Religion and Policy Practice in Virginia: A Qualitative Exploration of Faith-Based Advocacy Organizations

With the advent of President George W. Bush's Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (FBCI) in 2001 and the Charitable Choice provision of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) that preceded it in 1996, matters of faith and religion have become paramount in political discourse regarding social welfare and social policy. The viability of religiously-affiliated social service provision has been the focus of speculation, debate, and a growing amount of research as diverse stakeholders in the political system seek to promote its potential, question its wisdom, and/or understand its implications. While scholars have responded to the call to move the area of religiously-affiliated social services beyond anecdotal evidence to theoretical considerations and empirical grounding (Johnson, Tompkins & Webb, 2002), few studies have explored the role of faith-based advocacy or lobbying organizations in proposing or opposing policy changes in the social welfare system, or in defining social welfare. Little is known about faith-based lobbying or advocacy groups whose attempts at influence frequently involve the welfare of vulnerable and marginalized groups (Hertzke, 1988; Hofrenning, 1995; Yamane, 1998) and are affected by theological positions and religiously informed values. In response to this gap in empirical literature, the purpose of this study was to explore the activities and context of faith-based organizations that engage in lobbying, or legislative advocacy, in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Within an interpretive paradigmatic and theoretical framework that allowed for the exploration of meaning associated with advocacy activities, the inquiry asked the following questions, How do faith-based organizations engage in legislative advocacy in the Commonwealth of Virginia? What meaning do the organizations assign to their advocacy activities? Purposive sampling was employed using Virginia's annual list of registered lobbyists as the initial sampling frame and then nominational techniques with research participants to identify other religious groups and legislators who frequently interact with the religious groups. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 33 individuals, 27 of whom represented 9 different faith-based advocacy organizations, 6 of whom were state legislators. Interviews were triangulated by passive participant observation and document analysis. Data was analyzed by constant comparison in Atlas.ti.

Five primary categories emerged in the analysis process: Mandate, Decision-Making, Representing, Defining Success, and Activities. The inquiry suggests that while the focal organizations' advocacy activities appear similar to other interest groups, their religious mandates for action distinguish them from their secular counterparts. Interpretations of these mandates significantly influence the organizations' decision-making, their representation of multiple constituencies, and their definitions of success. Unlike previous studies that suggest these organizations distance themselves from insider politics, the religious advocates in the study suggest that fidelity to their mandate means actively participating in the political process while retaining their unique voice as representatives of God and religious traditions.

These findings suggest that faith-based advocacy organizations from a variety of religious and political perspectives may be allies in social work efforts to create systems level policy change. The study cautions, however, against simplistic conceptualizations of these organizations suggesting a number of potential tensions with social work ethics and values.