Jewish Week: "New Vision For USCJ Gets Mixed Reviews"
by Stewart Ain
Staff Writer
http://www.thejewishweek.com/viewArticle/c36_a16766/News/New_York.htmlFaced with a record loss of 33 congregations and a $1.3 million deficit, the board of the United Synagogue for
Conservative Judaism approved Sunday a sweeping reorganization plan.
"A decade ago we had 800 congregations, we had 700 congregations in the fiscal year that ended June 30, and today we have 667 congregations," Rabbi Steven Wernick, the USCJ's new executive vice president and CEO, told The Jewish Week Monday night. "The drop-off of 33 congregations is the most significant single-year decline the United Synagogue has ever experienced," Wernick said.
He said 19 of the 33 congregations "decided not to affiliate because they were not satisfied with what they were getting for their dollars."
When the USCJ's board met here Sunday, Rabbi Wernick said its members realized there was a need for change and it adopted what he called a "transformation plan that will assure a more equitable distribution of resources, no matter where the congregations are geographically."
As a result of these changes, Rabbi Wernick said he hopes to convince the 19 to renew their membership.
But Bonim ("builders" in Hebrew), a group of lay leaders from a number of Conservative synagogues around the country, issued a statement Tuesday saying the actions of USCJ are "too little, too late."
Bonim announced the creation of an exploratory committee to consider forming a new entity to assist congregations with membership, fundraising, leadership development and programming. It said it has raised more than $50,000 to study the need for this new entity and that if there is sufficient interest, it would be launched by the first of the year.
"At a time when other national organizations are undertaking wholesale restructuring in order to meet the needs of their constituency today, the USCJ is tinkering around the edges — focused on preservation rather than delivering value to their members," the statement said.
One of the group's founders, David Sacks of Silver Spring, Md., said he believes that there are at least 20 congregations just in the Washington, D.C., area that would join the new entity.
"There are synagogues that are in trouble, and nothing they [USCJ] are saying is about synagogues — it's only about themselves," he said. "They just don't get it. We want to provide synagogues with what we think USCJ should be providing, and it clearly is not their focus."
Another of Bonim's leaders, Diana Lerner of Poway, Calif., said in a statement: "The group seeks to offer congregations a choice between the ineffective policies of an expensive institution and a new, more agile synagogue association that begins with a mantra of client services."
But Rabbi Michael Siegel of Chicago, a leader of the Hayom ("Today") Coalition, representatives of 25 of the largest USCJ synagogues that had lobbied USCJ for change, said he was impressed by the actions of Rabbi Wernick, who assumed his new job in July.
"It shows he is a good listener," he said. "He took it upon himself to go around the country and speak to congregations, synagogue presidents and rabbis, and he took careful note of what have been long-term issues. It's refreshing to see him respond to these concerns as quickly as he has.
"Obviously it is going to take some time to create mechanisms to properly respond to the needs of synagogues, but he deserves to be commended for the good work he has done in such a short amount of time."
Rabbi Siegel added that the actions taken by the USCJ board may have been "historic" in the way it addressed "an array of issues and come up with concrete changes. United Synagogue is responding in ways I have not seen in my 27 years in the rabbinate. But one should not get confused with what is taking place at the board level and the long-range strategic plan Hayom is working on."
He said a professional would soon be hired to manage the plan, which should be completed no later than next September.
"The faster we get the report out, the more discussions we will have across the country and the better it will be for everybody," Rabbi Siegel said. "We're going to be looking at every aspect of this organization to ensure that we will be able to serve the needs of synagogues in the best way possible."
Another critic of USCJ who has been won over by Rabbi Wernick is Arthur Glauberman of Scarsdale, who had been a founder of Bonim.
"Having listened to Rabbi Wernick, I think we have a responsibility as Conservative Jews to be supportive of what he is trying to do to change United Synagogue to be a more responsive and transparent organization," he said.
In an interview with The Jewish Week, Rabbi Wernick insisted that his organization has made a "strategic decision to change the way we do business and to move in a more directed way and to understand that more adaptation will be needed in the future.
"On Sunday we took steps to start restoring our value-added tools. Synagogues want strengthening. They want meaningful relationships with our staff and a reinvestment in our youth department. We want a sharing of best practices and models of success, and we want United Synagogue to play a role with other groups in the movement — coming together as a movement with a compelling message of who we are."
The 19 congregations that disaffiliated are in areas of the country with smaller Jewish populations that have received fewer services from USCJ, Rabbi Wernick said.
"There has been an inconsistent delivery of services across the system," he acknowledged. "Service was based on membership, and congregations with fewer Jews did not get as much service."
