ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Sunday, April 14, 1996 TAG: 9604120024
SECTION: 3 EDITORIAL EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MARK J. ROZELL AND CLYDE WILCOX
THE CONTEST between incumbent John Warner and challenger Jim Miller for the Republican U.S. Senate nomination is being portrayed as yet another battle between the Christian Right and the moderate wing of the party.
Warner is lining up key party endorsements, such as that of former vice president Dan Quayle, and Miller is actively mobilizing grass-roots Christian conservative activists.
Some party moderates see a danger to Miller's strategy: As the GOP becomes increasingly identified with the Christian Right, the party loses support among the many Virginians who call themselves conservatives yet resent moral posturing in public life.
There may be some credibility to this charge, but it is worth asking whether it is true that a growing mass movement of politically active conservative Christians actually hurts the GOP.
Not too long ago, the Virginia Republican Party was a relatively small, homogenous party with little of the internal conflict so visible within the party today. It was also a party that lost much more often than it won.
Much of the internal conflict experienced by the GOP today is a natural outgrowth of the party's having become larger and more diverse. Its strength is also its weakness.
There is no doubt that, with the influx of conservative Christians, Republicans have gained the support of a highly organized and active constituency. This constituency provides key resources to the party to help it win elections.
This influx of new party activists has also provoked an important debate within the GOP on the regulation of private moral behavior and "family values." It has brought new elites to the GOP who bring diversity to a party once dominated by a small group of old-time Republicans from "The [Shenandoah] Valley."
Unarguably, the state GOP has benefited in many ways from the mobilization of previously apolitical evangelicals. Although we do not share the zeal of Christian conservatives for social regulation of private moral conduct or their agenda for education, we do believe that these people have a legitimate place at the pluralist table.
If the Christian Right can induce evangelicals, fundamentalists and Pentecostals to participate widely in politics, then that is good. If the Christian Left can countermobilize and provide an alternative religious view of social policy, then that too will be good. An enlightened debate in which religiously motivated citizens act as prophetic critics of public policy is healthful to the political system.
There are downsides to the Christian Right mobilization. For the GOP, the most obvious injury has been the string of nominees from the Christian Right, or who tilted too heavily toward the Christian Right agenda in order to win the nomination, rejected by voters as extremists. Had the GOP nominated Bobbie Kilberg for lieutenant governor in 1993, and anyone other than Oliver North for Senate in 1994, we are confident the party would have easily won both elections. The factional infighting will be especially damaging to the party if it loses the 1996 Senate race.
Virginia has also suffered to the extent that the debate over moral regulation has sometimes descended into rank prejudice and hatred.
Our surveys of GOP convention delegates asked questions about tolerance for gays. Christian conservatives said that they considered homosexuality sinful, yet a majority thoughtfully responded that they did not want government searching out and prosecuting gays. Nonetheless, a minority wrote extremely distasteful, hateful notes about gays in the margins of the survey.
There are many documented cases of mobilized activists using tactics of intimidation against opponents in GOP mass meetings and conventions. These attitudes and actions constitute only a minority of the movement, yet are prevalent enough to have caused some longtime activists to stop participating in party events altogether.
There is evidence that, as the Christian Right has become increasingly active in GOP politics, the movement has matured. If the trend continues, and leaders do a good job at training newly mobilized activists to avoid extremist rhetoric and tactics of intimidation, the movement will likely show greater political strength.
Today, challenger Jim Miller hopes those activists who backed his opponent for the Senate nomination in 1994 will provide the foundation of a primary victory against John Warner in June. Many analysts, it is clear, take Miller's candidacy seriously because of his potential support from the Christian Right.
This is far different from just several years ago, when the chances of any candidate whose main constituency was Christian Right activists would have been dismissed as implausible.
Mark J. Rozell is a research associate professor at the University of Virginia. Clyde Wilcox is an associate professor of government at Georgetown University. They are co-authors of "Second Coming: The New Christian Right in Virginia Politics."
LENGTH: Medium: 93 lines ILLUSTRATION: GRAPHIC: NANCY OHANIAN/Los Angeles Timesby CNB