Since 2016, the Lepanto Institute has written about the Quid Pro Quo lobbying efforts of both the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and Catholic Relief Services (CRS) on behalf of federal aid and development agencies.
In May of 2016, we provided details regarding a joint-letter the USCCB and CRS sent to Congress requesting nearly $6 billion to be allocated for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). At the heart of our concern was the fact that USAID and PEPFAR together consist of the world’s largest suppliers of contraception and condoms. The next month, we published the correspondence between a tenacious Catholic and a representative of the USCCB, who reluctantly admitted that the funding request made by the USCCB and CRS would include coverage of contraception and condoms.
In 2018, we called out both the USCCB and CRS for requesting “robust funding” for PEPFAR and the Global Fund, an agency which has provided grants for the spread of contraception and even made grants directly to Planned Parenthood.
In 2019, we reported on the testimony of CRS’ Executive VP William O’Keefe to Congress urging for billions of dollars to flow into PEPFAR, USAID and the Global Fund. This report also detailed USAID’s sordid history as an intended population control group.
Since that time, the USCCB and CRS have continued the call for funding of these contraceptive agencies unabated, including the most recent iteration from April 25th of 2024.
In a letter addressed to both houses of Congress, Bishop Elias Zaidan, chairman of the USCCB Committee on International Justice and Peace, Bishop Mark Seitz, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Migration, and Sean Callahan, president and CEO of CRS speak on behalf of the entire USCCB in calling for billions of dollars in funding to US Government international poverty-reducing humanitarian and development assistance programs, including PEPFAR, USAID and the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS. Specifically, the letter calls for $4.725 billion for PEPFAR and USAID and $2 billion for the Global Fund, which is almost a billion more for the Global Fund than requested by the Biden administration.
In an attempt to address the obvious elephant in the room that these programs are heavily steeped in condoms and contraception, the letter contains two different “caveats.”
The first, in the main body of the letter states:
And while we will always support the life-saving work advanced by Congress, we do have grave concerns about providing taxpayer funding for activities inconsistent with right reason and basic human rights that Catholic teaching provides. We therefore strongly urge Congress to maintain the longstanding, bipartisan, and life-saving Helms Amendment and all related pro-life riders in the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations bill. The USCCB will oppose any bill that expands taxpayer funding of abortion, including any appropriations bill. Furthermore, consistent with our longstanding support for the Mexico City policy, we strongly urge you to apply the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy to the bill.
The second, in the “Summary of Message to Congress and Account Descriptions” section states:
Although we have principled concerns about those PEPFAR prevention activities we find inconsistent with Catholic teaching and do not implement or advocate for these activities, we support PEPFAR’s overall lifesaving mission and urge robust funding for the Global Fund.
These caveats are incredibly weak. In the first statement, the USCCB states that it will oppose any bill that “expands” taxpayer funding of abortion while “urging” Congress to apply the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy to the bill. However, since the Biden administration rescinded the Mexico City Policy in 2021, abortion promotion is already expanded in these appropriations. Further, the USCCB is calling for the funding of these accounts REGARDLESS of whether the Protecting Life policy is applied. If anything, the USCCB’s support should be CONDITIONAL on that policy being applied!
As to the second statement, the USCCB’s back patting about not advocating or implementing PEPFAR activities that are inconsistent with Catholic teaching falls incredibly short given CRS’ proven involvement with leading PEPFAR’s DREAMS program in a number of African countries. One of the primary purposes of DREAMS, and a required aspect for all implementing partners, is to ensure condoms and contraception are being promoted and provided.
Furthermore, to state that the USCCB is supporting PEPFAR’s “overall lifesaving mission” is precisely the proportionalist approach to moral theology condemned by Pope John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor:
“One must therefore reject the thesis, characteristic of teleological and proportionalist theories, which holds that it is impossible to qualify as morally evil according to its species — its “object” — the deliberate choice of certain kinds of behaviour or specific acts, apart from a consideration of the intention for which the choice is made or the totality of the foreseeable consequences of that act for all persons concerned.”
