THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, June 8, 1996 TAG: 9606080007
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Another View
SOURCE: BY MARK J. ROZELL and CLYDE WILCOX
LENGTH: 97 lines
As Sen. John Warner and Jim Miller battle for the GOP Senate nomination, many speculate about the role that Christian Right activists will play in this contest. The conventional wisdom suggests that Miller will attract most of their support, but that the backing of the Christian Right may make him appear to be politically extreme.
If Miller allows his candidacy to be defined mostly by his commitments on controversial social issues, he may indeed be susceptible to that charge. But another possibility remains: that Miller can hold the support of the Christian Right while appearing to secular audiences as a mainstream Reagan conservative. To do so will depend as much on the actions of his supporters as on the candidate himself.
Our study of the Christian Right in Virginia suggests a movement that is maturing politically and learning to avoid the mistakes of the past.
The abortion issue provides a perfect example of the effective use of mainstream rhetoric. The Christian Coalition state legislative strategy booklet advises candidates to ``run smarter'' on the issue by downplaying the differences between pro-life and pro-choice and instead emphasizing ``sub-issues'' (for example, no taxpayer funding, parental notification and waiting periods). The goal of such appeals is to make pro-choice advocates sound ``extreme'' for not backing widely supported restrictions such as parental notification.
This strategy does not envision any change in principle. It merely advocates that the pro-life viewpoint, according to the strategy booklet, ``is communicated in a reasonable manner.'' GOP House of Delegates member Robert Marshall - also the executive director of the American Life League - is the author of a pamphlet that advises conservative Christian activists on how to effectively handle questions about a pro-life candidate's views. He advises, for example:
Be hesitant to go beyond what is requested. Don't answer questions that are not asked.
And when you do talk, you are under no obligation to exhaust your information on a topic.
And even the Lord did not always answer questions directly.
Also, it is morally permissible to answer a question with a question.
A second strategy is to emphasize issue appeals beyond controversial social ones. Leaders in the movement believe that a key to their long-term success is being accepted as mainstream conservatives who care as much about economic issues as abortion and cultural values.
Oftentimes, this strategy entails taking controversial social issues out of their context. Some movement leaders now claim that they want Roe vs. Wade overturned on grounds of federalism: that is, let the issue of abortion be decided by the states in order to guarantee a diversity of approaches.
A third strategy is to build stronger political coalitions, with increased cooperation among religious conservatives of different faiths. One of us attended a Moral Majority meeting in the early 1980s, and the opening sermon was titled ``The Catholic Church: Harlot of Rome.'' Speakers denounced members of different faiths. Then, during a political-strategy session, some expressed puzzlement that the group had not succeeded at attracting new members.
The story is much different today as religious conservatives are putting aside the question of who will find heaven and focusing instead on common political interests. Our surveys of Virginia GOP convention delegates and county committee members reveal that conservatives of a variety of faiths are expressing their support for Christian Right organizations, leaders and candidates. As the movement moves beyond religious differences, it becomes a much-more-formidable political force.
The Christian Right is also building bridges with secular conservative groups to share membership lists, co-sponsor candidate fund raisers and join forces to support GOP nominees. Fund raisers for Christian Right candidates in Virginia will feature representatives not only of Christian Right groups but also those from such organizations as Gun Owners of America, English First, Association for Concerned Taxpayers, Accuracy in Academia, the American Conservative Union and the Heritage Foundation, among many others.
The fourth strategy has been promoting the necessity of compromise. In the 1980s, Republican gubernatorial candidates in Virginia took uncompromising positions on abortion and lost to pro-choice Democrats. In each case, Christian Right leaders and activists threaten to withhold their support if the GOP candidates compromised. In the 1990s, Christian Right leaders have advocated supporting such politicians as George Allen who either are not strictly pro-life or do not wear their abortion views on their sleeve.
The question remains whether the Christian Right will grow in influence as the movement continues to mature politically. If the leadership is perceived as having moved so much into GOP mainstream as to be indistinguishable from it, activists may lose their enthusiasm. Indeed, we heard complaints from many Christian Right activists that leadership was too eagerly giving up moral positions in order to gain favor with GOP elites.
The Warner vs. Miller contest promises to test the continued strength of the Christian Right in Virginia. A Miller nomination and general-election victory is their preferred scenario, as he is the more-conservative candidate. But if Miller were to win the GOP nomination and then lose the general election, many would see that as evidence that the movement still has not broadened its support enough to carry a fellow traveler into office. A Warner renomination will surely test the willingness of social conservatives to be pragmatic, as he has angered the movement like no other Virginia Republican. MEMO: Mark Rozell is research associate professor at the White Burkett
Miller Center at the University of Virginia. Clyde Wilcox is associate
professor of government at Georgetown University. by CNB