A third reason is that it still remains to be seen whether organizations will be able not only to retain their religious identity but to express that religious identity in every aspect of their programs. University atheists don't mind Christian professors who go to church on Sunday but minimize the importance of the Bible during the rest of the week. Similarly, social service secularists can live with Christian organizations that maintain a religious identity but marginalize it.

Still, it was good to see Cabinet secretaries such as Mel Martinez of HUD stressing at a Sept. 22 press briefing that "in the past we have seen not only a negative feeling, but outright hostility to organizations of faith. (Now) they'll be able to compete fairly." It was also good to see Towey defending the rights of Jewish groups to hire Jews or Christian groups to hire Christians by telling reporters, in essence, to look around them: all groups hire people who share their goals, so religious groups should not be hit if they "hire people that share their vision and mission."

The danger in all this, of course, is that the federal grants system still centralizes power in Washington. Tax credits and vouchers that decentralize funding by empowering direct givers and receivers of aid would be an enormous improvement, but Republicans are not immune to the pleasures of speaking softly while carrying a big pork barrel.

It would be ironic if the triumph of one version of compassionate conservatism were to create additional support for the century-old liberal project of building and now maintaining Washington clout in social services -- but politics is full of irony.