BERKLEY CENTER for RELIGION, PEACE & WORLD AFFAIRS GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY 2007–2008 | 2007 Undergraduate Fellows Report Religious Advocates: A Force in US Politics? BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE FELLOWS REPORT REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE Table of Contents About this Report . 1 About the Berkley Center Acknowledgements Introduction . 3. Important Advocacy Issues I . Insider/Outsider Advocacy Strategies . 4 Insider Advocacy Grassroots Advocacy Determining the Issues II . Partisanship . 7. Elections Membership and Party Ties Policy, Not Party III . Coalitions . 10. Bridging the Religious-Secular Divide Building Bridges within the Religious Community IV . Religious Language . 14 Faith Talk: The Language of Religious Advocates The Religious Edge: Effectiveness of Religious Advocates Conclusion . 18 Appendix A: Survey Questions . 21 Appendix B: List of Organizations Interviewed and Surveyed . 22 Appendix C: Other issues listed by religious advocacy groups . 23 2007 Undergraduate Fellows Biographies . 24. Copyright 2007, Georgetown University. About this report Acknowledgements The Berkley Center’s 2007 Undergraduate Fellows Faculty Advisor Program gave a select group of ten Georgetown under- Professor Clyde Wilcox 2007–2008 graduate students the resources to study the role of | Department of Government religious advocacy groups in United States politics. Under the direction of Professor Clyde Wilcox of the Program Coordinator Department of Government, the Fellows spent the 2007 academic year defining their research agenda, Melody Fox Ahmed studying the key issues as a group, and learning from experts in seminars with speakers such as a prominent Project Leaders religious advocate and a leading journalist of religion Jenna Cossman and politics. They then reached out to leaders of a vari- Todd Wintner ety of religious advocacy groups in Washington, D.C., to conduct in-person interviews and an online survey. Authors Driven by awareness of the importance of religion to United States policies, especially as it relates to the 2008 Jenna Cossman U.S. presidential election, the Fellows sought to under- Catherine Currie stand the influence of religious advocacy on national Nadia Khan politics today. They hope their findings will serve as a useful tool to better understand this important issue. Camille Kolstad Megan O’Neill This is the second annual Berkley Center Undergraduate Fellows report. In 2006, the Fellows studied the role of Eric Nowicki religious and secular organizations in development Jeff Pan policy and released a report with their findings entitled Nicolas Sementelli Secular & Religious Approaches to Global Development: A Common Ground? Eric Wind Todd Wintner For more information, visit the website at http://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE FELLOWS REPORT REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE The Berkley CenTer for religion, PeaCe, and World affairs The Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, created within the Office of the President in March 2006, is part of a university-wide effort to build knowledge about religion’s role in world affairs and promote interreligious understanding in the service of peace. Through research, teaching, and outreach activities, the Center explores the intersection of religion with four global challenges: diplomacy and trans- national relations, democracy and human rights, global development, and interreligious dialogue. Thomas Banchoff, Associate Professor in the Department of Government and the School of Foreign Service, is the Center’s first director. 1 Religious Advocates: A Force in US Politics? Introduction Since the 2004 U.S. presidential election, much atten- 2007–2008 tion and scrutiny has been given to religious advocacy | groups and the perceived rise in strength of the “religious lobby.” Many commentators have claimed that these groups have an undue effect on American politics, and a myriad of articles and books have been written on the subject. With approximately a year left until the 2008 U.S. presidential election, the spotlight is once again focused on religious advocacy groups as candidates vie for the support and votes of the American people. Relatively little is known about the composition and influence of religious advocacy groups in the U.S. their goals by focusing on the strategies of insider versus Between February and November 2007, the Berkley outsider advocacy, the partisanship ties of advocacy Center Undergraduate Fellows set out to provide some groups, the coalitions shaping the advocacy environ- definition to this often misunderstood community. ment, and the religious language these groups and Specifically, our project seeks to better understand how coalitions employ in