Endowed By Their Creator

ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR: An Analysis of the Role of Minority Religious Identities in Congressional Leadership and Members of the 112th Session of Congress Kelsey Price POLS 5180 James Curry Leadership in American Politics Fall 2012

Price 2

ABSTRACT This paper seeks to examine the role of religious identity in Congressional leadership. In particular, it will seek to outline how members of Congress who self-identify as a “minority religious identity,� that is to say a group other than a Protestant of Catholic, use their religious identity to gain influence in Congress. A professed religious belief establishes a foundation for legitimacy as a leader in Congress, which then turns into an opportunity in which to gain influence by distinguishing oneself from other members of the religious group, as to appeal to constituents and peers who do not belong to that particular religious grouping. Through examining three members of the 112th Congress, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Representative Keith Ellison, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, this paper will explore the delicate interplay between political identity, religious identity, and leadership.

Price 3

ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR: An Analysis of the Role of Minority Religious Identities in Congressional Leadership and Members of the 112th Session of Congress

Religion and its role in American history continues to be a controversy in politics, whether the discussion be on the religious beliefs and identities of the Founding Fathers in the eighteenth century or proposed limitations on religious organizations in the twenty-first century.

When President John F. Kennedy ran for president in 1960, he gave a speech acknowledging that many of the colonists “fled here to escape religious test oaths that denied office to members of less favored churches … [and] they fought for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom” (Kennedy). While numerous political scientists and sociologists such as Robert Bellah have written on the culture of civil religion, i.e. mottos such as “In God we Trust” or oaths of office over the Bible, only limited research exists regarding the role of religious identity of politicians themselves. The majority of studies regarding religious identity, politics, or leadership are limited in their approach, as their focus is only topics such as the likelihood of voters to favor a candidate based on religious affiliation, the role of religion in business leadership, or the role of religion in presidential leadership. However, through focusing on the role of personal religious identity of politicians, in particular members of Congress, it is evident religious identity influences political leadership styles, successes, and failures. Although religious beliefs themselves or membership in one religion over another does not significantly

Price 4 impact Congressional leadership ability, belonging to a minority religious group leads to inherently unique leadership defined by a balance of religious identity and political identity.

While at times the religious identity and political identity of an individual Congress member may be seemingly in conflict with one another, the interplay of the two identities creates inherently unique leadership defined by the presentation of one’s as “other” or different from the mainstream of their religious identity. Such otherness can be expressed through a variety of variables, such a different party identification than the majority of their religious demographic, a division from a political party on moral issues, or becoming an authority on issues affecting their religious group. Combined with evaluating the role of religion on perceived ability of a member of Congress to represent constituency interests, voting records on social/moral issues, leadership positions held by members of religious groups, and lastly, individual case studies, religious identity forms a crucial aspect of leadership. Through analyzing the 112th session of Congress and its members religious identity is critical in shaping the likelihood for political successes and failures of Congressional representatives.

Role of religion in United States politics and Congress Undeniably, religion influenced the foundation of the United States political system, although the meanings remain ambiguous as to what extent religion was meant to play in government. Debate continues today over Thomas Jefferson’s original intentions regarding the role of religion in politics when he penned that men are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights” (U.S. Declaration Ind.) over 200 years ago. However, while colonists such as William Penn founded Pennsylvania as a haven for Quakers, the universalism of government and a moral Christian society remains ambiguous. Notably, Jefferson and John Adams repeated

Price 5 on religious inclusiveness, not a government founded on one fundamental set of Christian values.

In his diaries, Jefferson affirms, Neither Pagan nor Mahomedan, nor Jew ought to be excluded from civil rights of the Commonwealth because of his religion … It is the refusing toleration to those of a different [opinion] which has produced all the bustles and wars on account of religion … This notion we have not yet cleared ourselves from. In this case no wonder the oppressed should rebel & they will continue to rebel & raise disturbance until their civil rights are full restored to them & all partial distinctions, exclusions & incapacitations removed. (Jefferson, 103) True to Jefferson’s writing, minority religious groups play a significant role in American history, particular in regards to government and civil rights. As a whole, United States, contains a heavy narrative reflective of religious influence in government, but not a theocratic government or a wholly secular institution. From John Winthrop’s declaration of the Massachusetts colony to be a shining “city on a hill,” to Western settlement by the Mormon pioneers, to the impact of the Nation of Islam and Muslim figureheads such as Malcolm X, on the twentieth century civil rights movement, religious identity shaped a large portion of American history.

Indeed, religion’s role in the United States is less defined than in other countries, such as France, where national laws prohibit the government from recognizing any religion. However, the Constitution remains the most defining document regarding the relationship between religion and government, requiring that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” (U.S. Const., Amend 1). While a separation of church and state exists in the political sphere, religion and religious beliefs themselves can influence and shape policies as well as politicians themselves.