Rabbi Wernick said a proposal to change the dues structure for synagogues would be discussed as part of a long-range strategic plan. Dues are now based on the number of members in each congregation. Under consideration is a plan to base dues on the size of the congregation's budget and financial position.
The board Sunday approved the elimination of the group's 15 regional offices and the creation instead of six district offices, each covering a similar number of congregations.
It also approved shrinking its own board from 180 members to 75 and "the creation of a national assembly that is designed to be more representative of congregations," Rabbi Wernick said.
"The assembly would appoint the directors, approve the budget, deal with affiliate members and vote on the appointment of the executive vice president and chief executive officer," he added.
Those bylaws must now be ratified at the USCJ's biennial convention in December in Cherry Hill, N.J.
Because the USCJ's operating budget comes largely from congregational dues, Rabbi Wernick said this year's budget has been cut by $1 million to $13 million. And he said last year's $1.3 million shortfall was covered by unrestricted reserves, which will be tapped again this fiscal year to cover transformation costs and another budget shortfall. At the end of the fiscal year, $3 million in unrestricted reserves will remain.
Some of the changes being made were recommended in a 2004 report by consultant Jack Ukeles. Stephen Wolnek, a past president of USCJ, said some of his recommendations were made at the time but others were deferred because "things were going well and there wasn't the impetus to do it."
But now, he said, with demands for change compounded by the economic crisis, the Ukeles report was reexamined.
"We had a basis upon which to go forward — we didn't have to reinvent the wheel ... The leadership of United Synagogue heard the problems and is addressing them. They are listening to their constituency and making changes."
Rabbi Wernick added: "I'm creating a clear vision of what United Synagogue should aspire to, and the reorganization is to create the means to get there."
---
Rabbi Menachem Creditor
-- www.netivotshalom.org
-- www.shefanetwork.org
-- menachemcreditor.org
To join Rabbi Creditor's email list, send a blank email to thetisch-subscribe@yahoogroups.com.
![[]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vFdzPnLI41Eib6rsL27_OZDTpV_yQ4-oS-5nOCOpUcQ5iO7-t5L74tLSPDRB-2LRvEsCWg7lfTN7cSE-RwD84vbsGYHIMELPWIFhX8ywff-8QPk6u3pIksniUdRFA-Onk82plods8RzMFSBcWNm0kaJA=s0-d){kind=small}
By NORMAN PODHORETZ
One of the most extraordinary features of Barack Obama's victory over John McCain was his capture of 78% of the Jewish vote. To be sure, there was nothing extraordinary about the number itself. Since 1928, the average Jewish vote for the Democrat in presidential elections has been an amazing 75%—far higher than that of any other ethno-religious group.
Yet there were reasons to think that it would be different in 2008. The main one was Israel. Despite some slippage in concern for Israel among American Jews, most of them were still telling pollsters that their votes would be strongly influenced by the positions of the two candidates on the Jewish state. This being the case, Mr. McCain's long history of sympathy with Israel should have given him a distinct advantage over Mr. Obama, whose own history consisted of associating with outright enemies of the Jewish state like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and the historian Rashid Khalidi.
Associated Press
Hebrew campaign buttons for Barack Obama.
Nevertheless, Mr. Obama beat Mr. McCain among Jewish voters by a staggering 57 points. Except for African Americans, who gave him 95% of their vote, Mr. Obama did far better with Jews than with any other ethnic or religious group. Thus the Jewish vote for him was 25 points higher than the 53% he scored with the electorate as a whole; 35 points higher than the 43% he scored with whites; 11 points higher than the 67% he scored with Hispanics; 33 points higher than the 45% he scored with Protestants; and 24 points higher than the 54% he scored with Catholics.
These numbers remind us of the extent to which the continued Jewish commitment to the Democratic Party has become an anomaly. All the other ethno-religious groups that, like the Jews, formed part of the coalition forged by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1930s have followed the rule that increasing prosperity generally leads to an increasing identification with the Republican Party. But not the Jews. As the late Jewish scholar Milton Himmelfarb said in the 1950s: "Jews earn like Episcopalians"—then the most prosperous minority group in America—"and vote like Puerto Ricans," who were then the poorest.
Jews also remain far more heavily committed to the liberal agenda than any of their old ethno-religious New Deal partners. As the eminent sociologist Nathan Glazer has put it, "whatever the promptings of their economic interests," Jews have consistently supported "increased government spending, expanded benefits to the poor and lower classes, greater regulations on business, and the power of organized labor."
