Possible constitutional violation via faith based earmarks

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Federal Grant for a Medical Mission Goes Awry

In theory, it was simple: Congress gave two decommissioned Coast Guard cutters to a faith-based group in California, directing that the ships be used only to provide medical services to islands in the South Pacific.

Coast Guard records show that the ships have been providing those services in the South Pacific since the medical mission took possession of them in 1999.

In reality, the ships never got any closer to the South Pacific islands than the San Francisco Bay. The mission group quickly sold one to a maritime equipment company, which sold it for substantially more to a pig farmer who uses it as a commercial ferry off Nicaragua. The group sold the other ship to a Bay Area couple who rent it for eco-tours and marine research.

The gift of the two cutters was one of almost 900 grants Congress has made to faith-based organizations since 1987 through the use of provisions, called earmarks, that are tucked into bills to bypass normal government review and bidding procedures.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/13/business/13cutter.html?em&ex=1181880000&en=c2ce4ac92ddd87c8&ei=5087%0A

If your read the article you find out that it's unclear if they had a right to sell the cutters and even if they had the right there's no audit trail proving where the money went after they were sold. If they had a right to sell them the money would have to go toward their medical mission and not evangelism. However, other than Mr. Spence's word that that's where the $415,000 dollars went there's no proof.

If they did spend any of the money on evangelism it becomes a constitutional violation.

For those here like myself who were never fans of these faith based earmarks, I think you'll find the article an interesting read.

[Jokerman]

1. K & R

So the government gives them equipment to provide medical aid which they turn around and sell for a profit?

How in the hell can that be legal for ANY organization to do?

[Lone_Star_Dem]

2. The real issue is what did they do with the money

Think about this, if there's no oversight on faith based earmarks it could be an excellent way to launder money.