Let us not forget in the wake of Martha Coakley's defeat that there is a reason why we are, or should be, Democrats. Not "independents." Democrats. I write from the perspective of an American Jew, but many Americans of all ethnicities and religions share the values that make them Democrats and that make this country great.
I am pro-Israel. I am a Zionist. I've been a member of AIPAC virtually my entire adult life. I'm a liberal. I'm a Democrat. And I'm in good company. Of the 32 Jews in the House of Representatives, only one is a Republican, and of the 13 Jews in the Senate, none are Republicans. According to CNN exit polling, the percentage of Jews voting for Barack Obama in November 2008 was higher than any other ethnic, racial, or religious group except African-Americans. Obama won about 78% of the Jewish vote, more than John Kerry, yet some would still have us believe that this is not our father's Democratic party, that the Democratic party includes anti-Semitic elements, and that the Democratic party is weak on Israel. Let's set the record straight.
I know people who are knowledgeable about Judaism, concerned about Israel, and exemplars in their personal lives of the principles of tzedakah and tikkun olam who are staunch Republicans. In fact, some of my best friends... My purpose in writing this is not to question or disparage anyone, but to explain to those who don't know, or may have forgotten, why the Democratic party has been and remains the natural home for American Jewry.
Party Affiliation Matters. Calling oneself "independent" is a nice feel-good affirmation, but ours is a two-party system. There is no "independent" party. You either vote for Democrats or Republicans. Many of us have an aversion to thinking of ourselves as Democrats or Republicans. We like to think that we coolly and rationally evaluate the candidates on their positions. We like to think that we are above "partisanship," which has become a dirty word among the elites. But whether we like it or not, whether we care to admit it or not, the issue that matters most is party affiliation.
Nearly all members of Congress vote with their party more than 80% of the time, many vote with their party more than 90% of the time, and a few vote with their party 100% of the time. If you know only what party a member belongs to, you can predict how that member will vote on any issue with a greater degree of accuracy than if you know any other single fact about that member.
In 2009 alone, in the House of Representatives, every Republican except three voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. Every Republican except one voted in favor of the Stupak Amendment to the Affordable Health Care for America Act, which barred insurance plans purchased with government subsidies from covering abortions. Every Republican voted against President Obama's stimulus plan. Every Republican voted against bringing the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (SCHIP) to the floor. Every Republican voted against the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which included the entire foreign aid budget to Israel. In the Senate, every Republican voted against the health care reform bill.
And perhaps most important, the one vote that always goes straight party line is the vote for Speaker of the House. Unlike the Senate, where a few or even one Senator can affect outcomes, the House is run autocratically. The Speaker sets the agenda, and nothing moves forward without the Speaker's agreement.
Can anyone seriously argue that there is little difference between the agendas of John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi? If not, it is equally facetious to argue that party labels don't matter or that party affiliation should not be considered when voting.
Too many ideological organizations, who claim to want friends on both sides of the aisle, don't get it either. There are some issues--support for Israel is one example--where there are no major differences between the parties, and where it therefore does make sense for single-issue pro-Israel organizations to support candidates in both parties. But on many issues, including reproductive choice and the environment, the parties strongly differ. In a misguided attempt to appear non-partisan, certain groups go out of their way to find supportive Republicans, ignoring the reality that every Republican will vote to elect Boehner Speaker of the House and vote with their fellow Republicans the vast majority of the time, a result that could not be more harmful to the causes these groups support.
There is nothing wrong with uniting behind the one party that supports your beliefs. By supporting "good" Republicans, these groups hurt their own cause by empowering a political party whose agenda is not theirs. A more effective and intellectually honest approach would oppose candidates who join parties that are ideologically opposed to the positions taken by the advocacy group. If you care about stem cell research, reproductive choice, separation of church and state, or the environment, it does not make sense to support candidates whose election will empower the Republican party.
That's hard for some people to take because it conjures up images of machine politics and voting for the party, not the person. The point is not to vote solely based on party, but to recognize that as you consider the various issues, you should remember that the party a candidate has chosen to affiliate with is one of the most important issues.
I am not advocating mindlessly supporting one party's positions over the other, or condoning behavior from one party that you would note excuse in the other party. Neither party is correct on every issue. There are some people who would vote to have the garbage picked up on Tuesday solely because they knew the Republicans supported Monday pick up, and would switch positions if the party's switched positions. That kind of stupidity is what gives genuine partisanship a bad name.
