Addressing Obama's Catholic Problem

The New Republic: Ill. Senator Should Learn To Articulate Economic Views Through Catholic Lens

(The New Republic)  This column was written by Michael Sean Winters.

---

Barack Obama has a Catholic problem. While Catholics constitute only 23 percent of the nation's population, their numbers are higher in such critical states as Nevada, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania. And he lost badly among those voters this winter and spring. In New Hampshire, at the beginning of the primary season, Hillary Clinton took 44 percent of the Catholic vote to Obama's 27 percent. Toward the end of the primary season, in Pennsylvania, Clinton won 70 percent of the Catholic vote to Obama's 30. Pundits and pollsters have mostly focused on other demographic characteristics among Clinton's supporters: They were older, less educated, and earned less than $50,000. There is undoubtedly a great deal of overlap. But Obama consistently ran better among Protestants than he did among Catholics.

Obama doesn't need to take drastic action to make up for this deficit. He doesn't need to bring a Catholic priest into his "brain trust" like FDR did in 1932, and he doesn't need to win overwhelmingly among Catholics like John F. Kennedy did in 1960. But here's the interesting part: In articulating his economic views in ways that are especially accessible to Catholics, Obama would do much more than just increase his chances with that constituency. He'd discover that Catholic social thought provides Democrats with the kind of moral vision and linguistic clarity that their economic positions have lacked for decades now.

In early July, the Obama campaign had itself a "values week." It was a big to-do. The candidate called for extending Bush's faith-based initiatives. He gave a beautiful testimony about his own conversion experience and spoke movingly about how he "let Jesus Christ into my life." Obama has always littered his rhetoric with quotes from Scripture, and he did so even more a few weeks ago. He even allowed that "war and poverty, joblessness and homelessness, violent streets and crumbling schools -- are not simply technical problems ... they are moral problems." But the overall impression of the week was that a ticket was being punched, a check mark put next to the words "values voters" on the campaign checklist. The question is whether he will mention values not just on specifically designated occasions during "values week", but if he'll demonstrate how his values ground his economic and other policies. So far he hasn't.

He could start by borrowing from Catholic social thought, which rests on two foundations: the inalienable dignity of the human person and the common good. Human dignity, though recently derided in TNR has both a religious and a liberal pedigree. For Christians, Jews, and Muslims, it is rooted in the belief that man is created in the image and likeness of God. Modern liberals embrace the notion in different ways, but particularly espouse Kant's argument that a human being is never a means but always an end. In the American context, Lincoln said it best: "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy."

Human dignity's necessary social corollary is the common good. Not only are we all essentially equal; we are all in this together. The common good embraces the idea that property rights are not absolute and that the good of everyone in a society has a claim on each of us within that society. In the 2004 convention keynote that first catapulted Obama to national attention, he referenced a biblical injunction that speaks to the same core idea: "Alongside our famous individualism, there's another ingredient in the American saga, a belief that we're all connected as one people. ... I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper."

Too often, though, Democrats speak of economic plans as if they were distinct and unrelated to any common national purpose. They speak in abstract, de-personalized terms. Health care is presented as "a right" and education policy as an exercise in acquisitiveness ("Our plan for success for pre-schoolers!"). But insuring the uninsured is also a decent thing to do, providing better education is in part about valuing the work and wisdom of our ancestors, and raising living standards for the poor and near-poor is what we owe our least fortunate. Economic realities are, for everyone except economists, existential realities -- and all these policies help enhance human dignity and further the common good. Yet, in his major speech on health care in Iowa last year, Obama reverted to legalese, claiming health care was "a right" instead of invoking the moral obligations Americans owe to one another as citizens and as fellow human beings.

Another long-standing principle of Catholic social thought -- combining both the dignity and social good arguments -- is that the government must intervene whenever the private sector fails to protect and provide for a specific group of people. The seminal papal encyclical on social justice, Rerum Novarum, issued in 1891, was clear: "Whenever the general interest or any particular class suffers, or it is threatened with evils which can in no other way be met, the public authority must step in to meet them." Whatever you think of Republican policies in economic terms, they are repugnant in moral terms, and it would behoove Obama to make that case. He hasn't done a good enough job of convincing Americans that John McCain's health care proposal does little or nothing to help the poor; that his flip-flop on the Bush tax cuts has robbed him of both his most courageous vote and a principled stand against the unlimited acquisition of gross wealth; and that time and again, the GOP has stood for the rights of property above the well-being of the whole society.

