Last Saturday’s debate on the Stupak anti-abortion amendment to the House health reform bill provides an X-ray of the complex interplay between region and religion within the Democratic coalition.
When it comes to social issues, religion matters among Democrats, not just Republicans. Of the 64 Democrats who supported the Stupak anti-abortion amendment, 35 (55 percent) are Catholic. In the Democratic caucus, by contrast, Catholics make up only 38 percent of the total. Put differently: 36 percent of House Democrats who are Catholic supported the amendment, versus 18 percent of non-Catholic House Democrats.
Although we lack district-by-district breakdowns of religious affiliation, data from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life indicates that a majority of the Catholics who supported the Stupak amendment hail from states with above-average Catholic populations, and the ethnic composition of their districts suggests that they have large numbers of Catholic constituents.
Region matters as well. Of the 29 non-Catholic Democrats who voted for the Stupak amendment, 20 hail from conservative southern districts, and two from heavily Catholic districts in Texas and New Mexico. The remaining seven represent conservative-leaning districts in Indiana, Utah, West Virginia, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Ohio.
No Democrats from the western-tier states of Washington and Oregon or the mid-Atlantic states of New York, New Jersey, and Maryland voted for the amendment; of the 21 New England Democrats, only four--all Catholic--supported it.
Although the religious and regional balance of the Democratic Party has changed in recent decades, the need to manage a diverse coalition has not. It’s a reality that Democrats angry about compromises that congressional leaders make would do well to keep in mind.
Click here to read Alan Wolfe's argument that the vote actually illustrates the waning influence of Catholicism in politics.
Print
COMMENTS (1)
It's not just a question of how Catholic legislators vote, but also why they voted that way. Clearly the bishops took a hard line on the issue, threatening to oppose any bill for health care reform that did not include the provisions Mr Stupak put forward, and clearly it was this active and energetic intervention by the Church that influenced many of the Democrats in Congress. How many of them wish to be treated as Mr Kerry was in the 2004 election?
Maybe Mr Wolfe doubts the clout of the bishops, but the votes on Saturday tell a different story. All the statistics about how Catholics largely see issues the way the rest of the country does, and not as the bishops do, is irrelevant. What ma ... view full comment
It's not just a question of how Catholic legislators vote, but also why they voted that way. Clearly the bishops took a hard line on the issue, threatening to oppose any bill for health care reform that did not include the provisions Mr Stupak put forward, and clearly it was this active and energetic intervention by the Church that influenced many of the Democrats in Congress. How many of them wish to be treated as Mr Kerry was in the 2004 election?
Maybe Mr Wolfe doubts the clout of the bishops, but the votes on Saturday tell a different story. All the statistics about how Catholics largely see issues the way the rest of the country does, and not as the bishops do, is irrelevant. What matters in politics is the political will of the few who speak out loudly and are engaged in the political arena -- in that sense one must see the Church in America as completely reactionary.
Again, count the votes from Saturday -- Catholic Democrats in the House were twice as likely (36% to 18%) as non-Catholics to vote for Stupak's amendment. The bishops were heard on Saturday; moderate and liberal Catholics were not.
Neil