<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=4>
<H1 style="MARGIN-LEFT: 1em; MARGIN-RIGHT: 1em" align=left>Getting Religion,
Republican Style</H1>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 1em; MARGIN-RIGHT: 1em" align=left>Jonathan
Chait<BR><BR>April 1, 2005<BR><BR>The Terri Schiavo saga has prompted yet
another round of fears that the Republican Party has been hijacked by religious
conservatives. The truth, however, is just the opposite: Religious conservatives
have been hijacked by the Republican Party.<BR><BR>The odd thing is how many
people continue to believe that the religious right pulls the strings in the
White House and Congress. John Danforth, a moderate former GOP senator from
Missouri, expressed this fear the other day in a New York Times Op-Ed article.
<BR><BR>The traditional Republican agenda, he wrote, has "become secondary to
the agenda of Christian conservatives. As a senator, I worried every day about
the size of the federal deficit. I did not spend a single minute worrying about
the effect of gays on the institution of marriage. Today it seems to be the
other way around."<BR><BR>There is a remarkable amount of illogic packed into
that paragraph. I suspect Danforth didn't worry about gay marriage in his Senate
days because it didn't exist yet. And today, the Republicans don't care about
holding down the deficit not because they don't care about fiscal issues but
because their fiscal agenda consists of things that make the deficit
<I>larger</I> rather than smaller. If President Bush had a more ambitious
economic agenda, the deficit would be even higher.<BR><BR>But the larger fallacy
here is the idea that the conservative social agenda has subordinated the
conservative economic agenda. How much time has Bush spent worrying about gay
marriage? Not very much. In January, a reporter asked Bush about the prospects
of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, which he has said he
supports. But Bush just shrugged and said it didn't have enough votes in the
Senate. "Until that changes," he observed, "nothing will happen in the Senate."
For his part, Bush did nothing to move it along.<BR><BR>Gay marriage isn't the
only Bush priority that lacks support in Congress. Social Security privatization
doesn't have the votes to pass either. Rather than throw up his hands, though,
Bush has persuaded business groups to raise millions of dollars to lobby for
privatization, twisted the arms of recalcitrant lawmakers and barnstormed the
country for weeks touting his approach and threatening dire consequences for
those who stand in his way. And even as support for his approach has plummeted
from already low levels, he's vowed to keep on fighting. On Social Security
privatization, he's Winston Churchill. On gay marriage, he's Neville
Chamberlain.<BR><BR>As a supporter of gay rights, I'm happy that Bush hasn't
pushed the issue. But why aren't the leaders of the Christian conservative
movement, who regard gay marriage as a threat to Western civilization, unhappy?
The answer is that they've been co-opted. Republicans will help the social
conservative cause but rarely spend any political capital on it. Take the
Schiavo case, which supposedly demonstrates the social conservatives' power.
Sure, Bush flew across the country to sign a bill "protecting" her. But as soon
as polls showed the public disapproved of Washington's intervention, Bush
dropped the issue like a hot potato.<BR><BR>The main social conservative groups
exist mainly to persuade rank-and-file social conservatives to support an agenda
to which they have no natural allegiance. <STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000>High on
the Christian Coalition's list of its top legislative priorities, for instance,
are cutting taxes (No. 2) and privatizing Social Security (No. 4), two issues
that did not receive heavy emphasis in the Sermon on the Mount.</FONT></STRONG>
Their top issue — confirming Bush's judicial nominees — does have a social
angle. But in point of fact, conservative judges have been far more aggressive
in overturning regulations on business than in turning back the clock on
abortion or gay rights. That's why business groups have raised millions of
dollars to help confirm Bush's judges.<BR><BR>I suspect that, behind closed
doors, most Washington Republicans take religious conservatives for suckers.
This has been evident from the Washington Post's recent revelations about GOP
activist and lobbyist Jack Abramoff.<BR><BR>Three years ago, a casino-owning
Louisiana Indian tribe called the Coushatta hired Abramoff to help stop another
tribe from opening a casino, which the Coushatta feared would dilute their
business. Abramoff hired former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed, who
enlisted Focus on the Family's James Dobson, who spurred his followers to send
thousands of letters opposing the new casino. The poor souls riled up to stop
legalized gambling had no idea that they were pawns of another casino. It's a
perfect metaphor for the relationship between the Republican elite and the
voters who put them into office.
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1><!--
st_v=1.1;
//--></SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.2><!--
st_v=1.2;
//--></SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="//st.sageanalyst.net/tag-703.js">
</SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript>
if (st_v==1.0) {
var st_uj;
var st_dn = (new Date()).getTime();
var st_rf = escape(document.referrer);
st_uj = "//"+st_dd+"/"+st_dn+"/JS?ci="+st_ci+"&di="+st_di+
"&pg="+st_pg+"&rf="+st_rf+"&jv="+st_v+"&tai="+st_tai+"&ai="+st_ai;
var iXz = new Image();
iXz.src = st_uj;
}
</SCRIPT>
<NOSCRIPT><img src="//st.sageanalyst.net/NS?ci=703&di=d001&pg=&ai=2773574"></NOSCRIPT></FONT></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>