In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Evangelical Christian Movement: Voting and Elections

During the earlier series on the Evangelical Christian Movement I skimmed over the discussion of the Movement’s political influence in the U.S. It’s a story that’s been covered at length by the mainstream media [New York Times, Huffington Post, CNN].

There is no doubt the Movement is having a powerful impact on our upcoming Presidential and Congressional elections, but I am convinced that the more insidious influence is in our local and state elections. In the 1990s the Movement intentionally shifted their focus to these smaller elections where their voting block would have a greater impact.

As explained more than a decade ago by Ralph Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition:

The Christian community got it backwards in the 1980s. We tried to charge Washington when we should have been focusing on the states. The real battles of concern to Christians are in neighborhoods, school boards, city councils, and state legislatures.

[Hankins, American Evangelicals: A Contemporary History of a Mainstream Religious Movement]

In the early 1990s, Reed reported that 4,000 evangelicals were sitting on school boards in the U.S. and the People for the American Way reported that the Movement won 40 percent of the state and local elections they participated in. [DeFilippis et al, Contesting Community: The Limits and Potential of Local Organizing].

Of course, its been a long ass time since the Christian Coalition essentially imploded. [Washington Post]. So you may be asking yourself why the hell we should care. Well, personally, I’m not sure the influence of the remaining grassroots organizations is as dead as we might think. As I argued last time that:

[T]he goals of the modern Evangelical Movement are to create social and legal restrictions on abortion, contraception, financial safety nets, family structures, and sexual behavior.

And these principles appear, to me, to be driving the vile legislation we’ve seen in recent years [Feministe]. Of course it’s just a theory.

Assuming this theory is correct (and I recognize the size of that assumption), there is one rather obvious (if impractical) solution. We have to organize to contest candidates who share the Movement’s values.

A lot of work has been done by others about how organize for social and political change. [Online Conference on Community Organizing.]* Step One? Identify the problem. Or in this case, the candidates in our state, local, and judicial elections that are aligned with the Evangelical Christian Movement.

Easier said than done of course. Such candidates are not always visible. In local and school board elections there usually isn’t significant advertising. Instead politicians rely on political party membership or “handshake” campaigning. Affiliated churches, as the organizing institution of the Movement, are extraordinarily effective for these candidates. Sometimes they are even recruited or “called” from churches in part because they are perceived as having a built-in voter base. [My father was once “called” to run for office. Fortunately, he ignored that calling but as a consequence we had to leave that particular church.] In addition, there are rousing sermons (Remember Pastor Hagee?) that instruct members about the importance of voting and voting according to “God’s will.” [Feministe] Perhaps more importantly for local or school board elections, affiliated churches provide access to motivated voters and getting a voter to recognize your name is 90% of the battle. But unless a candidate reaches national attention, the general public may never know the candidate’s association with the Evangelical Christian Movement.

Project Vote Smart (one of my favorite websites of all time) can give us some indication because they aggregate the interest group scorecards (like the one for Planned Parenthood!). Still, these are an imperfect metric for local and school board elections where that level of analysis is not available.

Ideally, I would love to see a special interest group that engages candidates at this local level on the specific issues the Movement is trying to push: for example, allowing bullying in schools, reducing sex education, permitting CPCs to operate without proper oversight, modifying school curriculums to whitewash history, among others. The cool thing is, I think it’s actually doable. If we do the work of putting together questionnaires about the issues that are relevant to our communities and send them to the candidates, then groups like Project Vote Smart will likely include those results.

So my questions to you are, first, what do you think? Do you think this might be an effective way to counter the influence of the Movement at least at a local level? Is this something you might be interested in participating in? What types of questions would you ask your local candidates given what you’ve seen occurring in your communities?

*Of course this is just my favorite link, there are thousands of other excellent resources out there. Please feel free to link to your favorite in the comments.


12 thoughts on Evangelical Christian Movement: Voting and Elections

  1. I think we can do it without a special interest group of our own. If women in media, articulate non-media women, and even the rest of us, begin and continue to challenge each and every sexist thing, we may be able to back the fundies down. I can’t do it on the job–25% of the county wants to replace me, literally, since FT is scarce here, and bossman is a wingnut–but I’m happy to apply my confrontational skills elsewhere.
    It’s working for gay rights. Take a lesson from that.

