Candidates Rush To Affirm Their Religiosity, Use Faith As 2000 Election Issue

"What keeps me from talking about religion is
the fact that in me there lies a fanatic dozing
ever so lightly whom I particular do not wish
to rouse..."

--Julian Green, DIARY, 1928-1957

"No religious test shall ever be required as
qualification to any office or public trust under
the United States."

-- U.S. Constitution, Article VI.iii (1787)

e may not have seen anything yet... For many political pundits, the 1996 elections abounded with religious rhetoric, appeals to the political interests of sectarian groups, and demands that legislation at all levels of government reflect the principles of faith. Election 2000 is less than a year off, however, and already the race for the nation's highest political plum -- the presidency of the United States -- has taken on the aura of tent revival meeting instead of the usual whistle stop tour. Affirmations by candidates of their religious belief and sectarian affiliation, calls for "partnerships" between church and state, and even paeans to Jesus Christ as demonstrations of personal wholesomeness are becoming more common. References to the separation of church and state rarely appear in partisan exchanges; when the issue of establishment of religion is raised, it is as if the First Amendment has become an afterthought, an inconvenience, and perhaps even an obstacle to be deftly circumvented or redefined.

   ¶    Last week during interviews and debate in Des Moines, Iowa, three of the six GOP presidential contenders named Jesus Christ as their political or philosophical role model.    Texas Gov. George W. Bush declared, "When you turn your heart and your life over to Christ, when you accept Christ as the savior, it changes your heart."

   Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch -- often dubbed "the Senator from LDS," due to his vocal affiliation with the Mormon Church -- agreed with Bush, declaring, "I think that goes without saying." Hatch added former Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan to his list of the "thinkers" who had influenced him the most.

   "But I bear witness to Christ, too," Hatch hastened to add. "I really know him to be the savior of the world. And that means more to me than almost anything else I know."

   ;Gary Bauer, a long shot in the polls but head of the influential Family Research Council, cited his belief in the primacy of Jesus Christ in his life, and pledged to "end abortion in the United States" as his first presidential act.

   For Bush, his declaration of religiosity and Jesus worship was likely a political stroke of genius, despite its expression of philosophical poverty. Former White House operative Dick Morris gushed on Fox News that the GOP front runner had "cut right into the evangelical vote."

   While the constant references to Jesus may play well with voters, especially in Bible-belt states like Iowa, even some religious leaders are disenchanted to see their messiah pressed into the service of partisan politics. C. Christopher Epting, the Episcopal Bishop of Iowa, told the New York Times that religious rhetoric as a tool for precinct-level vote hustling has reached an all time high, surpassing even the 1988 race when Pat Robertson launched his bid for the White House.

   "It was a little awkward," Epting said in reference to the Iowa debate. "I would probably not think of Jesus as a philosopher or a thinker. It's a different category."

   But on the hot issue of the government and churches joining forces to form "faith-based" partnerships, and allow sectarian groups to organize and administer public social welfare programs, Epting expressed the sort of doubts many religious leaders have -- a point of view less concerned with the separation of church and state than the practical politics involved. "There can be a healthy partnership between the church and government," Epting opined. "The concern is, Are there going to be stipulations and restrictions from the government?"

   About the only public criticism of the Iowa sermons came from Abraham Foxman, director of the Anti-Defamation League. He told the Times that he was disturbed by the emphasis candidates placed on religion as a political litmus test.

   "I felt left out, and I think a lot of Americans felt left out," Foxman said. "It was a disconcerting inclusion of religion into politics..."

   ¶    Not to be left behind, the "new" Al Gore declared on a recent "60 Minutes" program that he was a born-again Christian. He earlier told the Washington Post that he often asked himself "W.W.J.D. -- what would Jesus Do?"

   ¶    Both Bush and Gore have come out in support of "faith-based" partnerships which would use government money and other resources to promote social welfare projects by the clergy.

   In July, Gov. Bush praised religion-based social outreaches as "the next bold step in welfare reform," and pledged that if elected president he would dedicate $8 billion to churches and other sectarian groups in his first year. The Bush program calls for a combination of tax rebates and direct grants, and sets up an "Office of Faith-Based Action" as a "clearinghouse for information on effective religious organizations and assisting them in their dealings with the federal government."

   "We will allow private and religious groups to compete to provide services in every federal, state and local social program," Bush told an audience at an Indianapolis, Ind. church when he announced his proposal.

   It was Gore, though, who was first out of the gate in calling for such a program. In May, the vice president advocated creation of a "New Partnership" between state and clerical groups, and promised that if he won the year 2000 election, "the voices of faith-based organizations will be integral to the policies set forth in my administration."

   ¶    Gore has parted company with all of his Republican adversaries, though, on the question of vouchers and other government aid to religious schools. His democratic opponent, Bill Bradley announced this past weekend that he was "open to experiments" with public subsidies for private and religious schools. Bradley also voted for voucher programs when he was a Senator from New Jersey.

