplish this by promoting full employment policies, passing local living wage laws, but most of all by increasing the union movement’s power...

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) provides an excellent organizing tool (i.e., tactic) through which we can pursue our socialist strategy while simultaneously engaging the broader electorate on an issue of economic populism.
This is one of John Conyers' "people". Coincidentally Conyers is also a big fan of the EFCA.

After a "new agey" rave about the "oneness" of everything (cut out of this video), Conyers thanks the gathering for coming to the march and at 1:30 minutes goes on to say:
"This is an important event, that we don't doubt will be played down and misinterpreted by the corporate media...We understand the significance of it. We know that when unions, political ideology, clergy, labor, civil rights come together... and just people that are progressive enough to see in this one World concept, that we're all in this together, it makes certain things easy to understand where we're coming from."
At 2:25 minutes, Conyers talks about "peace" and Dennis Kucinich.
"Overriding it all is the quest for peace in the world...and I am firmly supporting Congressman Dennis Kucinich's measure that would make a Department of Peace in the United States Federal government." (applause)
John Conyers was once an affiliate of the Soviet front World Peace Council. Like Kucinich, Conyers also has a long history with the Communist Party USA, which has consistently advocated such measures.


At 4:20 minutes, Conyers moves on to the "question of my beloved 44th president of the United States."

Conyers criticizes America's war in Afghanistan and how "we" need to "make it clear to him, through all the usual means of communication, including pickets and protests....there probably isn't anybody above the 10th grade who doesnt know that you cannot win a war in Afghanistan." (laughter).

At 7:35 minutes Conyers says of Obama;
"I respect him, I support him... I say that all against the backdrop, of the fact that in 2012, there is a highly organized effort to make sure that he is a one term president.

This started even before he was sworn in. It's grown... I only mention the Tea Party, because it is small and dismissible, but there are much more serious and affluent sources behind this effort to interfere with a re-election campaign of Obama... I've got to ensure he is re-elected 2 years from now. That calls for some balancing, but not a whole lot from where I stand."
At 6.10 minutes Conyers goes on to deal with how those assembled need to help Obama.
"I see that us making him more cooperative with our plans is going to strengthen him and not weaken him... (applause) And to have this press secretary of his denouncing the left is an automatically dismissible act, if I were president...

The whole point is that, trashing progressives and the left, and at the same time watching your ratings go down - gee... what's so difficult about figuring that out?... Whose job do you think it is to get him straightened out and get him on the right track? Ours! Ours!"
(applause)
D.S.A. has tried to publicly distance itself from Obama in recent times, though they have a twenty seven year history with the President. Even Conyers has publicly criticized the President.

Clearly, John Conyers understands he is among friends, who are just as pro-Obama as he is. In private, Conyers and D.S.A. are right behind their man.

Like Obama, John Conyers has a long history with D.S.A.
  • In 2003 John Conyers was a keynote speaker at the D.S.A. national conference in Detroit - with 2008 Obama Black Advisory Council member Cornel West and the first journalist to promote obama on the national stage, the Washington Post's Harold Meyerson.
  • In 2005 D.S.A'.s Democratic Left -Spring edition, called "Congressman John Conyers (a key D.S.A. ally in Congress)..."
--------------------------------------------
The real secret of contemporary U.S. Politics is this:

Under today's Democratic Party, much of the legislation they push for is not made by Democrats. It is actually formulated by organizations close to D.S.A. and the Communist Party. It is then infiltrated into Congress by socialist sympathizers like John Conyers and his comrades, in the more than eighty strong, D.S.A. co-founded Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Socialized health care, the grossly mis-named Employee Free Choice Act, the current push to "normalize" relations with Cuba, even the campaign for a national holiday in honor of D.S.A. and the Communist Party's best friend Cesar Chavez, are all communist/socialist initiatives.

If this sounds far fetched, remember that in most U.S. states the Democratic Party is almost totally dependent on labor unions for manpower and money.

Since D.S.A. member John Sweeney became president of the AFL-CIO in 1995, the once anti-communist U.S. labor movement has come under near complete marxist control.


Barack Obama, John Sweeney

He who pays the piper, calls the tune.

The Democrats simply put a "respectable" face on policies originated by tiny, but hugely influential marxist sects.

Think of it this way. Just as the Mafia once used "respectable" front-men to control Las Vegas casinos, the marxists use "respectable" Democrats, kept in line with labor union "muscle" to control your Houses of Congress.

That's how it works America.

If you don't start throwing the Democrats out of office come November, your children may inherit a country permanently ruled by these people.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Professor Emiritus Hal Lewis Resigns from American Physical Society

The following is a letter to the American Physical Society released to the public by Professor Emiritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis

From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society

6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’ĂȘtre of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:

1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.

APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.

Hal

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)

Saturday, October 9, 2010

McDonald's, 29 Other Firms Get Health Care Coverage Waivers

Nearly a million workers won't get a consumer protection in the U.S. health reform law meant to cap insurance costs because the government exempted their employers.

Thirty companies and organizations, including McDonald's (MCD) and Jack in the Box (JACK), won't be required to raise the minimum annual benefit included in low-cost health plans, which are often used to cover part-time or low-wage employees.

The Department of Health and Human Services, which provided a list of exemptions, said it granted waivers in late September so workers with such plans wouldn't lose coverage from employers who might choose instead to drop health insurance altogether.

Without waivers, companies would have had to provide a minimum of $750,000 in coverage next year, increasing to $1.25 million in 2012, $2 million in 2013 and unlimited in 2014.

"The big political issue here is the president promised no one would lose the coverage they've got," says Robert Laszewski, chief executive officer of consulting company Health Policy and Strategy Associates. "Here we are a month before the election, and these companies represent 1 million people who would lose the coverage they've got."

