New data released this week confirm America's vibrant religious culture. More than half of adults consider religion very important in their lives, and 86 percent say that it is at least somewhat important. About 6 in 10 American adults report membership in a local religious congregation, and nearly 4 in 10 attend at least once a week.

No wonder campaign strategists are seriously sizing up religious voters during this heated election season. But more profound than moving a voting bloc is the potential of America's spiritual capital to meet serious social needs, and to shape our approach to policy as a result.

Yesterday in Washington, President Bush highlighted this potential in a speech to a national conference organized by the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives--an office he launched in his first executive order in 2001. Four cabinet secretaries and the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy were also on the agenda. The President has sought to make government systematically more friendly to civil society solutions, which has been accomplished in a variety of policy areas, from drug treatment to prisoner re-entry to homelessness. Thirty-five governors--more than half of them Democrats--now have similar faith-based efforts at the state level.

But the faith-based initiative's rhetoric has at times outpaced implementation, and the devil in the policy details demands persistent attention over the life of a program (reauthorization proposals for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR--and their abandonment of core elements of original administration policy--are a case in point).

The initiative's major policy accomplishment has been to prompt serious reflection on the significant capacity of American civil society. Moving forward, policymakers should draw lessons from these recent years and hone proposals that expand the vision for reshaping government. For example, the role of faith-based organizations should figure more largely in discussions of curbing entitlements and dependency generally. Entitlement and welfare state programs represent a competing paradigm for solving social needs, in contrast to the local, personal, and flexible nature of civil society initiatives. Runaway entitlement commitments saddle every child born today with $175,000 in debt. Continued growth of government will have a dampening effect on civil society. Conversely, religious and community-based groups can play a role in entitlement and welfare state reform by providing alternative means of meeting needs as well as helping individuals and families navigate complex systems or transitions.