   In a debate on the NBC program "Meet the Press," Bradley was equivocal at first over the controversial voucher question, saying that he believed that "every child deserves a quality education, not just the children of parents who are wealthy." He then compared his approach to that of former President Franklin Roosevelt, saying, "Honest leadership should be willing to try new and innovative ways to achieve this end..."

   Like Gore, Bradley suggests creating programs which could be "partnerships" involving government and religious groups. He called for "public private partnerships" to provide day care and other services for preschool youngsters, and a network of after-school programs run by community and faith-based organizations.

   ¶    Bradley's stand on First Amendment issues may reflect what Washington Post staff writers Barton Gellman and Dale Russakoff described as "A religious journey with twists and turns" in a story which ran on December 15. As a youth, Bradley had wished to "spread the word of Jesus Christ," and later came to embrace "many of the competing strains of missionary Christianity, by turns apocalyptic, exemplary and hortatory..." His writing appeared in the Christian magazine "Guideposts," where he reminded readers that "being Christian is an 'all or nothing' proposition..."

   Further into his professional athletic career, Bradley was intimately involved with groups like Fellowship of Christian Athletes. A spokesman for FCA told a filmmaker during a 1967 interview that the group intended to launch "a conquering Christian offensive" to combat "atheistic materialism and world revolution."

   Years later, Bradley came to see serious flaws with this hard shell Christian evangelism. He noted that it "did not tolerate debate," and many who embraced it did not sympathize with the movement for civil rights which Bradley had come to embrace passionately.

   Bradley still sees his political agenda intimately linked with religious movements, though. Earlier this month he gave a heady, almost tent-revival style speech before the Congress of National Black Churches in Los Angeles where he discussed raising the minimum wage, and expanding the Head Start program. Both Gore and Bradley, though, can expected to seek ways of funding religious groups with taxpayer money should either win the White House in 2000.

   ¶    Will all of the pulpit banging that politicians seem to be doing play with the voters? According to a recent New York Times/CBS poll, 28% of Republicans and 27% of Democrats say that religion plays "an extremely important role" in their lives. Only 17% of independent voters agreed, though.

   Within the GOP ranks, the "religion talk" by candidates has been designed to cultivate loyalty from the party's religious right wing, represented best by Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition. Some Republican leaders fear that shrill rhetoric, especially on issues like abortion rights or gays in the military, could offend middle-of-the-road voters, and possibly weaken chances that the GOP will hang on to control of Congress. Indeed, a Washington Post article on December 15 by Julie Eilperin was somewhat prematurely titled: "GOP looking beyond Christian Coalition in 2000."

   Eilperin wrote that "Republicans are so concerned about the coalition's viability that they have begun channeling resources to other grassroots organizations to mobilize the kind of conservative voters they hope will preserve the Republican majority in 2000." There is no evidence, though, that this effort -- a modest one -- is meant to appeal to more moderate voters, or ameliorate the image of the GOP as a handmaiden for the religious right. Instead, the National Republican Congressional Committee funneled $250,000 to the National Right to Life Committee, and another $500,000 to U.S. Family Network, a lobbying group associated with a former aid to House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas.) DeLay operates the Values Action Team (VAT), a congressional group set up after James Dobson (Focus on the Family) threatened to lead a walkout of religious organizations from the Republican party. Dobson had charged that the GOP was abandoning key legislative items concerning abortion, school prayer, gay rights and voucher aid in exchange for more voter-friendly tax cut legislation.

   Recent media reports have noted that the Christian Coalition is heavily in debt, and has lost some key personnel including its former President Don Hodel, Director of Operations Chuck Cunningham, and executive director Randy Tate. Coalition founder Pat Robertson has stepped in to serve as President, and says that the group's $2 million debt is "manageable." Robertson has deep financial reserves at his disposal, especially after the sale of his Family Channel network to media mogul Rupert Murdoch. The televangelist also stands to make millions of dollars as part of a settlement agreement with the Bank of Scotland over an internet banking deal that ended after Robertson described Scotland as a "dark land" overrun by powerful homosexuals.

   Public religiosity, and calls to include the "faith community" at the public trough are likely to increase as election 2000 approaches. Concerns over the First Amendment separation of church and state seem to be a low priority item with candidates, in stark contrast to the 1960 election where John Kennedy -- a Roman Catholic -- successfully ran for the White House. Ironically, Kennedy was a staunch supporter of the establishment clause, and once joked that when Al Smith lost to Herbert Hoover ("A vote for Smith is a vote for the pope") Smith had to cable the Vatican a one word telegram which read: "Unpack." Kennedy joked that after he refused to support U.S. Catholic bishops in their effort to obtain government aid for parochial schools, the pope cabled Kennedy: "Pack."

   Kennedy emerged as a staunch defender of state-church separation, and declared "I believe in a president whose views on religion are his own private affair."

   Forty years later, views on religion have instead become a political litmus test.

[text only]