The voters spoke out in the most recent election, this past Tuesday, and the U.S. House of Representatives will now have a Republican majority. The Senate will have a more balanced makeup as a result of the vote. A number of governor's races went to Republicans, as well, plus state legislatures are seeing an increase in Republican representation.
But is this a Republican resurgence? Not necessarily. One can interpret that the election represented a repudiation of the current course of our government. There was a definite anti-incumbency and anti-establishment feel in the results. Polling data showed that voters were distressed with Democrats, but not necessarily enamored with Republicans, either. The clear signal was that voters wanted a change, and definitely not the type of "change" that had been the mantra of the campaign in 2008.
The attitude of change and a call to governmental responsibility in the face of seemingly uncontrolled, or at least excessive, spending has been personified in the "Tea Party" movement, which is generally thought of to be an economically-based thread of our nation's populace. But many of the "members" of the grassroots movement also possess strong evangelical credentials. In fact, a poll released by the Faith and Freedom Coalition shows that 52% of self-identified Tea Party members are also evangelicals.
The influence of "values voting", and more specifically, faith-based voting, was greater in this year's election that in 2008. According to that survey, the largest single constituency in the electorate in the 2010 midterm elections was self-identified evangelicals, who comprised 29% of the vote and cast 78% of their ballots for Republican candidates.
And while much of the general news coverage focused on how economic factors would affect the 2010 vote, the life issue definitely played a significant role. The Susan B. Anthony List proclaimed this year "The Year of the Pro-Life Woman", and a number of the female candidates it supported were successful in their election bids. The List also sponsored its "Votes Have Consequences" project, in which it was active in races in districts where so-called "pro-life" Democrats who supported the health care reform legislation, which contained taxpayer funding of abortion, were running for re-election. The results are impressive: 15 of 20 of those Democrats proclaiming themselves as pro-life while supporting health care reform lost their elections. LifeNews.com has this guest column. You can also visit www.sba-list.org/scorecard to learn how SBA List-supported candidates fared on Election Day. And, here's a summary of the election of pro-life women from LifeNews.com.
I made the point in a recent interview with former U.S. House member Marilyn Musgrave, who headed up the "Votes Have Consequences" project, that candidates that have a foundation of being pro-life tend to hold a Biblical view on other issues, such as marriage and even the economy. A number of the Tea Party candidates, who spoke forcefully on economic issues and governmental restraint and stewardship, were at their core socially conservative, as well. Pastor Jim Garlow spoke with me and discussed that he believes that Christians, especially Christian pastors, will be speaking out increasingly on economic issues, including the concept of government within its means. Perhaps this election can send the message that a Christian view of government and public policy can yield effective solutions to the daunting issues that we face as a country.
No comments:
Post a Comment