Unmentioned in CRS’ and USCCB’s caveats is their calling on funding for USAID, which is even worse than PEPFAR. For example, USAID is directly funding IPPF: https://www.ippf.org/news/ippf-part-team-funded-usaid-implement-global-health-equity-project. As stated on its website, USAID prides itself on being the worlds “largest donor of family planning assistance:”
We are the world’s largest bilateral donor of family planning assistance; the Agency’s bilateral family planning and reproductive health program budget for FY 2022 is $607.5 million. When USAID launched its family planning program in 1965, fewer than 10 percent of women in the developing world (excluding China) were using a modern contraceptive method, and the average family size was over six. Today, in the 41 countries where USAID focuses its support, modern contraceptive prevalence has increased to 34 percent, and the average family size has dropped to 3.9.
There really is no excuse for CRS and the USCCB to actively lobby Congress for funding for contraception and condom promoters and distributors. There is even less of an excuse for them to be lobbying on behalf of an agency that was created for the specific purpose of enacting population control programs and policies in impoverished nations. And yet, this is precisely what they are doing. The question is, why?
It all comes down to the almighty dollar. quid pro quo. quid pro quo.
A ‘Quid Pro Quo’ is defined as, “a favor or advantage granted or expected in return for something.” Much of CRS’ activities are funded through USAID, PEPFAR or the Global Fund. By lobbying Congress to provide “robust funding” to these agencies, CRS is expanding on its own opportunities for funding.
The official internet resource for US government spending data is USAspending.gov. The stated mission of the website is “to show the American public what the federal government spends every year and how it spends the money.” When looking up funding to Catholic Relief Services, total amounts allocated to CRS from 2005 through 2024 from USAID total $4.51 billion. For the years 2022 and 2023 alone, CRS has received $862.8 million from USAID.
The website responsible for tracking funded projects of PEPFAR is copsdata.amfar.org. According to the website, “the database highlights planned funding by program area, country, and organization for each year that has been publicly released.” PEPFAR website which tracks all of its grants to various organizations indicates that PEPFAR has allocated over $1,007,618,212 to Catholic Relief Services since the year 2005. This does not include the money CRS has received through PEPFAR as a result of being a sub-partner on other PEPFAR projects where CRS was not the principal recipient of the grant.
It’s difficult to know exactly how much CRS has received from the Global Fund over the years because the Global Fund website isn’t as comprehensive as PEPFAR’s. That said, we have been able to confirm that CRS has received at least $384.95 million from the Global Fund for 12 different grants. The amounts are as follows:
- From 2012-2015, CRS received $13,810,139 for a project in Indonesia.
- From 2003-2008, CRS received $1,439,778 for a project in Madagascar.
- From 2016-2017, CRS received $6,034,778 for a project in Mali.
- From 2013-2015, CRS received $6,795,038 for another project in Mali.
- From 2010-2018, CRS received $11,098,900 for a project in Gambia.
- From 2012-2018, CRS received $85,454,539 for a project in Guinea.
- From 2011-2017, CRS received $13,064,548 for a project in Sierra Leone.
- From 2008-2017, CRS received $21,749,047 for a project in Benin.
- From 2016-2017, CRS received $32,128,902 for a project in Niger.
- From 2008-2016, CRS received $72,658,405 for another project in Niger.
- From 2020-2022, CRS received $17.88 million for a project in Madagascar.
- From 2020-2026, CRS received $102.85 million for a project in Congo.
If anything is ever going to change at Catholic Relief Services, this kind of quid pro quo between them and government granting agencies has got to come to an end. CRS and the USCCB have got to stop lobbying Congress to expand federal funding to agencies that are truly Enemies of the Cross of Christ, and they have to stop receiving money from them as well.
How do the bishops profit from this quid pro quo of CRS? Thank you for bringing this to light.
Thank you for compiling this. All Bishops,Pastors and priests need to read this.
Very simply, all Catholic organizations ought to cease all contractual financial arrangements with government – Federal and State. You cannot go into the pig sty and expect to emerge smelling anything but like a pig.
Amen
What is it you want to achieve with this comparison?
Much as I think you investigate well, you seem to chose what path to take and your conclusions seen to have been ore formed and in need of some argument, even in feeble
The primitive Christians lived in the ideal communism way. Does it make them communist? Of course not.
The Catholic Church and the Vatican as it’s main speaker, more so with Pope Francis, talk incessantly about the responsibility we have to eradicate poverty and make society more equal. Does that make our Church communist? Well, not in the Communist way.