The United Agricultural Benefit Trust, the California-based cooperative that offers coverage to farm workers, was allowed to exempt 17,347 people. San Diego-based Jack in the Box's waiver is for 1,130 workers, while McDonald's asked to excuse 115,000.

The plans will be exempt from rules intended to keep people from having to pay for all their care once they reach a preset coverage cap. McDonald's, which offers the programs as a way to cover part-time employees, told the Obama administration it might re-evaluate the plans unless it got a waiver.

McDonald's and Jack in the Box didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.

The waiver program is intended to provide continuous coverage until 2014, when government-organized marketplaces will offer insurance subsidized by tax credits, says HHS spokeswoman Jessica Santillo.

The regulations would have hit some insurance plans for young adults in the universal coverage program run by the state of Massachusetts. The program, enacted in 2006, has a plan for individuals ages 18 to 26 who can't get coverage through work, covering about 5,000 people. The waiver obtained by the state "will give us time to implement the transition plan in a manner designed to mitigate premium increases," says Dick Powers, a spokesman for the state program.

The biggest single waiver, for 351,000 people, was for the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, a New York union providing coverage for city teachers. The waivers are effective for a year and were granted to insurance plans and companies that showed that employee premiums would rise or that workers would lose coverage without them, Santillo says.

© 2010 Bloomberg L.P. All Rights Reserved


In Related News

McDonald's Gets Taste of Obama Sausage-Making: Caroline Baum

Bloomberg Opinion

Baum

Caroline Baum

“We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 9, 2010.

She wasn’t kidding. The public got to peek under the hood last week when the Wall Street Journal reported that McDonald’s Corp. wanted out: out of a requirement in the new health-care law that compels employers to spend 80 to 85 percent of premiums on medical benefits.

Who knew?

For McDonald’s mini-med health-care plan, a low-cost, limited plan covering about 30,000 hourly fast-food workers, the minimum medical loss ratio was economically unfeasible. The company asked for a waiver, according to memos provided to the Journal.

It turns out lots of other companies are seeking waivers for limited benefit plans -- along with some states, like Maine, with a small number of insurers, according to Joseph Antos, a health-care scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

Another group is lining up to apply for exclusions from the minimum annual cap on benefits that is part of the law. No wonder the Department of Health and Human Services had to put out a memo on waiver guidance. The subject line alone is intimidating:

“OCIIO Sub-Regulatory Guidance (OCIIO 2010-1): Process for Obtaining Waivers of the Annual Limit Requirements of PHS Act Section 2711”

Shell Game

The explanation of the purpose, background and process for filing a waiver isn’t much better. The gist of it is this:

-- the Secretary of HHS is authorized to determine the minimum coverage limits;

-- the Secretary of HHS is authorized to waive those limits if compliance with them “would result in a significant decrease in access to benefits or a significant increase in premiums,” according to the memo.

The state insurance commissioners can give the secretary advice, Antos says, but she doesn’t have to take it.

That pretty much describes the operating premise for the legislation that changes health care as we know it.

“The law they passed is a shell of a law,” says Michael Cannon, director of health-policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington. “Most of the rules have yet to be written.”

Who knew?

“If you like your health-care plan, you can keep your health-care plan.” -- President Barack Obama, Aug. 11, 2009, Aug. 12, 2009, Aug. 13, 2009, etc., etc., etc.

That pledge “should have come with a disclaimer: Offer not valid for low-income workers,” Cannon writes in a recent blog post.

The offer is also subject to the discretion of the HHS secretary.

Discretion may be the better part of valor, but it’s not something businesses can rely on for planning purposes. Corporations are already hunkered down because of (take your pick) weak demand, hurt feelings as a result of presidential persecution, or uncertainty over future health-care costs and tax rates. It won’t help business confidence to learn the HHS secretary can make and break rules on a case-by-case basis.

“The secretary can decide what you have to purchase, but if you are in a presidential swing state, the secretary has the authority to undo everything she just did,” Cannon says.

Cabinet secretaries are political appointees. Policy has become increasingly politicized. The role of the executive branch is not to make or interpret laws.

“I will not sign health-insurance reform that adds even one dime to our deficit over the next decade.” -- President Obama

Who knew that adding 30 million people to the health-care rolls would bend the cost curve -- in the wrong direction?

Anyone with a basic knowledge of economics. The law of supply and demand teaches us that when consumers want to buy more (health care, for example) at any given price than they did before, the demand curve shifts out, to the right, representing a higher equilibrium price and higher quantity demanded.

At the same time, providers are responding to the government’s increased intrusion by running the other way, refusing to accept new Medicare patients as the government cuts reimbursements.

Everywhere you turn there’s a story about insurance premiums rising and employers shifting more of the cost onto employees. A new study by human-resources consultants Hewitt Associates LLC projects an average premium increase of 8.8 percent in 2011, the biggest in five years.

Government of Laws

Costs associated with ObamaCare are just one of the reasons, according to Hewitt. (The others are rising medical claims costs and an aging population.) And it shouldn’t come as a surprise that, confronted with a big unknown, companies hope for the best outcome and price for the worst.

“...to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.”

-- John Adams, Samuel Adams and James Bowdoin, Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1780

The McDonald’s kerfuffle shined a light on the health-care legislation. With many of the rules to be written and many of the provisions to be phased in between now and 2014, the public got to see how the sausage was made and who gets to make it.

And once again, the Obama administration found itself on the defensive, with HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius claiming the Journal story about McDonald’s dropping its mini-med coverage was “flat out wrong.”

“We can’t waive a regulation that doesn’t even exist,” Sebelius said.

Who knew? Well, pretty much anybody who was paying attention.

(Caroline Baum, author of “Just What I Said,” is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Caroline Baum in New York at cabaum@bloomberg.net.