As with these old political and economic questions, so with the newer issues being fought out in the culture wars today. On abortion, gay rights, school prayer, gun control and assisted suicide, the survey data show that Jews are by far the most liberal of any group in America.
Most American Jews sincerely believe that their liberalism, together with their commitment to the Democratic Party as its main political vehicle, stems from the teachings of Judaism and reflects the heritage of "Jewish values." But if this theory were valid, the Orthodox would be the most liberal sector of the Jewish community. After all, it is they who are most familiar with the Jewish religious tradition and who shape their lives around its commandments.
Yet the Orthodox enclaves are the only Jewish neighborhoods where Republican candidates get any votes to speak of. Even more telling is that on every single cultural issue, the Orthodox oppose the politically correct liberal positions taken by most other American Jews precisely because these positions conflict with Jewish law. To cite just a few examples: Jewish law permits abortion only to protect the life of the mother; it forbids sex between men; and it prohibits suicide (except when the only alternatives are forced conversion or incest).
The upshot is that in virtually every instance of a clash between Jewish law and contemporary liberalism, it is the liberal creed that prevails for most American Jews. Which is to say that for them, liberalism has become more than a political outlook. It has for all practical purposes superseded Judaism and become a religion in its own right. And to the dogmas and commandments of this religion they give the kind of steadfast devotion their forefathers gave to the religion of the Hebrew Bible. For many, moving to the right is invested with much the same horror their forefathers felt about conversion to Christianity.
All this applies most fully to Jews who are Jewish only in an ethnic sense. Indeed, many such secular Jews, when asked how they would define "a good Jew," reply that it is equivalent to being a good liberal.
But avowed secularists are not the only Jews who confuse Judaism with liberalism; so do many non-Orthodox Jews who practice this or that traditional observance. It is not for nothing that a cruel wag has described the Reform movement—the largest of the religious denominations within the American Jewish community—as "the Democratic Party with holidays thrown in," and the services in a Reform temple as "the Democratic Party at prayer."
As a Jew who moved from left to right more than four decades ago, I have been hoping for many years that my fellow Jews would come to see that in contrast to what was the case in the past, our true friends are now located not among liberals, but among conservatives.
Of course in speaking of the difference between left and right, or between liberals and conservatives, I have in mind a divide wider than the conflict between Democrats and Republicans and deeper than electoral politics. The great issue between the two political communities is how they feel about the nature of American society. With all exceptions duly noted, I think it fair to say that what liberals mainly see when they look at this country is injustice and oppression of every kind—economic, social and political. By sharp contrast, conservatives see a nation shaped by a complex of traditions, principles and institutions that has afforded more freedom and, even factoring in periodic economic downturns, more prosperity to more of its citizens than in any society in human history. It follows that what liberals believe needs to be changed or discarded—and apologized for to other nations—is precisely what conservatives are dedicated to preserving, reinvigorating and proudly defending against attack.
In this realm, too, American Jewry surely belongs with the conservatives rather than the liberals. For the social, political and moral system that liberals wish to transform is the very system in and through which Jews found a home such as they had never discovered in all their forced wanderings throughout the centuries over the face of the earth.
The Jewish immigrants who began coming here from Eastern Europe in the 1880s were right to call America "the golden land." They soon learned that there was no gold in the streets, as some of them may have imagined, which meant that they had to struggle, and struggle hard. But there was another, more precious kind of gold in America. There was freedom and there was opportunity. Blessed with these conditions, we children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren of these immigrants flourished—and not just in material terms—to an extent unmatched in the history of our people.
What I am saying is that if anything bears eloquent testimony to the infinitely precious virtues of the traditional American system, it is the Jewish experience in this country. Surely, then, we Jews ought to be joining with its defenders against those who are blind or indifferent or antagonistic to the philosophical principles, the moral values, and the socioeconomic institutions on whose health and vitality the traditional American system depends.
In 2008, we were faced with a candidate who ran to an unprecedented degree on the premise that the American system was seriously flawed and in desperate need of radical change—not to mention a record powerfully indicating that he would pursue policies dangerous to the security of Israel. Because of all this, I hoped that my fellow Jews would finally break free of the liberalism to which they have remained in thrall long past the point where it has served either their interests or their ideals.
That possibility having been resoundingly dashed, I now grasp for some encouragement from the signs that buyer's remorse is beginning to set in among Jews, as it also seems to be doing among independents. Which is why I am hoping against hope that the exposure of Mr. Obama as a false messiah will at last open the eyes of my fellow Jews to the correlative falsity of the political creed he so perfectly personifies and to which they have for so long been so misguidedly loyal.
MSNBC.com
.png)
