Catholics and Tsunami Tuesday

While the commentariat has covered the religious aspects of the GOP primary extensively, few are looking at how religion may affect the Democratic race. They should: eight of the 22 states that vote next Tuesday have populations that are more than 30% Roman Catholic, including the biggest prizes of the day: California, New York and New Jersey. In Iowa, with only 23% Catholics, Obama won the state with 38% to John Edwards’ 30% and Hillary Clintons’ 29%. But, in heavily Catholic Dubuque County, Obama’s margin was smaller, beating Clinton by 36%-31%. Hillary won in New Hampshire where Catholics are 35% of the electorate, and she won Catholics there by a whopping 44% to Obama’s 27%. Most commentators felt it was her appeal to the working-class background of NH Catholics that earned her such a large plurality among Catholics, not any specific religious affinity. The heavily Catholic states on Tsunami Tuesday fall into two regions, the Northeast and the Southwest, and two demographics, white ethnics and Latinos. Connecticut and Massachusetts are two of the most heavily Catholic states in the nation, with Catholics making up 46% and 44% of the electorate respectively. In both states, Latinos account for only about 5% of the electorate. In New York and New Jersey, Catholics are 38% and 37% of the electorate and both states have higher percentages of Latinos. In these four states, Latinos are disproportionately from Puerto Rico. Non-Latino Catholics are largely Irish, Polish, Italian and French Canadian, many of them Reagan Democrats and swing voters, socially conservative but economically progressive. Here’s a nifty map that show’s Catholic population rates nationwide In California, the biggest prize of the day, Catholics are 32% of the electorate. Of those, two-thirds are Latino. Similar ratios are found in New Mexico and Arizona; in fact, in New Mexico 30% of the electorate are Latino Catholics with another 10% non-Latino Catholics. In these three states, immigration is the issue that matters most to Latinos, and California Congresswoman Linda Sanchez cited Obama’s unwillingness to engage in immigrant-bashing as one of the principal reasons for her endorsement of his candidacy. Still, the Clinton brand name is well loved among Latinos as their 2-to-1 backing of Hillary showed in the Nevada caucuses. Immigration is also the issue on which Catholic leaders have been most vocal. Cardinal Roger Mahoney of Los Angeles said that the Church would ignore any laws requiring it to ask for documentation before providing assistance. Cardinal Sean O’Malley in Boston is about as Hispanic as an Irishman can get and led a pro-immigration rally on Boston Common in 2007. And in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Bishop Edward Slattery issued only the second pastoral letter of his 14-year tenure, specifically invoking his authority as a successor of the apostles in a passionate defense of the rights of immigrants. Last week, I suggested that Obama put forward a "family friendly" approach to immigration that would resonate not only with Latinos but with other Catholics and evangelicals. He must be doing something right: he got attacked last night by Lou Dobbs for "pushing amnesty for illegal aliens" and "pandering to supporters of illegal immigration." Catholics are not single issue voters nor can they be delivered as a bloc by local political bosses as in the days of Tammany Hall. But Catholics do share certain ways of looking at the world – a concern for the Common Good, a commitment to human dignity, a familiarity with Just War theory – that any Democratic candidate would do well to consider in framing their speeches. Obama, who opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, might also usefully invoke two other famous persons who opposed the war from the start: Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Catholics may make the difference next Tuesday, from Connecticut to California and even in eastern Oklahoma. Why is the press ignoring them? Michael Sean Winters
Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
10 years 8 months ago
You make a strong case...but unfortunately any analysis that does take place may have to be left largely to speculation. The media group that determines state exit poll questions isn't asking Catholic-specific questions to Democrats, only to Republicans. Looking at the list of questions that GOP voters had to answer in South Carolina, they may have mistaken their exit poll interview for an examination of conscience! See for more details on this whole exit poll question brouhaha and for the questions that got asked of GOP voters in SC. It's a real shame those questions aren't getting asked in a bipartisan manner.


The latest from america

 10.17.2018 Pope Francis greets Cardinal Blase J. Cupich of Chicago before a session of the Synod of Bishops on young people, the faith and vocational discernment at the Vatican Oct. 16. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)
“We take people where they are, walking with them, moving forward,” Cardinal Blase Cupich said.
Michael J. O’LoughlinOctober 20, 2018
Catherine Pakaluk, who currently teaches at the Catholic University of America and holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard University, describes her tweet to Mr. Macron as “spirited” and “playful.”
Emma Winters October 19, 2018
A new proposal from the Department of Homeland Security could make it much more difficult for legal immigrants to get green cards in the United States. But even before its implementation, the proposal has led immigrants to avoid receiving public benefits.
J.D. Long-GarcíaOctober 19, 2018
 Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, then nuncio to the United States, and then-Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, are seen in a combination photo during the beatification Mass of Blessed Miriam Teresa Demjanovich at the Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart in Newark, N.J., Oct. 4, 2014. (CNS photo/Gregory A. Shemitz)
In this third letter Archbishop Viganò no longer insists, as he did so forcefully in his first letter, that the restrictions that he claimed Benedict XVI had imposed on Archbishop McCarrick—one he alleges that Pope Francis later lifted—can be understood as “sanctions.”
Gerard O’ConnellOctober 19, 2018