  2. Remember that school boards, boards of supervisors, and town councils are where the next crop of state delegates and state senators come from. State delegates and state senators are where congress people come from. And Governors. Governors and congress people are where Senators and Presidents come from.

    Which is why it’s important to vote pro-Choice, pro-Equality, and pro-other-progressive issues even when the office doesn’t involve any of those issues.

  3. @Liz,

    How do you know whether a particular school board candidate is for example, pro-choice? I haven’t been able to figure that out myself.

  4. Kristen: You listen for evangelical dog whistles, for bloviation about values, or for oddly out-of-place comments about God or Jesus, and then you vote against those people. You figure out what church someone attends and if it’s known to be evangelical you vote against them. You treat evangelicals and conservative Christians as the repellent, backwards, violent, regressive theocrats they are and you don’t vote for them. This is the age of google, you can find out almost anything about someone who has lived an even moderately public life and people running for office have no right to privacy. So you research them and you punish them. Christianity isn’t a race or a gender or a sexual orientation, it isn’t even private consensual behavior once people with fantasies of Torquemada decide to hop onto a school board to advance the cause of some savage half-bright’s interpretation of a translation of something someone trying to make a sale wrote about a figure who might not have existed in the first damned place. Just because Christians wave the flag of religion doesn’t mean they’re entitled to a vote; I’m a big fan of freedom of speech but I’m not about to vote for even the nicest candidate in the world if they’ve been spending a lot of time with David Duke…

  5. i have a question, if anybody cares to answer—what do we do about churches who violate the conditions of their tax-free status by endorsing candidates or a political party?—-correct me if im wrong, but i think a pastor that tells his congregation who to vote for ought to have his church’s tax exempt status pulled

  6. @William

    Honestly, you can find that information on your local candidates? Because some of my local candidates have no google presence whatsoever. I’ve rarely found any information about school board candidates beyond the blurb in the local paper you get from voter education groups. And very rarely does that indicate anything about their political views.

  7. @Maggie May,

    It should but I don’t think its ever been enforced. There was a huge stink about it a few months ago when a group of pastors characterized it as a “gag” rule.

    1. @ kristenj—-

      yea, thats their typical MO—-cry persecution when someone actually requires them to follow the rules

      theres a world of difference between a pastor telling the congregation who HE prefers to vote for based on thus-and-so and telling them they are “in sin” if they vote another way—-i butted heads with a former pastor myself over that very issue—told him that telling his congregation to vote republican is improper and very likely illegal—-i eventually got out of what was(still is) a very abusive church—still have relatives who wont talk to me over it

  8. Kristen:

    How much you can find out about someone generally depends on how creepy you’re willing to be. John Doe might not have much of a web presence, but their wife Jane might and that could lead you to all sorts of information about what John is likely up to (especially if no one has told Jane about Facebook privacy). John might have a kid, Joe, who had a little blurb about his little league team and enough of a web presence to give you some pointers. Maybe its different in a town like Chicago where theres a ton of reportage, but its generally been my experience that research is really only limited by personal ethics.

  9. @William,

    I guess I just think it would be more efficient to ask them pointed relevant questions and then report on their responses.

  10. just read a letter 2day in my local paper from a longtime catholic couple who flatly stated that the bishops are indeed trying 2 ban contraception thru the back door—and that rank and file catholics R very upset about it—-they stated emphatically that the bishops do NOT speak for the catholic majority

  11. @Kristen J – I think it would be cool if someone did draw up such a questionnaire and send it to their local candidates, but from what I see on my local election-monitoring website (Midwest Democracy Project), which has its own list of questions that it asks every candidate, such third-party questionnaires have a pretty low response rate.

    I also find that, where I live (in Kansas), candidates make a point of declaring that they are conservative Christians, if they are. Like William says, any vague talk about “family values,” a “culture of life” or whatever is probably a good indicator that the person is anti-abortion, anti-gay and anti-contraception. And, here, that kind of thing plays well enough that even the shortest newspaper profile of, say, a guy running for school board, or city council, or county commission, or some similar piddly local office, will include a phrase like that.

Comments are currently closed.