Price 6 In the United States today, the largest religious group is Protestant, with 51.3 percent of the American adult population identify themselves as Protestant. Following Protestants, 23.9 percent of individuals identify themselves as Catholics and 16.1 percent as Unaffiliated. The largest groups of minority religions were 1.7 percent of the population identifying as Mormons, 1.7 as Jewish, 0.7 percent as Buddhist, 0.7 as Jehovah’s Witness, 0.6 percent as Muslim, 0.7 as Unitarian (Miller, U.S. Religious Landscape Survey).

Despite the role that minority religious groups have played in the United States, historical evidence also overwhelming suggests that minority religions are not as numerous in Congress as their Protestant or even Catholic counterparts. Lewis Charles Levin was the first Jewish member of Congress, but was not elected until 1845 when he was elected as a member of the American Party for a Pennsylvania seat in the House (Miller, Faith on the Hill). While John Milton Bernshisel became the first Mormon in Congress when he began serving in 1851 when Utah was recognized as a territory, the Reed Smoot trials took years to validate a Mormon’s ability to serve in Congress.

Other notable first members of include the first and only Sikh in Congress, Dalip Singh Saund, who served represented California as a Democrat for from 1957 to 1963. In 2007, Keith Ellison who became the first Muslim in Congress in 2007 (D-Minn.), alongside the first Buddhists, Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Mazie K. Hirono (D-Hawaii), who were seated the same year. The only representative in Congressional history to declare the did not believe in Supreme Being is Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.). A Unitarain elected in 1973, Stark declared in 2007 he did not believe in a Supreme Being and was reelected in 2010 (ibid).

Price 7 Defining religion and religious identity Identity and self-identity can be best understood as how individuals define themselves or express who they are through a variety of factors and elements that play a significant role in one’s life and who they are. Frequently studied identities include religious identity (i.e.

Catholic), ethnic identity (i.e. Asian), sexual identity (i.e. bisexual), political identity (i.e.

Republican), and national identity (i.e. Bosnian). A person can have multiple identities, such as Muslim-American, although academic studies have also raised the question of how these identities can at times not necessarily conflict with each other, but raises the question of what Mearsheimer and Walt classify as dual loyalty. For example, many groups and individuals, have raised the question of dual loyalty regarding Jewish-Americans and their ties to Israel, and whether or not is it more important to be an American or to be a Jew. However, realists contend that hyphenated identities, in particular that of Jewish-American, can exist without a dual loyalty that poses a threat to either identity, despite an emphasis and focus on a return to the Promised Land (Mearsheimer and Walt, 146-149).

Religion, while similar, is not identical to religious identity. Religion is a belief system that is typically organizationally based, while according to social identity theory, an identity is defined in people’s self-conception or perception of themselves in relation to the collective whole of the group (Hogg, 111). Furthermore, identities grow out of interaction, and the notion that individuals holds different “internalized positional designation” for various roles they hold in society, such as what it means to be a mother, doctor or student (Stets, 88-89). Particular in regards to social identities, such as religious identity, are largely defined how “people categorize themselves as similar to some” as well as “the behavior excepted from those memberships” in a particular identity category (ibid, 89).

Price 8 Distinguishing religious identity from personal identity or political identity can, at times be difficult, but the distinction remains more visible in the United States than in many other nations across the globe. Indeed, because religion is such a central force in daily life in regions Middle East, especially in regard to politics, religious identity has at times become impossible to separate from political identity. In Lebanon, for example, religious membership is specified on citizen’s identity cards (Joseph, 11). In comparison to the Middle East, the United States remains relatively secular in relation to politics, especially since the Constitution explicit forbids any religious oaths as a requirement to hold office.

Religious identity and impact on leadership From a leadership perspective, religious identity can influence traits in an individual that can affect leadership success and failure, particularly in regard to strategic leadership. This particular type of leadership is the process used by leaders in top organizational positions to influence policy or reach specific goals. Typical studies focus on large businesses or organizations, although the ramifications of such studies adequately transcend to Congress as an organization as well. In a study on strategic leadership, Finkelstein and Hambrick state leaders who are effective in leadership roles are those “who have overall responsibilities for an organization—their characteristics, what they do, how they do it, and particularly, how they affect organizational outcomes” (4). In analyzing Congress like an organization analyzed in most strategic leadership studies, in the sense it qualifies as an organization or unit with considerable influence in the policy-making process of the United States. Organizational leadership transcends past corporations well into analyzing members of Congress.

