How do you vote for compromise?

by E.J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post, October 31, 2012

Excerpt

How do you vote for compromise? by E.J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post, October 31, 2012

Here’s where we have arrived as a country: We are so polarized that even compromise has become a partisan issue.

As the 2012 campaign closes, bipartisanship and “working together” are more in vogue than ever because the few voters still up for grabs tend to be more moderate, less partisan and less ideological.

But beneath the last-minute embrace of comity lurks a central fact about American politics now: Democrats, a more moderate and diverse party, believe in compromise far more than Republicans do.

While polls find that six in 10 Democrats regard themselves as moderate or conservative, nearly three-quarters of Republicans say they are conservative. And tea-party Republicans, who loom so large in primaries, are especially averse to giving any ground.

Moreover, Democrats still have a positive view of government and regard trade-offs between taxes and spending as a normal part of governing. Republicans care most about reducing government’s size and in cutting taxes. They’re prepared to accept standoffs and crises to reach those goals…

Full text

Here’s where we have arrived as a country: We are so polarized that even compromise has become a partisan issue.

As the 2012 campaign closes, bipartisanship and “working together” are more in vogue than ever because the few voters still up for grabs tend to be more moderate, less partisan and less ideological.

But beneath the last-minute embrace of comity lurks a central fact about American politics now: Democrats, a more moderate and diverse party, believe in compromise far more than Republicans do.

While polls find that six in 10 Democrats regard themselves as moderate or conservative, nearly three-quarters of Republicans say they are conservative. And tea-party Republicans, who loom so large in primaries, are especially averse to giving any ground.

Moreover, Democrats still have a positive view of government and regard trade-offs between taxes and spending as a normal part of governing. Republicans care most about reducing government’s size and in cutting taxes. They’re prepared to accept standoffs and crises to reach those goals.

No Republican better summarized this sentiment than Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, who defeated moderately conservative Sen. Richard Lugar in a Republican primary and is now best known for his comments on God’s will and rape.

“What I’ve said about compromise and bipartisanship” Mourdock said on CNN last May, is that “I hope to build a conservative majority in the United States Senate so bipartisanship becomes Democrats joining Republicans to roll back the size of government, reduce the bureaucracy, lower taxes and get America moving again.” When it was noted that this didn’t sound like compromise, Mourdock replied: “Well, it is the definition of political effectiveness.”

The split on compromise itself is visible in many other contests this fall, and none more than in the Virginia Senate battle between Democrat Tim Kaine and Republican George Allen.

Kaine has made working across party lines a central theme of his campaign. Allen has put a lot of energy into linking Kaine to President Obama. He has also criticized Kaine for endorsing the compromise that helped avoid a crisis during last year’s debt-ceiling battle because of the defense cuts it contained. These would take effect only if Congress fails to reach — well, a compromise after the election.

Kaine argues that avoiding default was essential and that voters seem to agree with him. The latest Post poll found Kaine leading Allen by seven points while Obama leads inVirginia by four.

In his discussions with voters, Kaine said in an interview, “the three questions I get most are: How do we accelerate the economy? How do we fix the budget? And how do we find common ground? Of the three, the one that comes up the most is the third one.”

Even in audiences that are “100 percent Democrats,” Kaine added, “they respond viscerally and warmly to the idea of ‘Let’s find an MO to work together.’ ”

No surprise here, because polls show Democrats are consistently more pro-compromise. This partisan difference was especially visible — and consequential — during last year’s debt-ceiling fight. In April 2011, as the battle was taking shape, a Pew survey found that 69 percent of Democrats supported the idea of their own side making compromises. Among Republicans, by contrast, 50 percent preferred their side to “stand by their principles.” The anti-compromise number rose to 56 percent among conservative Republicans and to 68 percent among Republican or Republican-leaning independents who supported the tea party. Sympathy for compromise has risen since then, but the gap between the parties endures.

It’s true that politicians running in states dominated by the opposing party are, by necessity, less partisan. InMassachusetts, Republican Sen. Scott Brown, who is running behind Democrat and consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren, brags about votes he has cast with Democrats.

Two Democrats running strong races in Republican territory, Heidi Heitkamp inNorth Dakotaand Bob Kerrey inNebraska, play down party all they can. In one ad, Heitkamp pledges to “put partisanship aside and do what’s right for our country.” Kerrey closes his latest spot declaring that “we need to put country ahead of party.”

But their cases underscore why Democrats will remain the more pro-compromise party for some time: To hold their Senate majority, Democrats need to keep winning in smaller and rural states that lean Republican. Republicans almost everywhere — Brown is the exception — now live in fear of losing primaries to tea-party candidates such as Mourdock.

Thus is compromise on the ballot next week. But only one side seems genuinely interested in reaching it.

ejdionne@washpost.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ej-dionne-jr-how-do-you-vote-for-compromise/2012/10/31/4e9c6ef6-238f-11e2-8448-81b1ce7d6978_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines

Is America Losing Its Religion?