Government intervention on behalf of the common good is also well-suited to issues that cross geographic and generational boundaries, such as environmental and educational policy. Your factory in Ohio could cause acid rain that pollutes my farm in New York, so individual self-regulation or even policy initiatives at the state level are insufficient. Global warming is, well, global in scope and will require diplomacy to avert its horrific consequences. Educational policy must reflect the moral commitment of one generation to the next: We may not directly and materially benefit from the education our grandchildren receive, but we have a moral obligation to them nonetheless. Self-interest, the foundation of the GOP's laissez-faire approach to problems, lacks the moral weight to adequately address such issues.

In April 2006, Michael Tomasky famously argued that Democrats should embrace the common good, and chastised them for relying overmuch on rights-based language. He noted the many and varied sources for the idea of the common good, from Rousseau's social contract to parts of Madison's writings in the Federalist papers. But Tomasky shunned the religious roots of his argument. This was a mistake: More Americans are familiar with Obama's reference to the biblical letter of St. James than they are with the writings of Jean Jacques Rousseau, and church-goers (which most Americans are) encounter the countless biblical invocations to solidarity more regularly than they flip through their copies of the Federalist papers. Tomasky was correct about the limits of rights-based language, but he missed how speaking about the common good can help Democrats attract religiously motivated voters.

There are, of course, other ways to reach out to Catholics beyond economic issues. Obama can tie his struggle against racial bigotry to the earlier struggle of immigrant Catholics against ethnic and religious bigotry. He can reach out to Latino Catholics by invoking Pope Benedict's call to make keeping families together a focal point for immigration reform. He can go to a Catholic university and discuss how the fiasco in Iraq might have been avoided, not only by reading the National Intelligence Estimate, but also by consulting the 5th century just-war theories of St. Augustine.

Alan Wolfe, one of the nation's foremost analysts of how politics and religion collide in our society and culture, recently wrote (happily, while blurbing my new book) : "As Catholics go, so goes America." In 2008, with all the focus on the economy, Catholics are ripe for Obama to pick if he can master the distinctive ways they view economic issues. Unlike the gloom-and-doom preaching of Calvin's heirs, Catholicism has a more positive take on the possibilities of human culture and politics that would fit Obama's politics of hope nicely. And unlike the disconnected, valueless recipes for economic policy that have plagued previous Democratic campaigns, Obama can unite his policies into a moral vision for where he wants to lead America. Doing that could win him the White House -- and, more importantly, it could give him a blueprint for how to lead once he's there.

[ioweign]

Two more Catholics in name only. I''ve got news for you, the younger people are rejecting the cafeteria Catholic mentality, that tried to hijack our church. There rejecting contraception, abortion, and embracing the Holy Fathers teaching. Come back to Mass, and you will see this.

Posted by cwbyht at 04:35 PM : Jul 19, 2008

I am Catholic and the the US government has never asked or approached me about abortion or contraception. I attended twelve years of parochial education at no cost to the state or federal government and firmly believe in the separation of church and state. If you want religion in schools then you pay for it like my parents did.

[drapp91]

P.S. Since the flock of network anchors, aka, the Obama %u201CPIMP MY CANDIDACY TEAM%u201D has already begun Obama''s coronation, he will now be addressed as %u201CThe Ayatollah of Crapola%u201D. The %u201CMullah of all lying Mullah''s%u201D and what a Mullah Flocker he is.

As far as the network anchors reporting status goes...please....Obama press promotion propaganda hacks at best.Fair and Balanced not today not ever!!!

Need proof, in June 08, the networks reported on Obama a total of 146 minutes, McCain they reported 48 minutes.
The network anchors are proving to be a lot like general Wesley Clark...the difference between a %u201CBROWN NOSER AND A BUTT KISSER IS DEPTH PERCEPTION...a skill as yet unacquired by the bunch of them.
I hope you all enjoy your pre-presidential knee pad acquisition trip.

MARK THIS DAY WELL, BECAUSE THIS IS THE DAY NETWORK ANCHOR WENT FROM BEING REPORTERS, TO PROPAGANDA APPARATCHIKS OF THE BODY POLITIC.

