Many Jewish Non-profits Hail Passage of the Historic Health-Care Legislation

JTA

By Jacob Berkman

Published March 24, 2010, issue of April 02, 2010.

Several Jewish non-profit groups are lauding passage of health care reform legislation, saying it will benefit the community on a number of levels. Other groups, however, are keeping quiet in what some observers and insiders describe as an attempt to keep out of the political crossfire.

On March 21, the morning after the U.S. House of Representatives voted along party lines to pass a measure that would create sweeping change in the country’s health care and insurance system, a slew of Jewish groups issued statements supporting the bill and looking forward to President Obama signing it into law.

B’nai B’rith International has been closely watching the bill’s evolution over the past year because it operates a network of senior residences, according to Rachel Goldberg, B’nai B’rith’s director of aging policy.

“We have looked at the whole thing because we think access to health care for younger people is going to affect how they age,” Goldberg said. “All of the Jewish organizations have come at this from slightly different angles. Because of our expertise, we are looking at things like access to care for everyone. And healthy aging is not possible without access to health care.”

Likewise, the Religious Action Center, the political lobby of the Reform movement, said in a statement that the adopted bill “is not perfect. But it is necessary.”

And while the Jewish Council for Public Affairs did not put out a public statement, its executive director, Rabbi Steve Gutow, endorsed the bill in an interview with JTA on March 23.

“Knowing our community, we will take advantage of the things in there that apply for us,” said Gutow, whose organization is a public policy umbrella group bringing together the synagogue movements, several national organizations and more than 100 communities in North America.

Among those declining to comment on the passage of the bill is the Jewish Federations of North America, the North American arm of the country’s largest Jewish charitable network.

The decision to sit the fight out came despite the fact that the JFNA and its Washington office played a lead behind-the-scenes role in advocating for parts of the bill, which Congress approved 219-212 on March 21. In particular, JFNA pushed for inclusion of two parts of the bill it thinks could create “transformational” change for the Jewish community: The Early Act, which will create more funding for breast cancer research and detection, and The Class Act, which will allow workers to buy into a system — much like they buy into Medicare — that will provide up to $3,000 per month for long-term support and services for the elderly and infirm.

Jewish Federations — whose constituent federations collectively raise close to $2 billion per year and through JFNA lobby the federal government for hundreds of millions more to help care for the elderly — also played a lead role in getting a measure killed that would have helped pay for the bill by reducing the tax deductibility of charitable contributions of top wage earners.

Nevertheless, the long-term funding in the legislation could prove a windfall for the 120 Jewish nursing homes, 145 Jewish family service agencies and 15 to 20 Jewish hospitals that the federation system supports.

Asked about the decision to sit out the final stages of the legislative fight, a spokesman for Jewish Federations wrote: “We will not be issuing any statements on this issue.”

A federation insider said the organization’s “hands are being tied” by executives at local federations who worry “that GOP donors will be livid if JFNA gets publicly engaged.”

Steve Hoffman, the CEO of the Jewish Federation of Cleveland and the former CEO of the JFNA’s predecessor, the United Jewish Communities, said, “While some people may characterize it as a social justice issue and therefore would expect a Jewish perspective, others would say that it is an economic or budgetary type issue. It is a political issue as much as anything else, and therefore it falls outside the providence of federations.

“When you go to war politically, everybody wants you there without regard to the damage done to you,” Hoffman said. “It is real partisan warfare, and we have the job of holding things together.”



Would you like to receive updates about new stories?






















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.