THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, November 6, 1996 TAG: 9611060011
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A26 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 48 lines
Voters who rely on the Christian Coalition's guide ballots in political campaigns would be wise to apply a little skepticism in future races.
The ballots are supposed to be nonpartisan, but the Coalition's on-again, off-again enthusiasm for Sen. John Warner suggests how easily such guides are manipulated for partisan purposes.
Last January, the Coalition waxed warm toward Warner. A 1995 legislative score card showed the senator supporting the organization's key positions 100 percent of the time that year.
Then came the June GOP primary. Same senator, different ballot.
Suddenly, 100-percent John re-emerged as 20-percent John. A voter guide distributed by the Coalition showed Warner siding with the Coalition on only two of 10 key votes.
The Coalition, which must avoid outright endorsements to protect its tax-exempt status, seemed clearly to be pushing Warner-opponent Jim Miller who was on the ``right'' side of all 10 votes.
The switch came at a time when many conservative Christians were mad at Warner for opposing the GOP's 1994 Senate nominee, Oliver North. Reflecting that view, Coalition founder Pat Robertson contributed to Miller's campaign, not Warner's.
But then, after Miller lost and Warner won the GOP nomination, the Coalition printed yet another election guide prior to Tuesday's U.S. Senate vote. This time, John Warner - the conservative alternative in the general election - reappeared as 83-percent John.
To achieve that result, the Coalition dropped from the guide ballot several votes used to portray Warner in an unfavorable light last spring, even though it kept the old list in certain congressional races. It then substituted several issues on which Warner sided with Coalition positions.
The tailoring of the ballots shows how voting records can be selectively cited to reach a preordained conclusion in political campaigns. It is also evidence that the Coalition's claim to nonpartisanship is largely a charade.
Other organizations claiming tax-exempt status - from labor unions to environmental groups - also print guide ballots with a distinctly partisan cast. But rarely in a one-year cycle do they fluctuate so markedly on a single candidate.
The Christian Coalition consistently backs the most conservative candidate in any given race. That's fine. But it should also be consistent in how it portrays individuals. The organization undermines its own credibility when its guide ballots can cast a single senator in vastly different lights, depending on the outcome the Coalition seeks. by CNB