The Guardian [1] / By Sarah Posner [2] October 10, 2012 |

Last weekend, hundreds of conservative churches participated [3] in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday”, during which pastors preached about electoral politics and sent recordings of their sermons to the Internal Revenue Service. It’s a provocation: these pastors and their legal counsel hope to challenge the rarely-enforced IRS rule prohibiting candidate endorsements by tax-exempt organizations, including houses of worship, and take it all the way to theUS supreme court.

A new survey from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life [4], which confirms previously observed trends of Protestant decline, accompanied by a rise in religiously unaffiliated Americans, casts serious doubt on whether the self-styled church freedom warriors are fighting a politically popular battle. Among the survey’s findings, two thirds of Americans (66%) believe churches shouldn’t endorse candidates. And 54% say churches should stay out of political matters entirely. Even a majority (56%) of white evangelicals agreed that churches should not endorse candidates.

Would these data cause the churches clamoring for a legal war with the IRS to pack their bags and go home? Of course not. In fact, in spite of these trends away from organized religion [5] and away from the entanglement of organized religion in politics, I would expect these culture war battles to ramp up – at least for the time being.

The religious right hasn’t spent millions [6] building up legal advocacy groups, pressing for conservative judicial appointees [7], and training lawyers and politicians to thump the Bible in legislatures and the courts for nothing. They’ve built an infrastructure to fight their battles, even as they lose public opinion wars. For their most ardent supporters, losing in the court of public opinion only serves as a call to redouble their efforts, to fulfil their call to carry out God’s plan for America.

But a provocation for secularists might emerge from these data: can they match the organization and intensity of their political adversaries?

Looking at the Pew survey, one wonders how long the religious right can continue to use the same battle plan. Yet, the data shows they are clearly losing the public. Another survey last week from the Public Religion Research Institute showed that while Mitt Romney [8] has the support of 80% of younger white evangelical millennials [9] (aged 18 to 25), this is a small and diminishing constituency: white evangelicals comprise only 12.3% [9] of that age group. That’s less than half their proportion of the 50 to 64 population. The Pew survey showed that while 32% of Americans aged 50 to 64 are white evangelicals, only 13% of those aged 18 to 29 are.

As Protestants have declined, percentages of Catholics have remained steady. While they are far less homogeneous politically than evangelicals (the Pew poll found Catholics favor legal abortion 50% to 45%, and same-sex marriage 53% to 37%), the generational trend lines might explain why religious conservatives are intensifying evangelical-Catholic alliances around issues like contraception coverage and same-sex marriage. This is further evidence that, despite demographic shifts, they’re not giving up without a fight – instead, shifting their strategy to frame these concerns as ones of “religious freedom”. If they’re a minority, they hope to reap political benefits from arguing at least that they are a persecuted one.

The Pew survey also found there are now as many “nones” as there are white evangelicals – each makes up 19% of the US population. But the generational trends are traveling even more starkly in a non-theist direction: 32% of 18 to 29 year-olds are unaffiliated, and 42% of those describe themselves as atheist or agnostic. That’s over ten points higher than the 21% of 30- to 49-year-old “nones” who describe themselves that way, and more than twice the 15% of 50- to 64-year-old “nones” who do.

That has to worry Republicans [10]. White evangelicals are the most sizable segment of their base and the unaffiliated – in particular, the atheists and agnostics – are the most sizable part of the Democratic base. Still, Republicans maintain a party identification advantage among Christians as a whole (with the exception of black Protestants and all Catholics, which includes Latino Catholics). Because Democrats [11], overall, have a party identification advantage over the GOP (48% to 43%, according to Pew), will those numbers make each party intensify their efforts to make religious voters happy, or encourage them to present a less religious case for election?

With a tight presidential race, and each campaign trying to peel away as many persuadable voters in swing states as possible, appeals to religion – including from the Obama camp – are likely to continue, if only to targeted audiences. Oddly, 67% of all groups, including nearly a third of “nones”, agree it’s important for the president to have “strong religious beliefs”. At the same time, though, 43% of all groups said it makes them uncomfortable when politicians talk about how religious they are.

The numbers are important, telling and potentially transformative for our politics. Yet, questions remain: there’s nothing in the Pew survey on public attitudes about religious freedom, church-state separation or the secular nature of our government. These are the issues around which the “nones” can organize. The religious right, whose leaders maintain America is in the throes of a revival, has spent decades mythologizing a “Christian nation”, denigrating and undermining church-state separation, and questioning the very American-ness of secularists.

While this is just one survey, and the “Christian nation” advocates retain their intensity and organization, there’s evidence here that an opening exists for a new revival: a secularist one.

Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/belief/america-losing-its-religion

Links:
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/
[2] http://www.alternet.org/authors/sarah-posner-0
[3] http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/08/us-usa-tax-pulpit-idUSBRE89700E20121008
[4] http://www.pewforum.org/Unaffiliated/nones-on-the-rise.aspx
[5] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religion
[6] http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/22/report-tracks-explosion-of-religious-lobbying-in-washington/?hpt=hp_t2
[7] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/08/republicans-judicial-activism-supreme-courts
[8] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/mittromney
[9] http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/6473/young_white_evangelicals_will_vote_romney,_poll_finds/
[10] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/republicans
[11] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/democrats
[12] http://www.alternet.org/tags/religion-0
[13] http://www.alternet.org/tags/religious-right
[14] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B