Price 9 In an article by Dr. Skip Worden he claims elements that pertain to religious identity, such as moral beliefs and attitudes, can help an individual in that these elements increase strategic leadership values such as charisma, vision, ethics, and credibility (221). While Worden’s initial analysis of religion in strategic leadership focuses on leadership in business, the principles are also applicable to other organizations and institutions, including Congress. Other studies on leadership theory suggest that religious identity can cause conflict in leadership positions, such as with egalitarian social struggles (Goethals and Sorsenson, 146). Indeed, this has been evident through the Congressional debate on contraception, with several male members of Congress being criticized on their views because of an apparent unconscious religious belief that men are superior to women, such as the attitudes expressed in 2012 Congressional hearings regarding women’s access to birth control. However, the same study by Goethals and Sorsenson, notes that multiple religious identities within an organization such as Congress may also “increase the importance of effective communication and healthy negotiation of conflict” (146).

Studies also suggest that religious identity itself is less important in effective leadership than religion itself. As early suggested, religion fosters key traits that can improve leadership, including vision. Fry suggests that religion can help a leader motivate one’s self and others. This includes creating a vision through a sense that Congressional leaders’ goals as well as the efforts of others have a significant meaning and purpose in life and makes a quantifiable difference, as well as working to establish a culture within an organization whereby effective leaders show genuine care, interest, or concern towards self and others (Fry, 695). In Congress, Fry’s theory of spiritual leadership can be applied in a variety of ways, such as a representative-torepresentative, representative-to-staff-member, representative-to-constituent, or representative-

Price 10 to-public level. Perceived religious identity may influence a legislators’ ability to accomplish work in session.

Religious Identity in the 112th Congress The 112th session of Congress was composed of one of the diverse religious groups in history, with 304 of the 535 members of Congress identifying themselves as Protestant. When compared with the United States population, where 51.3 percent of American adults identify themselves as Protestant, the percentage of Protestants in Congress (56.8 percent) is slightly higher. As a whole, however, Congress accurately reflects the Protestant majority make-up of the country. Religious groups that are underrepresented in Congress compared to the American population as a whole most notably include Baptist (12.7 to 17.2 percent), Jehovah’s Witness (0 to 0.7 percent), Muslim (0.4to 0.6 percent). Jews, who make up just 2 percent of the overall population, are the most overrepresented in Congress, representing for 7 percent of Congress as a whole and 12 percent of the Senate (Miller, Faith on the Hill).

Differences in religious identity are also fairly marked when analyzed on party lines.

According to the Pew Forum, While 69% of congressional Republicans are Protestant, fewer than half of Democrats (43%) belong to Protestant denominational families. On the other hand, Catholics make up a greater share of Democratic members (34%) than they do of GOP members (25%). And while Jews make up 15% of all congressional Democrats (including two independents who generally caucus with the Democrats), they account for less than 1% of congressional Republicans; there is one Jewish Republican in the House and none in the Senate. (ibid)

Price 11 Within Chamber leadership, the proportional numbers of religious identity to seats does not reflect the demographic make up of the American population itself, suggesting that holding one religious identity over another does not hold significance in whether or not members of Congress obtain leadership positions. However, minority religions tend to hold more seats in leadership proportionally, which could also indicate the ability of minority religious identity members to use their appeals as different from the mainstream of their religion to gain clout among their peers. The breakup of Congressional leadership by religious identity is illustrated below in Figure 1:

FIGURE 1: Religious Identities of Leaders in the 112th Congress Name John Boehner (R-OH) Eric Cantor (R-VA) Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) Tom Price (R-GA) Cathy McMorris Rodgers (RWA) Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Steny Hoyer (D-MD) James E. Clyburn (D-SC) John Larson (D-CT) Xavier Becerra (D-CA) Name Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Harry Reid (D-NV) Dick Durbin (D-IL) Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) Patty Murray (D-WA) Debbie Stebenow (D-MI) Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Jon Kyl (R-AZ) John Thune (R-SD) John Barrasso (R-WY) John Cornyn (R-TX)

Source: Pew Forum

HOUSE LEADERSHIP Position Speaker of the House Majority Leader Majority Whip Rep. Conference Chairman House Rep. Policy Committee Chairman House Rep. Policy Committee Vice-Chair Minority Leader Minority Whip Assistant Democratic Leader Democratic Caucus Chairman Democratic Caucus Vice Chairman SENATE LEADERSHIP Position President Pro Tempore Majority Leader Majority Whip Democratic Caucus Co-Chairman, Democratic Policy Committee Democratic Conference Secretary Democratic Policy Committee Co-Chairmain Minority Leader Minority Whip Republican Conference Chairman Republican Policy Committee Chairman Republican Campaign Committee Chairman

Religious Identity Roman Catholic Jewish Baptist Episcopalian Presbyterian Christian Nondenominational Roman Catholic Baptist African Methodist Episcopal Roman Catholic Roman Catholic Religious Identity Methodist Mormon Roman Catholic Jewish Roman Catholic United Methodist Baptist Presbyterian Protestant Presbyterian Church of Christ

Price 12

While such identity statistics are key in further analyzing individual voting patterns and leadership, the statistic of most note from the Pew Forum’s study is that members of Congress are much more likely than the United States population as whole to have a religious identity.

