What Would Jesus Tax?
By David Madland
January 19, 2008
As Mike Huckabee's presidential candidacy gains momentum, winning the Iowa
caucus and now in the running to win Saturday's South Carolina primary,
the
media has primarily focused on his ability to generate sup****t among white
evangelical Christians based on his conservative positions on social
issues,
such as his opposition to abortion and to civil unions for gay couples.
This
standard story line misses the former Baptist minister's ability to speak
to
the economic concerns of evangelical voters and glosses over the growing
divide in the conservative movement between social and economic
conservatives.
Conservatives have won electoral gains over the past thirty years by
courting an uneasy, yet effective fusion of right-to-life social
conservatives with economic conservatives who sup****t tax cuts and a
reduced
government safety net for the needy. For thirty years, the differences
between these two factions have largely been masked, with many observers
assuming that socially conservative white evangelicals actually sup****t a
conservative economic agenda.
Not all of Huckabee's economic views, of course, are progressive. He
sup****ts, for example, a regressive consumption tax that would seriously
empty the wallets of many low- and middle-income white evangelicals he is
now courting on the campaign trail. Still, Huckabee is running against the
standard conservative line on the economy. He argues that conservatives
need
to "quit being a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wall Street ... or else we're
not going to win another election for a generation." He has sup****ted
increasing the minimum wage and expanding health insurance to more
children-positions that put him at odds with traditional economic
conservatives.
While commentators have increasingly noted Huckabee's economic views, few
have linked his message with his ability to win white evangelical voters
or
noted what this may mean for the future of the conservative movement.
Since
the emergence of the Religious Right as a defining voice in the
conservative
movement in the late 1970s, most evangelical leaders (with some notable
exceptions like Jim Wallis) have generally sup****ted cutting taxes and
reducing government services.
Most Christian Right leaders, observes Michael Lienesch, a professor of
Political Science at the University of North Carolina, "combine
conservative
economics and conservative religion in a multiplicity of ways, so that in
the end the two are almost indistinguishable."
Indeed, Pat Robertson argues that, "To everyone who has shall more be
given," while the late Jerry Falwell argued that capitalism was "part of
God's plan for His people." Ralph Reed, former head of the Christian
Coalition, is known for his fervent sup****t of tax cuts.
Yet these evangelical leaders no longer command the following they once
did.
More im****tantly, they never accurately reflected the economic views of
most
evangelicals, who are not married to economic conservatism but rather
boast
a wide range of views on economic issues. There are even quite a few
economically progressive evangelicals.
In my research, I have found that people who are pro-life are just as
likely
as people who are pro-choice to sup****t progressive economic policies,
such
as increasing benefits for the unemployed and reducing income inequality.
Similarly, sociologists like Robert Wuthnow and Stephen Hart have found
that
religious conservatism is not linked to economic conservatism.
Most evangelicals today are not necessarily wed to a pro-business agenda.
According to a January 2007 poll by the Pew Research Center, more than two
thirds of white evangelicals agreed that business cor****ations make too
much
profit. Further, almost three quarters (72 percent) of them said there is
too much power concentrated in the hands of a few big companies. These
views
are largely anathema to those held by the cor****atist wing of the
conservative movement.
There is also evidence that on a few particular issues white evangelicals
tend to embrace a more progressive economic outlook. According to the same
Pew survey, 78 percent of white evangelicals favored increasing the
minimum
wage from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour, and 59 percent sup****ted the government
guaranteeing health care for all citizens.
This evidence suggests that Mike Huckabee's electoral success and
popularity
is not just a product of his social conservatism. In fact, he more
accurately than other, more economically conservative candidates, captures
the economic concerns of many evangelical voters.
More fundamentally, Mike Huckabee's success highlights the underlying
tensions in the conservative movement. The fusion of economic and social
conservatives has been a ticking time bomb for nearly 30 years. Economic
and
social conservatism do not naturally fit together. Their fusion has been a
marriage of convenience.
Now, evangelical voters seem to be leaving this marriage of convenience
with
every vote they give to Mike Huckabee -- a candidate who does not force
them
to choose between their social and economic views. As this election season
develops, this may become known as the moment when the uneasy coalition
between social and economic conservatives finally breaks down.
This article was originally published in The Wa****ngton Post.
|