LAST WORD ON THE NEW YORKER MAGAZINE COVER: SATIRE AND TASTE ARE NOT SYNONYMOUS. SO OBAMA, CRY ME A RIVER YOU BABY!!!!!WHAAA... MOMMEY THERE MAKING FUN OF ME..... WELCOME TO THE BIG LEAGUE PAL.

It''s when they stop making fun of you...then it''s time to worry. By the way with those ears how could you possibly be that thin skinned?????

[cwbyht]

"Some of us Catholic''''s are more worried more about the corruption infesting this country (from Republican''''s)than we are about non-issues like abortion"


"Many, many Catholics are pro-choice - that''''s no reason they''''d vote against Obama. The Pope does not speak for all American catholics - if he did, we''''d be not using birth control, and ignoring the pedophile priests as he wanted."

Two more Catholics in name only. I''ve got news for you, the younger people are rejecting the cafeteria Catholic mentality, that tried to hijack our church. There rejecting contraception, abortion, and embracing the Holy Fathers teaching. Come back to Mass, and you will see this.

[PacificGatePost]

WHILE OBAMA IS TRAVELING, .....

HILLARY MAY BE ANTICIPATING A DIFFERENT OUTCOME AT THE CONVENTION

The Democratic convention is not over and done with.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/07/is-clintons-presidential-campaign.html

[grumpas]

Are you clueless? Obama will NEVER get the Catholic vote, until he renouces abortion.

Posted by cwbyht

Some of us Catholic''s are more worried more about the corruption infesting this country (from Republican''s)than we are about non-issues like abortion. It''s eating away at the heart of our society. The fact honest people like you have the ability to ignore it and pretend it doesn''t exist is frightening. That''s why I am voting Obama.

[it_oldtimer]

Screw the strupid, moronic Catholics. Anybody that truly believes in the big "Santa Claus In The Sky" is a mental ***. They need serious psychiatiric help to get their lives back on a rational track.

[brianbwb-2009]

"spectacularly", excuse the typo, coffee just kicked in.

[brianbwb-2009]

"He''''s still not talking policy. His is a no-risk, platformless strategy. No way is he even worthy to be a candidate until he addresses some issues and cuts out the charismatic bullcrap." Posted by eddom949

Only a fool would try to establish policy before knowing the effects such would have on those subject to it, this is why Mr. Obama is traveling now, gathering first hand information, and not relying on the liars who have guided us into the messes we are in now.

Announce a policy? Based on what, and whose information? It is like Bush to announce policy in ignorance, then blame others when it fails, and like Bush suporters to condone such behavior.

Seeing as how the neocons sold us out to "globalization", even domestic economic policy depends on other countries now, like China, (holds $3 trillion in US debt) Saudi Arabia, (controlling a third of all the would''s oil flow, and holding 15% of all US currency) and Iran, (controls the strait of Hormuz, the valve for the oil flow out of the Middle East) each of which could seriously damage our economy, or in combination, destroy it.

Only a fool would arrogantly announce policy without consulting with thoise who also have stakes, and that fool will fail, as Bush has so spectactlarly done.

[brianbwb-2009]

So now we hear of a "Catholic problem". before JFK was elected the nation''s first Catholic president, have the "Catholics" had any problems with all the non Catholic presidents before and since?

None that I am aware of, so what is so different about... Oh yeah, I do sometimes suffer from the delusion that racism is dying.

I doubt Mr. Obama has a "Catholic problem," more he has a "racist problem". So far I have heard of the "Catholic problem", the "Jewish problem", the "rural White male problem", so it is apparent that the mass media is continually trying to create new biases in those deluded creatures who regard themselves as "White" people, who all have a problem related to their particular segment of "Whiteness".

The problem is not Mr. Obama''s, it is their own, and nothing can be done for them, they have simply not yet evolved to the point of thinking past Neanderthal superstition and stereotype.

[eddom949]

He''s still not talking policy. His is a no-risk, platformless strategy. No way is he even worthy to be a candidate until he addresses some issues and cuts out the charismatic bullcrap.

[susanhelit]

Many, many Catholics are pro-choice - that''s no reason they''d vote against Obama. The Pope does not speak for all American catholics - if he did, we''d be not using birth control, and ignoring the pedophile priests as he wanted.

[cwbyht]

Are you clueless? Obama will NEVER get the Catholic vote, until he renouces abortion.