Only six members of Congress, less than 1 percent, do not specify any religious affiliation, and there are no members who explicitly state they are unaffiliated. In comparison, over one-sixth or 16 percent of the American population is unaffiliated, and only 1 percent refused to specify which religion. Such a trend among Congress members suggests that religious identity or even the act of having an established religious identity is crucial in a Congressional campaign or being able to be an effective leader of Congress. Indeed, this is further supported by a secondary study conducted by the Pew Forum on behalf of the Center for the People & the Press, where 61 percent of Americans said it was important for members of Congress to hold strong religious beliefs. Surprisingly even among the self-identified atheist and agnostic American population holding a strong religious belief was important, with 15 percent also said it was important for members of Congress to have strong religious beliefs (“Growing Numbers”). Such numbers support Worden’s claim that religious identity improved an individual’s leadership qualities, including charisma, vision, and credibility.

Minority religious identity and majority leadership: Harry Reid – division from party and religious identity Since its formal organization in 1830 as a church, Mormonism has created widespread contention in American politics. On a Congressional level, politician Brigham Henry Roberts was denied a seat in the House of Representatives after being elected in 1898 to the 56th

Price 13 Congress because he was a practicing polygamist. After four-year investigation regarding his leadership in the LDS Church, Reed Smoot was finally seated to the Senate after the 1902 election (Cann, 113). In presidential elections, voters met the religious identity of George Romney and his son, Mitt Romney, was met with considerable bias in their respective presidential races, George in 1968 and Mitt in 2008 and 2012. Polls conducted by Gallup, which asked the question “if your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be Mormon, would you vote for that person” showed voter bias regarding LatterDay Saints. Results in 1968 showed that 17 percent of voters would not vote for a Mormon president, a number that virtually was unchanged in June 2012, prior to Mitt’s nomination for the Republican party, where 18 percent of voters would not vote for a Mormon (Newport). While Mormonism as a religious identity has a less visible impact on Congressional elections today— there were 15 Mormon representatives in the 112th session of Congress—the impact of the religion on individual leadership can be analyzed through influential members of Congress who identify themselves as Mormon, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Like Keith Ellison, a Muslim member of Congress, Reid is a convert to his religion.

Unlike Ellison, who frequently discusses the draws of the moral and political values of Islam as a draw to his conversion, Ellison’s motivations in conversion are not political. Reid explained that “The thing that was so impressive to me—in addition to the spiritual aspects that I’d never experienced before—was the emphasis on family.” Reid’s religious identity takes a central role in his political beliefs and leadership style. He is known for always keeping at least one copy of the Book of Mormon in his Congressional office at all times. As the Senate Majority Leader, Reid is also the highest-ranking elected Mormon leader not just of Congress, but of any or international political position in history (Burr).

Price 14 What makes Harry Reid a unique case in analyzing religious identity and leadership is that other members of Reid’s religious group tend told hold unfavorable views of him as a politician. Less than a quarter of Mormons view Reid favorably, although it should be noted that nearly three-quarters of Mormons also identify themselves as Republican or conservative leaning, compared to 8 percent identifying themselves as liberal (Smith, Mormons in America).

Despite this divide between Reid and the majority of those who share his religion, he contends that “I also say that my faith and political beliefs are deeply intertwined. I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon, not in spite of it” (Mouravskiy).

Paradoxically, Reid’s religious identity has tremendously influenced his political beliefs, causing him to vote against his party, despite his role as Majority Leader, on several key social and moral issues. Despite the Democratic Party’s formal platform of pro-gay marriage, Reid favors traditional marriage, even voting in Nevada for the state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage (Burr). Reid further notes the role his religious identity has aided him as a leader of the Democratic Party. As the Majority Leader, it is crucial that Reid, despite his opposition to the Democratic Party’s stance on gay marriage, show a deep commitment to the party vision. In an interview with a Nevada newspaper, Reid states One of the reasons I feel so strongly about the philosophy of the Democratic Party is that we're concerned about people who have little. Look at the programs we've pushed: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. Republicans opposed those, every one of them … I don't see how a person who cares about their fellow man could oppose these programs. (Smith, “Senate’s New”).

