ALL INDICATIONS point to a close presidential election in 2004, and in such a tight battle every vote and dollar will matter. While the Democrats won 80 percent of the Jewish vote in 2000, 2004 may prove to be a far different story and the Jewish vote may determine the fate of the presidency and congress. While Jews make up only 3 percent of the United States population, Jewish political influence is far greater than that due to their outsized campaign donations, media involvement and electoral presence.
Historically, Jewish voters’ primary political concern has been social justice, which has been the key driver of their political affiliations. From the 1850’s to the early 20th century, Republicans garnered the majority of the Jewish vote due in no small part to the GOP’s role in abolition. Franklin Roosevelt sharply reversed that trend for the Democrats, who ever since have been perceived by Jewish voters as the champions of social justice.
But while social justice is important, today policy towards Israel looms large in the minds of Jewish voters. Ever since the generous Camp David II offer was made–and responded to by the Palestinians with a campaign of unique savagery–Israel has become to many American Jews the most prominent issue in their electoral decisions.
IN 2000, THE JEWISH COMMUNITY viewed George W. Bush with more than a small amount of wariness as he entered office. His father was not considered a friend of Israel and many thought the younger Bush would continue his father’s policies towards the Jewish state. Instead, he not only walked away from his father’s views, but is perceived by many to be the most ardent supporter of Israel to ever occupy the White House.
How? For starters, Bush moved his administration decisively away from the Clinton doctrine of moral equivalency. His June 24, 2002 speech, in which he placed the blame for the current round of Middle East violence squarely on the shoulders of the Palestinian leadership, was a watershed policy statement. Bush has allowed Israel to take measures in self defense and has taken bold steps to reshape the Middle East towards the goal of democratizing the region. He has also surrounded himself with senior policy advisors who share his desire to support the Jewish state.
In fact, support for Israel in the Republican party goes deeper than the presidency–so much so that it is now an almost institutional belief within the party. (Ironically, this support can be accounted for in no small part due to evangelical Christians, who have an almost zealous support for Israel.) This fact has not been lost on the Jewish community. Polling data has shown a consistent rise in Jewish support for the president and Republicans generally.
THE JEWISH FACTOR in 2004 should not be underestimated; there are a number of key states with significant Jewish populations, any of those states might determine the election. In 2000, Bush lost Pennsylvania by five percentage points. While the Jewish population is only 2.5 percent of the state, they make up 5 percent of the electorate. If Bush could match Reagan’s capture of 40 percent of the Jewish vote, it would put that state into a statistical dead heat. Jews make up another 5 percent of the electorate in Florida, where hundreds of votes decided the outcome last time.
The Jewish community could also help Republicans with their prolific ability to fundraise. Jewish voters raise tens of millions of dollars for presidential candidates and tens of millions more for congressional candidates each year. In 2000, over 90 percent of the money raised for the presidential campaign went to the Democrats. Bush is positioned to make a strong push for these dollars at a time when campaign finance reform has left Democrats dangerously short of hard money donations.
A STUNNING REMINDER of Jewish political power came in the 2002 midterm elections, with the ousting of two vehemently anti-Israel legislators, Cynthia McKinney and Earl Hilliard. Both were Democrats and both were career antagonists towards Israel. The Jewish community targeted their reelection efforts. Both lost. (Interestingly, much of McKinney and Hilliard’s money came from the Arab-American community.)
Now Jews are beginning to scrutinize the Democratic positions on Israel. The most problematic issue for the Democrats is their inability to come to grips with the failure of the Oslo Accords. It is this refusal to let this chapter of the Israeli-Palestinian saga die that has led them to embrace a notion that can be only described as “solutionism.” It is the claim that a solution is near, if only Israel would be more flexible, and if not a solution will be forced. In the face of a steady stream of bus bombings and the mass-murder of civilians that Israel has endured for the last three years, this notion is understandably unpopular with many Jewish voters.
John Kerry has been conspicuously silent on many issues that could affect Israel, but what he has said bodes ill: one harbinger could be his statement that he would consider Jimmy Carter and James Baker–two of the most anti-Israel policy makers of the last 30 years–as envoys to the Middle East.
By supporting the Republicans in the coming election, the Jewish community would send a strong message to the Democratic party that their vote and money is in play and that their needs should no longer be taken for granted.
Ami Horowitz is a writer living in New York City.