[cfin5]

If Barak Obama wins this election, he will promote Muslims in our Armed Forces to positions that you would not even dare to believe right now. Your daft in the thinking gourd if you don''t believe me. You just keep believing words instead of the personal history of this candidate,.....and you are gonna bite off more than you can chew in all things strategic concerning our country. Baraks tongue is a golden politically, but his history is lead brick. ---------I prefer tongue-tied knowledge to ignorant loquacity.
Marcus Tullius Cicero

[andylance1]

Obama''s only Catholic connection is with the radical race-baiting Father Michael Pfleger in Chicago who attacked and ridiculed Hillary Clinton and was censured and placed on mandatory leave by Cardinal Francis George.

Father Pfleger and Rev. Wright helped put Obama on the political map in Chicago. With Catholic friends like this, who needs enemies?

[chrisbieber]

BHO is a suave and articulate advocate of socialism by any other name. His voting record(the little there is) is quite revealing and his advocation of "change'' is pure socialism cloaked under the happy mask of "hope"..more and more and STRONGER and STRONGER centralized FedGov and Empire..and MORE robbing Peter to pay Paul Marxist redistribution of OTHERS wealth.

Just like megalomaniac militarist McMadman....and the same Republican message of Empire and war and taxes....

a Hobson''s choice of false alternatives...

Thanks to the conditioned voters who rejected Ron Paul and his message of nonintervention and peace.

[Razzl]

Unfortunately, while Catholic social thought is the basis for modern European social democracy that we should be striving toward, the leadership of the church itself have lost their feel, or perhaps their stomach, for the political struggle for social justice and American catholics are not sufficiently grounded in the essentially socialistic views of their own church to understand why they must not imitate their noisy protestant evangelical counterparts. Obama''s standing among American catholics is determined by their being primarily blue collar and ethnic, therefore inherently hostile to blacks, and not religious. There''s no benefit to be paid to courting catholics as catholics because catholicism as a religious ideology is now an empty shell and all its remaining adherents belong to groups too difficult to be worth courting in these last few months before November...

[wordtrap]

Obama cannot gain the restoration of such Judaeo Christian values as liberty, equality, fraternity by preaching but only by helping the electorate to understand total privatization of everything is not the antidote to "socialism" seen as a way of taking away everyting you own but but that it is in fact self interest and the profit motive masquerading as promoiting a "free market" that has done that very thing.

[aldon61]

Senator Obama does, in fact, have to take on this issue. If his past record is indicitive, he''s going to put the horse before the cart and concentrate on being officially named as the democratic nominee. Sometime in late August or early September, I look for him to have a major speech, something that will blend into the debates. The primary difference that I see is his support for abortion rights. McCain may well have a problem attaining the Catholic vote, due to his divorice and many adultries. This is going to be crucial to both and will be interesting to watch it unfold. My guess? They''ll split the Catholic vote, or come awful close to it.

[rpmcestmoi]

James Michener wrote eloquently of Kennedy''s Catholic problem in Report of the County Chairman, a little remembered book about Michener''s acute awareness of bigotry in Buck''s County, Pennsylvania, where Michener was Democratic Party chair.
Kennedy confronted the Catholic problem straight on. Could Obama do the same with this reverse Catholic bigotry? Hard to know.
Kathleen Sebelius has interesting credentials, as governor, catholic of the practical persuasion regarding women''s rights to choose (as is the majority view), and being a straight-on speaker. She just might to a lot for the party as veep.

[claudann1970]

I do not understand how Mr. Winters can assert that Barak Obama or any liberal democrat should use the Jewish/Christian/Muslim social ideals of "the inalienable dignity of the human person" and "man is created in the image and likeness of God" when they support the legal murder of not-yet-born humans! That would be the height of hypocrisy. Also, how does Mr. Winter have the gaul to make the blanket statement that Republican policies are "repugnant in moral terms". I can understand, although I don''t agree with most of them, the arguments against many Republican policies. But I do not understand how intelligent and compassionate people, especially people "of faith", can support the party that endorses the most repugnant thing most of us can think of--the murder of innocent, helpless children. What rational person of faith can actually believe that an infant is not a human being made in the image of God the second before it is born, but suddenly it is a human being made in the image of God the second it is born. And to then make the leap that since it is a second away from being a person, we can kill it and our consciences will be clear--preposterous!