However, in analyzing Reid, is should be noted that a limited number of theories suggest that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints does help develop individual’s leadership

Price 15 skills in comparison to other religious groups. In The Mormonizing of America, Stephen Mansfield contends numerous Mormons have “a stunning level of influence” (219) in large part due to their religion. According to Mansfield, Mormon culture, and thus to a lesser extent, the Latter Day Saint religious identity, is built on values such as leadership, especially since church callings a fundamental aspect of the organizational structure of the religion (31). However, while church culture and attitudes may have some impact regarding leadership style or success, there is no definitive linkage currently established between Mormon religious identity and leadership.

While Mormons do account for a larger percentage of the religious makeup of Congress in comparison to the general population (Miller, Faith on the Hill), this is linked more to the political gerrymandering of the districts and conservative states current member of Congress represent.

Divide between religious minorities and mainstream America post-9/11: Keith Ellisonreligious identity as a political platform The tragic events of September 11, 2001, sent shock waves through America and the world as a whole. Prior to the attacks, Islam received little attention on the national political stage, being largely bypassed or ignored in the media in favor over more controversial religious topics such as the debate amongst Evangelical groups regarding the “Christian” status of Mormonism. While Islam’s history in America dates back to slavery during the colonial period, and had a role in the civil rights movement, the religion’s place in American society was never questioned so viciously than after the terrorist attacks. Representative Keith Ellison (D) made American history in 2006 when he became the first Muslim to be elected to Congress. The Minnesota 5th district representative has been subject to increased scrutiny regarding his

Price 16 leadership ability due to his religious identity, including public criticism from Virginia Representative Virgil Goode, Washington Post writer Alan Cooperman, Representative Bill Sali, and Representative Michele Bachmann. Most notably, during the 2012 election, where Bachmann sent Ellison a 16-page letter detailing alleged ties to radical Islamic groups.

Ellison, who converted to Islam during college, downplayed his religious identity during his initiation campaign in 2006, became a national figure in Muslim-American affairs when he chose to be sworn into office using the Quran rather than the Bible, which sparked a national debate among politicians, constituents, and the religious community alike. However, despite the controversy regarding his religious identity, since his election Ellison has become a noted member of Congress, not just because of the historical significance of his election, but rather because of his track record as a successful member and leader in the House of Representatives.

To an extent, Ellison attributes his political vision to his spiritual conversion to Islam. In an interview with Al-Jazeera English, he stated, I can't claim that I was the most observant Catholic at the time [of my conversion].

I had begun to really look around and ask myself about the social circumstances of the country, issues of justice, issues of change. When I looked at my spiritual life, and I looked at what might inform social change, justice in society ‌ I found Islam. (MacEoin, 32) Appointed to the Judiciary Committee when he took his seat in January 2007, Ellison has emerged as leader regarding civil liberty issues. Out of the thirty approval scores of civil liberties and civil right organizations available through the non-partisan organization Project Vote Smart from 2007 to the 112th session, only five organizations gave Ellison an approval score of less

Price 17 than 65 percent. On average, Ellison’s approval rating among civil rights focused groups was 84.45 percent.

Ellison has gained respect and credibility as a leader in Congress for civil rights despite his religious identity as a Muslim, in large part because his goal and visions have consistently used rhetoric condemning Islamic extremists. Throughout his terms as a member of Congress Ellison has proved ability as a leader to use his religious identity to gain positive influence traits, such as respect and credibility. Ellison’s remarks regarding politics of the Middle East, terrorism, etc., reflect a moderate approach to Islam that has helped him gain respect among his peers, despite initial outspoken remarks from other members of Congress when he was elected. In 2006, Ellison voiced that Islamic extremists “[are] criminals. But I think that people who commit criminal acts should be treated like criminals, regardless of their faith,” (Ellison, 2006) on a conservative talk show, showing leadership traits to bridge partisan divides. Ellison’s identity as a Muslim has given him unique leadership opportunities, such as being called as an expert to testify for the House Homeland Security Committee in 2011, despite the fact he has no formal background in law enforcement or homeland security.

In his 2011 testimony, Ellison contends that “First, violent extremism is a serious concern to all Americans, and is the legitimate business of this Committee. Second, this Committee's approach to violent extremism is contrary to American values, and threatens our security. Finally, we need increased understanding and engagement with Muslim American communities to keep America safe” (Ellison, “Testimony”). With a use of strong emotional appeals in his testimony to the American public, such as the story of a Muslim paramedic who died aiding victims of the 9/11, helped establish Ellison’s legitimacy as a stakeholder in civil rights issues.

Price 18 Ellison also is popular amongst his constituency, further supporting that Ellison is a successful and influential leader in politics. Prior to being elected to the United States House of Representatives, Ellison won state races for the Minnesota House by large margins, winning 66.54 percent of Minnesota District 58B in 2002, and by 84.1 percent in 2004, a 17.6 percent increase in favor from 2002. In United States House of Representative races, the closest of his four races was his first in 2006, when he was elected by 55.6 percent of voters. For the 112th session of Congress, Ellison won by a comfortable margin over his opponent, 67.7 percent compared to 24.1 percent. His largest victory to date for the United States House, however, was his most recent race in 2012, where he won 64.5 percent of votes in his district. (Minnesota Seccretary of State) Such percentage win suggests his constituents believe he is leader worthy of continued political service.