The kind of partisanship I'm advocating means standing up not only for your beliefs, but for those who share your beliefs. Rather than apologizing for supporting one party over another, we should point out that "independence" too often means independence from rational thought and an understanding of one's own interests. There are major differences between the parties. A candidate's party affiliation is itself a position that intelligent voters should consider. Voters should hold their elected representatives accountable for the party those representatives have chosen to affiliate with, and if that's what you mean by partisanship, I'm all for it.
Democratic and Jewish Values. Everyone who lives here is an immigrant or is descended from immigrants. Most ethnic groups start out as Democrats because Democrats are more focused on defending the weak and powerless. Democrats believe that there is a higher law than the law of the jungle and unfettered capitalism. Democrats see government as a powerful force for good, not as inherently evil. Government does not exist simply to enforce property rights and provide for the common defense. This is not to say that Democrats oppose free markets, but that Democrats recognize that some elements of society need health insurance, education, food, and shelter now, and cannot wait for those necessities to trickle down. Democrats recognize that growing income inequality is a sign that too many are being left behind and is a problem that must be addressed.
Democrats may disagree with one another about the best health care solution, but we all agree with Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff, the Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at American Jewish University and chair of the Conservative movement's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, that the fact that
more than 40 million Americans have no health insurance is, from a Jewish point of view, an intolerable dereliction of society's moral duty. The Torah, the Prophets, and the Rabbis of our tradition all loudly proclaim that God commands us to take care of the poor, the starving and the sick. Given the current costs of health care, almost all of us fall into that category. On both moral and religious grounds, then, we simply cannot let the present condition continue; we are duty-bound to find a way to afford health care for all American citizens.
The difference between most Jews and many other groups is that even as Jews overcame anti-Semitism and achieved economic success, Jews remained committed to the ideal of a government committed to helping the less fortunate. Sociologists can debate whether this is a result of a long history of being oppressed, a feeling of outsider status that persisted in the face of economic and social acceptance, or the values of tzedakah and tikkun olam so embedded in the Jewish soul. For whatever reason, Jews have remained committed to these ideals. As a group, Jews do not vote their pocketbooks, but instead consider the needs of all the American people, not just themselves. Many non-Jewish Americans share these values (most Democrats, after all, are not Jewish). Jews do not have a monopoly on these ideals, but no group other than African-Americans votes for the party that exemplifies these ideals to the extent that Jews do.
Democrats Are Strong on Israel. Some argue that we should put our fundamental values and beliefs aside because, in their view, the Republicans are stronger on Israel. Fortunately, that's a choice we don't have to make, and it's no longer a hypothetical question. When Democrats took control of Congress in 2006 they continued America's tradition of bi-partisan support for Israel and a look at what the Democratic-controlled Congress achieved in 2009 reveals that Congress continues to recognize and value the special relationship American has with Israel. President Obama confirmed in his first year in office that he too is pro-Israel.
If anything, a stronger case can be made that the Democrats are better on Israel than the Republicans. Former President George W. Bush gave Hamas a legitimacy it could have never earned on its own by pressuring Israel to allow Hamas to participate in Gaza elections, ignoring warnings from both Israel and the Palestinian Authority that Hamas would win. Iran is the single biggest threat to Israel, yet in eight years, Bush took no military action against Iran, he failed to rally the international community to impose tough sanctions on Iran, he destroyed Iran's natural enemy (Iraq), and he refused to talk to Iran. Consequently, Iran is now on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. Imagine what those urging Jews to vote Republican would have done had the Democrats overwhelmingly opposed foreign aid to Israel, advocated arms sales to Saudi Arabia, put Hamas in power, and not only did nothing in eight years to halt Iran's nuclear arms program, but rejected aid for an Israeli raid on Iran's main nuclear site. The Bush administration also violated security related agreements with Israel by selling arms to Arab states, a situation the Obama administration is remedying.