advocating for specific issues. religious advocates conduct their affairs and achieve Ultimately, the goal of evaluating the effectiveness of religious affiliaTions of The 110Th Congress African Methodist Episcopal Jewish Anglican Mormon Assembly of God Reorganized Latter-Day Saints Baptist Lutheran Buddhist Methodist Christian Muslim Christian Reformed Nazarene REPORT FELLOWS BERKLEY CENTER UNDERGRADUATE Christain Scientists Presbyterian Church of Christ Protestant Congregationalists Baptist Quaker Disciples of Christ Roman Catholic Eastern Orthodox Seventh-Day Adventist Episcopalian Unitarian Evangelical United Church of Christ Evangelical Lutheran Unaffiliated Evangelical Methodist 3 religious advocacy groups on U.S. policy provided the Important Advocacy Issues framework for this study. The survey results show a wide range of interests and issues addressed by religious advocacy groups over the The methodology used for the project consisted of past year. Notably, issues frequently associated with in-person interviews of religious advocates as well as religious advocacy in the media, such as abortion and an online survey sent out electronically to numerous family issues, were equally accompanied by a number religious advocacy organizations. The surveyed groups of other concerns such as human rights, justice and include some that are explicitly religious in their plat- the environment. The following graph illustrates the form as well as others that do not specifically mention diversity of issues taken up by religious advocacy orga- religion, but advocate for what could be considered nizations. Other less frequent responses are listed in religious issues based on the group’s target constituency, Appendix B. the intentionality of their constituents, their cause, and their rhetoric. The survey included both qualitative I. Insider/Outsider Advocacy and quantitative questions, and groups who responded Strategies to the electronic version of the survey were allowed to answer anonymously. See Appendix A for a list of ques- Religious advocacy groups, like other interest groups, tions used in the survey and Appendix B for a list of the can choose among a variety of strategies and tactics. organizations interviewed and surveyed. However, given that the majority of religious advocacy organizations are registered under 501(c)(3) tax-exempt The United States Congress is the avenue by which the status, they are not “lobbies” in the legal sense and vast majority of religious advocacy groups attempt to therefore are limited to “educating” policy makers for influence public policy. Congress itself is a model of the sake of “public interest.” In return, 501(c)(3) status religious pluralism as no individual religious denomina- offers tax-exemption for both the organization and the GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY GEORGETOWN | tion finds majority representation. The chart on the donations it receives. previous page represents the declared faith of the 535 members of Congress. imPorTanT advoCaCy issues In the past year, with which issues has your organization worked? 30 BERKLEY CENTER 25 20 15 10 5 0 e s t s n e ir ce rty Stat fa atio nmen Peac ove Justi P s Issues Abortion ch/ mily Issue viro ign Af re Immigr Chur Fa En men’ Fo Human Rights Wo 4 Insider Advocacy There is a fine line between the strategies used by lobbying organizations on Capitol Hill and the “insider advocacy” tactics employed by religious advocacy groups. Most of these strategies directly overlap, including meetings, phone calls, and other forms of face-to-face interaction between advocates and members of government. Such meetings are invaluable opportunities for members of the advocacy community to educate policymakers about their organizations’ issues of concern and build relationships with politicians who can serve as advo- cates for their causes. For example, it was only through her discussion with Nancy Pelosi on the topic of the 2007–2008 2007 U.S. Farm Bill that Monica Mills, Director of | Government Relations at Bread for the World, had the opportunity to effectively express her moral opposition to certain aspects of the legislation. Interestingly, 97% of the organizations surveyed reported meeting with government officials ten or more times during the past year. Only one organization, the Buddhist Peace Fellowship, reported no engagement Washington National Cathedral in “insider advocacy” activities. The advocacy groups surveyed reported approaching policymakers across the There is a fine line between the strategies three branches of government, not only meeting with used by lobbying organizations on the high-level officials but their staff as well. Hill and the “insider advocacy” tactics employed by religious advocacy groups. Some well-connected religious advocates exert enough political