Although Ellison’s successes as a leader in civil rights and liberties issues can not be exclusively attributed to his religious identity, as prior to his election he worked as a criminal justice lawyer, it seemingly has given him considerable legitimacy in Congress to speak on any legislation regarding Muslim-American affairs or Islamic-tied issues.

Regarding other social issues, Ellison’s religious identity does not always dominate his positions. Despite Ellison’s emergence as a leader on Islamic-issues in Congress Ellison’s voting record conflicts with many commonly held beliefs in conservative Islamic communities. Most Muslim jurists preach against abortion, though Ellison is consistently pro-choice, and he also is a firm advocate for LBGT rights, including marriage, despite that same-sex marriage is condemned by the Islamic community, much as it is in conservative Christian groups in America (MacCoin, 37).

Price 19 As a whole, Ellison’s leadership style in Congress reflects a progressive approach to politics, one that utilizes a moderate religious identity approach, but does not rely exclusively on religious beliefs during the decision-making process. Editor-in-Chief, Danis MacEoin, of the Middle East Quarterly accurately describes Ellison’s leadership in Congress as reflecting, “a garden variety liberal politician, someone whose youthful associations have been jettisoned in favor of a more sober but still progressive approach to American governance and efforts to achieve social justice” (MacEoin 39).

Religious and political minorities: Eric Cantor- separation form political party and religious identity Despite his title, 112th Congress House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is a minority in several ways. First, as a Jew, Cantor is one of the less than 2 percent of the American population who religiously identifies himself as part of the Judaic faith. On Capitol Hill, Cantor also is a unique religious minority in that, of the 39 Jewish members of the 112th session of Congress, Cantor is the only Jewish Republican in not just the House, but in both Chambers (Miller).

Cantor’s religious identity also plays an important historical role in regard to his ties to his district, the Virginian 7th. A third generation immigrant, Cantor’s paternal grandparents came to the United States fleeing the anti-Semitism and persecution of Jews that preceded the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Settling in the district Cantor has represented since 2001, his grandparents immigrated to the United States, opening a grocery store in Jackson Ward in the early 1900s (Nolan).

Cantor’s role as both a United States Representative and a Jewish-American creates an interesting dynamic in leadership style. As a whole, the Jewish-American population is

Price 20 overwhelmingly liberal compared to Cantor’s staunch conservative Republicanism. In 2004, just one-quarter of Jews voted for Bush, compared to 75 percent of the population voting for Kerry (Green). As the House leader of the Republican Party, then, Cantor is a notable exception among Jewish-American political leaders. While Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Fellow Dr. Steven Windmueller notes there are a significant number of Republican Jews who run for office on a national level, but most do not find success like Cantor has. Indeed, Dr. Windmueller states, “There seems to be number of efforts by Republicans to run Jewish candidates, but they tend to have difficulty on the federal level, the House or Senate” (Dickter). Furthermore, during the 112th Congress, Cantor was the only member of the Republican Party who identified himself as belonging to a non-Christian denomination (Kurtzleben).

Despite his unique dichotomy as a minority as the only Jewish Republican, Cantor demonstrates leadership through his position as the House Majority Leader. His success as a leader in Congress, however, parallels the growing number of Republican Jews as a whole. As a noted defender of religious freedom, Cantor compared the Obama administration of mandating birth control coverage to religious institutions as akin to mandating what being kosher means to “those of United States in the Jewish faith” (Cantor, 2012). Cantor often appeals to the public by claiming that Jewish support for Israel, as an excuse for other issues affecting Jews is a falsehood in the American political system. In response to comments made by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in September 2012, Cantor stated, “to suggest any Jew is 'exploited' for their political beliefs or that support for Israel is somehow an 'excuse' for anything. Such thinking diminishes the importance of issues affecting Jews everywhere” (Office of the Majority Leader).

As the lone Republican Jew in Congress, Cantor has faced opposition from many others who share his religious identity, because the majority of Jewish-Americans identify themselves

Price 21 as Democrat. The divide between Cantor’s religious identity and political beliefs has often been at the center of Congressional debate, with Cantor even jokingly describing Democrat Jews as “the bane of my existence” in an interview with 60 Minutes. In the same interview, Cantor attributed the tendency of Jews to lean Democratic to Tikkun Olam, a concept of Judaism on repairing the world. In the interview, Cantor explains, “clearly there is the ability to characterize all the social programs that exist at the federal level as reflecting that need to repair the world and to help those who can’t help themselves” (60 Minutes).