Congressional Republicans have also come up short. In 2007, 164 Republicans opposed foreign aid to Israel and 80% of House Republicans voted to slash foreign aid without any exception for Israel. Remarkably few Republicans opposed the Bush plan to sell arms to Saudi Arabia, and the only votes against funding a museum of Polish Jewry in Warsaw were Republican votes. As recently as July 9, 2009, a majority of House Republicans voted against the foreign aid bill. And then on December 10, 2009, every Republican voted against the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriation Act, which not only contained the entire security assistance package for Israel but funding for essential social programs.
There are real differences between the parties, but Israel is not one of them, although recent Republican lapses might give one pause. What is particularly disturbing about Republican attacks on the Democratic party from within the Jewish community is that we should know better. We have worked tirelessly for 60 years to support the natural instinct of the American people to support Israel no matter what their party or politics. Bi-partisan support for Israel is essential, and given the cyclical nature of American politics, nothing could be more foolish or short-sighted than to urge Jews to abandon one party. Yet this is exactly what some Republicans would have us do. They seem willing to turn support for Israel into a partisan issue simply for short-term political gain. If someone who is pro-Israel finds himself or herself more at home in the Republican party, then that's fine, and probably good for that person and support for Israel generally. But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that from a pro-Israel perspective, the Republican party is better than the Democratic party. The facts--what the parties actually do, rather than what fringes associated with those parties may say--don't support that conclusion.
The highest ranking Republican in the House, the man who sets the agenda for the Republicans and who would set the agenda for America if Republicans regained power, is John Boehner (R-OH). Boehner received zero ratings from NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the League of Conservation Voters. The National Education Association gave Boehner an F. The National Right to Life Committee gave Boehner a rating of 100, the Gun Owners of America gave Boehner a rating of 100, and the National Rifle Association gave Boehner a rating of A. That's the Republican agenda. It's not ours.
Why Do Any Jews Vote Republican? Then why do even 20% of Jews vote Republican? One possibility is that some Jews use support for Israel as a fig-leaf to hide their real motivation for voting Republican: their pocketbook. They would never support a candidate who is not pro-Israel, but given the choice between a pro-Israel candidate who supports their economic interests and a pro-Israel candidate who supports the economic needs of those truly in need, they opt for themselves and offer concern for Israel as the reason. We should be proud that so many Jews continue to carry the concepts of tzedakah and tikkun olam from their personal and communal lives into their political activities, but there always will be some who do not.
Another possibility is fear. The Republicans play very well into the emotional needs of our community. We are all concerned about Israel, and just as the Republicans used fear to goad the country into war with Iraq, the Republicans use fear ("can you imagine a nuclear bomb dropped on Tel Aviv") to demonstrate their commitment to Israel. The irony is that the Bush Administration single-handedly removed both of Iran's natural enemies (Iraq and Afghanistan) and that Iran and North Korea made significant strides in their nuclear programs on the Bush Administration's watch. Democrats just as strongly support Israel, but use more responsible language. The dangers Israel faces are real, but rather than talk tough, the Democrats continue to propose meaningful legislation to fight Iran and protect Israel. Tough talk from Republicans makes it appear that "they feel it in their kishkes," but political grandstanding to win votes here does nothing to make Israelis safer.
Of course, a third possibility is that some Jews truly believe that the Republican agenda is consistent with Jewish values and is best for America and Israel. We should respect their views, and ask only in return that they respect ours.
The Democratic Party is Our Natural Home. The vast majority of both parties are not Jewish, which means that we have to choose the house we are most comfortable in. Would you join a country club whose steadily dwindling membership had 178 members, none of whom was African-American and only one of whom was Jewish? If so, then the House Republican Caucus is for you. But for most Jews, the Democratic party, with its message of social and economic justice, is our natural home--not the Republican party, whose main goal seems to be to help the rich get richer and make the world safe for plutocracy. A good example is the estate tax. As Al Gore points out in his book The Assault on Reason, under the Republican agenda,
the need to eliminate inheritance taxes on the wealthiest 1/100 of 1 percent of families in American (the only taxpayers who are still subject to it) has been treated as a much more important priority than the need to provide at least minimal access to health care for tens of millions of families who currently have no access to health care coverage at all.
The 80% of Jews who vote Democratic are not stupid and are not any less concerned about Israel than the 20% who vote Republican; they simply continue to feel more comfortable with the Democratic party's commitment to Jewish values.
So I say to my Republican friends, continue to vote Republican if you want to, but remember: When the Messiah comes, there's an 80% chance he'll be a Democrat.