Voting from the Pew: The Effect of Senators' Religious Identities on Partisan Polarization in the U.S. Senate

Abstract

Partisan polarization in the Senate is in part a product of the increased sorting of evangelical Christians into the Republican caucus. The relationship between senators' religious identities, party affiliation, and ideology has changed since the 1970s. Whereas congressional party caucuses in the past were more diverse in their religious composition, evangelical Christian senators have sorted themselves into the party that most closely resembles the values of their religious identities, leading to greater overall polarization.

Thou Shalt Not Flip Flop: Senators’ Religious Affiliations and Issue Position Consistency

“…Finally, the religious and political environment has heightened conflict over cultural issues such that Congress is now divided into clear orthodox and progressive partisan camps (D'Antonio, Tuch, and Baker ). While evidence in support of this characterization is strong (McTague and Pearson‐Merkowitz ), we find it improbable that such divisions are monolithic. Instead, particular religious groups likely anchor either side of cultural conflict in the Senate with other groups far more persuadable on any given “culture wars” roll‐call vote.…”

“…As a result, any increase in the religious orthodoxy of the Republican Party in Congress (D'Antonio, Tuch, and Baker ) may prompt an equal and opposite response among Jewish Democrats. For these reasons, and because previous research shows a strong relationship between Jewish affiliation and cultural liberalism (Edwards Smith, Olson, and Fine ; McTague and Pearson‐Merkowitz ), we expect Jews in the Senate to be among the most consistent in their voting records.…”

“…Finally, mainline Protestants are likely to exhibit relative flexibility in their cultural voting records over time, as previous research demonstrates their partisan and ideological diversity (Edwards Smith, Olson, and Fine ; McTague and Pearson‐Merkowitz ). Unlike evangelical Protestants, who place a primacy on the Bible as the sole source of moral guidance, mainline Protestants “accept many different sources of religious truth” (Wald and Calhoun‐Brown , 30), and many mainline churches attempt to remain silent on politically charged issues .…”

“…Members of Congress who identify with different religions vary in their ideology, partisan affiliation, voting patterns on discrete issues, and in the extent to which they respond to the lobbying efforts of different interest groups (D'Antonio, Tuch, and Baker ; Edwards Smith, Olson, and Fine ; Fastnow, Grant, and Rudolph 1999; McTague and Pearson‐Merkowitz ; Oldmixon ; Oldmixon and Calfano ). While extant research shows that religion is an important factor influencing legislative behavior, it is also increasingly apparent that such influence is embedded in the broader political and partisan environment.…”

“…While extant research shows that religion is an important factor influencing legislative behavior, it is also increasingly apparent that such influence is embedded in the broader political and partisan environment. Two recent studies indicate that religious sorting within the congressional party caucuses has occurred alongside the emergence of clashing orthodox‐versus‐progressive ideological worldviews, growth in overall party polarization, and polarization over “culture war” issues such as abortion and gay and lesbian rights (D'Antonio, Tuch, and Baker ; McTague and Pearson‐Merkowitz ). For example, the emergence of new “culture war” issues on the political agenda cleaved the parties in fundamentally new ways that drove evangelical Protestant members of Congress from the Democratic to the Republican Party (McTague and Pearson‐Merkowitz ); this finding explains in part the increasingly distinct party positions on abortion since the 1970s (Adams ; Karol ).…”