Despite the unique divide between the majority of members of his religion and his political beliefs, Cantor, like Senator Reid, has in many ways; found ways to bridge the divide to achieve Congressional success. The Republican Party, according to many Congressional leaders such as Cantor, “is more dependably pro-Israel and focused on the war on terrorism” (US House of Representatives). As a result, many of Cantor’s sponsored and co-sponsored pieces of legislation reflect his religious identity, as he is a sponsor of numerous pro-Israeli resolutions and bills.

While Cantor’s policies regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict stands starkly in line with the majority of members of his religious group, like Ellison’s and Reid’s policies, Cantor often votes against what the majority of members of his party believe in. Despite support for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by Jewish organizations, such as the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Jewish Women International, and Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism (Rosen & Clement), Cantor opposes healthcare reform. Furthermore, Cantor is a staunch opponent to abortion in all instances, stating “the principle that the right to life is universal and not reserved only for the planned” (Cantor, 2011). Such a position stands in contrast to the majority view held by the Jewish-American population according to the Pew Forum’s United

Price 22 States Religious Landscape Study. The study found less than 15 percent of Jews believe that abortion should be illegal in all or most cases (Pew Forum).

Cantor, like others who belong to a minority religious identity in Congress, has a leadership style that is a balance between both personal religious identity and political beliefs.

Despite being the only Republican Jew in the House, his ability to gain leadership and respect among peers is highlighted in his role as the House Majority Leader.

Conclusion A legislator’s membership or self-identification to a particular religion does not give a significant advantage regarding the ability to be elected or to gain leadership positions in Congress. However, since an overwhelming amount of Americans continue to believe that have a strong religious identity is important for members of Congress, religious identity remains an influential variable in analyzing leadership in Congress. In particular, case studies of members of the 112th Congress in both chambers suggest that members of Congress use their identity in terms of minority religion to gain strategic leadership advantages. Specifically, those legislators who have a minority religious identity establish themselves as a different from American generalizations or trends affecting that particular social group.

How members of Congress establish themselves as to appear different from other members of the religion vary on an individual and subjective basis. For example, Representative Keith Ellison makes frequent appeals in his rhetoric stressing his identity as a moderate Muslim and that radical or extremist Islamists have no place in the American political sphere, separating him from many negative stereotypes created by post-9/11 Islamaphobia. In contrast, Representative Eric Cantor, although he does not frequently refer to his religious identity,

Price 23 separates himself from other Jewish members of Congress through his political party beliefs.

Regardless of the approach, minority religious identity figures use strategic leadership to effectively distinguish themselves from other members of Congress. In doing so, these members of Congress are challenging traditional norms and beliefs regarding the role of religious values in politics.

Price 24 WORKS CITED “2002 Election Results: Minnesota State Legislative.” Minnesota Secretary of State. 2002 <http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20021105/ElecRslts.asp?M=LG&LD=A&R=ALL REPS> “2004 Election Results: Minnesota State Legislative.” Minnesota Secretary of State. 2004. <http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/2004/campaign/results/data/html/ld/ ld_58Bdata.html> “2012 Election Results: Minnesota” Minnesota Secretary of State. 2012. <http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/ENR/Results/CongressionalResults/1?id=560 > “Growing Number of Americans Say Obama is a Muslim.” Pew Research Center, 2010. The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Web. <http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-andElections/Growing-Number-of-Americans-Say-Obama-is-a-Muslim.aspx> Burr, Thomas. "Harry Reid: A Mormon in the Middle." The Salt Lake Tribune, 25 Oct. 2009.

Web. <http://www.sltrib.com/lds/ci_13629152>.

Cann, D. M. "Religious Identification and Legislative Voting: The Mormon Case." Political Research Quarterly 62.1 (2008): 110-19. Print.

Cantor, Eric. "60 Minutes Profiles House Majority Leader Eric Cantor." Interview by Leslie Stahl. 60 Minutes. CBS. Jan. 2012. Television.

Cantor, Eric. "NBC Meet the Press." Interview. MSNNBC. NBC, 4 Mar. 2012. Web. <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46593547/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/t/meet-presstranscript-march/#.ULuqh4UeKz4>.

Cantor, Eric. Office of Congressman Eric Cantor. Congressman Cantor Statement on March for Life. Official Website of Congressman Eric Cantor. Office of Eric Cantor, 24 Jan. 2011.

Web. <http://www.majorityleader.gov/newsroom/seven/congressman-cantor-statementon-march-for-life.html>.

Dickter, Adam. "Congressional Races: Cantor Still A Soloist." The Jewish Week. The Jewish Week, 11 Nov. 2012. Web. <http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/nationalnews/congressional-races-cantor-still-soloist>.

