c. 1998 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ A bill aimed at curbing religious persecution abroad passed its first legislative hurdle Wednesday (March 25) by a wide margin, belying a host of congressional concerns that remain to be ironed out if the measure is to win final approval.

Following a full day of procedural wrangling and debate over a slew of friendly and unfriendly amendments, the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act passed the House International Relations Committee 31-5 with one abstention.

The vote came after a host of specific references to nations that allegedly persecute religious believers was stripped from the bill because of concerns that relatively milder expressions of religious discrimination were being lumped together with more violent forms of religious persecution.

Only Sudan _ where there was consensus that Khartoum’s Islamic government violently persecutes its Christian minority _ was named in the bill. Passage of the bill would trigger automatic economic sanctions against Sudan.

Also Wednesday, the White House was given expanded veto power over the measure’s stipulated economic sanctions against nations other than Sudan found to be persecuting on the basis of religious belief.

But while the margin of support in the committee for the bill was large, much of it was conditioned on resolving panel members’ concerns about the legislation’s impact on trade and diplomatic issues prior to a final vote.

Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., who backed the measure, summed up the committee’s prevailing mood just prior to the vote when he noted the”admittedly imperfect bill”still faces the scrutiny of other House committees, a floor debate and reconciliation with whatever version the Senate passes _ if, in fact, it does pass a version.”This is just the first step in a long and arduous process,”Lantos said.

For supporters _ among them a broad range of religious groups _ this means the end product could be a bill far removed from the strongly worded stand against religious persecution abroad first introduced nearly a year ago by Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa.”We’ve already made some major concessions on this one,”said Rep. Christopher Smith, R-N.J., a supporter of the measure on the international relations committee.”But clearly there’s more give and take to come. Our key is that we want to get religious freedom seriously considered.” Religious persecution abroad has become a marquee issue for conservative Christian activists and their congressional allies, making it tougher for opponents to vote against the legislation without facing political heat.

Christians living as minorities in some Muslim and communist and former communist nations, say bill supporters, constitute the single largest group of religious believers facing ongoing persecution because of their faith.

But Tibetan Buddhists, Iranian Baha’is, Chinese Muslims and others also face severe persecution, add the bill’s supporters.

This broadening of the bill’s focus has prompted such groups as the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and the (Jewish) Anti-Defamation League to join the Family Research Council, the Christian Coalition and other such organizations primarily identified with conservative evangelical Protestants to support the measure.

However, the bill still faces considerable opposition, most notably from the White House.

The Clinton administration opposes it because it fears having its hands tied when choosing between national security and trade concerns and a nation’s persecution of its religious minorities.

State Department legislative affairs official Barbara Larkin said the administration still opposes the measure despite what she called the”significant improvements”made to the bill Wednesday.

White House concerns remain over what Larkin said was the bill’s”one size fits all”approach to dealing with nations found to persecute believers and its elevation of religious problems to the top of the”hierarchy of persecution”by singling it out.

Committee critics of the bill _ including some who eventually voted for the measure Wednesday _ also found fault with the bill on a variety of fronts.

Rep. Doug Bereuter, R-Neb., said he feared the bill would create a loophole in the nation’s recently tightened immigration laws.”Under the current bill, every Buddhist in a country that persecutes Buddhists could apply for asylum,”he said.

At day’s end, however, Bereuter voted for the measure after he was assured his concerns would be addressed later.

An example of the arcane issues upon which the bill’s future may depend was the debate over gum arabic _ a tree gum important in the printing process and the food and pharmaceutical industries. The problem for the committee was that Sudan is the world’s leading exporter of gum arabic, providing nearly all of the product imported by the United States.

As originally written, the bill would prohibit the United States from purchasing any gum arabic from Sudan. After that was pointed out by Rep. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., the committee approved a waiver on the purchases of gum arabic from Sudan until an alternative source for the product can be developed _ regardless of how bad Sudan’s record on religious persecution is found to be.

The gum arabic debate underscored the concerns of many committee members about the full impact of the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act, leaving its final form and passage far from resolved. Among them was Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz.

Salmon voted for the bill Wednesday, but remained wary of the measure, even though, he pointed out, he is a Mormon whose own church experienced a good deal of religious persecution in its earlier history.”This bill opens a Pandora’s box. The likelihood of unintended consequences is great,”he said.

DEA END RIFKIN