Ellison, Keith. “Testimony Before the House Homeland Security Committee.” The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community’s Response.

112th Congress. 10 March 2011. <http://ellison.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=587:congres sman-ellisons-testimony-to-the-house-committee-on-homeland-security-as-prepared-fordelivery&catid=36:keiths-blog&Itemid=44>

Price 25 Ellison, Keith. Interview by Glenn Beck. CNN. N.p., 14 Nov. 2006. Web. <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0611/14/gb.01.html>.

Green, John C. "Religion and the Presidential Vote: A Tale of Two Gaps." Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Pew Research Center, 21 Aug. 2007. Web. <http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Religion-and-the-Presidential-Vote-ATale-of-Two-Gaps.aspx>.

Hogg, Michael A. "Social Identity Theory." Contemporary Social Psychological Theories. By Peter J. Burke. Stanford, CA: Stanford Social Sciences, 2006. 111-36. Print.

Jefferson, Thomas. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson. Comp. Paul L. Ford. Vol. II. New York and London: GP Putnam Sons, 1893. Print.

Kennedy, John F. "Address to Protestant Ministers." Greater Houston Ministerial Association, Houston. 12 Sept. 1960. Address.

Kurtzleben, Danielle. "Religion and Party Affiliation Go Hand in Hand." U.S.News & World Report. U.S.News & World Report LP, 20 Apr. 2011. Web. <http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/04/20/religion-and-party-affiliation-gohand-in-hand>.

"Leader Cantor Responds To Pelosi Comments On Israel." Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Office of the Majority Leader, 29 July 2012. Web. <http://majorityleader.gov/newsroom/2012/07/leader-cantor-responds-to-pelosicomments-on-israel.html>.

MacEoin, Denis. "Keith Ellison's Stealth Jihad." Middle Eastern Quarterly (2010): 31-40. Print.

Mansfield, Stephen. The Mormonizing of America: How the Mormon Religion Became a Dominant Force in Politics, Entertainment, and Pop Culture. Brentwood, TN: Worthy Pub., 2012. Print.

Mearsheimer, John J., and Stephen M. Walt. The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007. Print.

Miller, Tracy. "Faith on the Hill: The Religious Composition of the 112th Congress." Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Pew Research Center, 5 Jan. 2011. Web. <http://www.pewforum.org/Government/Faith-on-the-Hill--The-Religious-Compositionof-the-112th-Congress.aspx>.

Miller, Tracy. U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. Rep. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center, 2008. The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Web. <http://religions.pewforum.org/reports>.

Price 26 Mouravskiy, Alex. "What Is Harry Reid's Religion?" Politics Daily. The Huffington Post, 2010.

Web. <http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/09/28/what-is-harry-reids-religion/>.

Newport, Frank. "Bias Against a Mormon Presidential Candidate Same as in 1967." Gallup.

N.p., 21 June 2012. Web. <http://www.gallup.com/poll/155273/bias-against-mormonpresidential-candidate-1967.aspx>.

Nolan, Jim. "Election 2012: Eric Cantor Cites Deep Roots in 7th District." Richmond TimesDispatch. N.p., 30 Sept. 2012. Web. <http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/election-ericcantor-cites-deep-roots-in-th-district/article_faf851a7-3b25-53a5-916908da2e91f1b5.html>.

Pew Forum. "U.S. Abortion Views by Religious Affiliation." Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Pew Research Center, 15 Jan. 2009. Web. <http://www.pewforum.org/Abortion/Abortion-Views-by-Religious-Affiliation.aspx>.

Rosen, Anne F., and Scott Clement. "Religious Groups Weigh In on Health Care Reform." Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. Pew Research Center, 8 Oct. 2009. Web. <http://www.pewforum.org/social-welfare/religious-groups-weigh-in-on-health-carereform.aspx>.

Smith, Christopher. "Senate's New Majority Whip: Senator Harry Reid of Nevada." The Salt Lake Tribune 9 June 2001: n. pag. Print.

Smith, Gregory, comp. "Mormons in America: Certain in Their Beliefs, Uncertain of Their Place in Society. Report. Pew Research Center, 12 Jan. 2012. Web. <http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Mormon/mormons-in-america.aspx>.

Stets, Jan E. " Identity Theory." Contemporary Social Psychological Theories. By Peter J. Burke. Stanford, CA: Stanford Social Sciences, 2006. 88-135. Print.

United States Constitution, Amendment 1.

United States Declaration of Independence.

US House of Representatives. The Office of the Democratic Whip. In the House, Both Partiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Leaders Pledge to Maintain Jewish Outreach. US House of Representatives, 3 Nov. 2004. Web. <http://www.democraticwhip.gov/content/house-both-parties%E2%80%99leaders-pledge-maintain-jewish-outreach>.