Does Your Vote Count?

The Vote You Cast May Not Be Your Own!

Tradition and Bloc Votes Often Lack Independent Thinking

COMMENTARY

by Jim Evans

Many Americans pride themselves in their regular participation in the voting process but consistently vote the "party line" based on family tradition, race, national origin and other factors, without regard to the issues.

Some groups have a long history of voting in political "blocs" (groups united for common action) to influence elections. (Material influenced by The New Americans, How the Melting Pot Can Work Again, Michael Barone, Regnery Publishing Inc., 2001).

Blacks, for example, have voted almost unanimously Democratic since 1964 following that year’s passage of the Civil Rights Act into law, because they so strongly associate it with the Democratic Party — endorsed by John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, and passed with the strong support of Lyndon B. Johnson, also a Democrat. Yet, ironically, a greater percentage of congressional Republicans than Democrats voted for the bill. In national and state politics, in particular, where party labels tend to "freeze" opinions, black voters continue to embrace Democratic policies even when they may not always be in their best interest.

Latinos also generally have voted Democratic over the years, often because of similarities between the Democratic Party and the political parties in their countries of origin. As the Latino population grows, however, it is becoming an important target group for both major political parties. Latinos have become increasingly less predictable with regard to party affiliation and more issue-oriented — particularly on ballot issues in California — and their concentration in big electoral-vote states makes them a potent force in the election process. The six states with three-quarters of the Latino population cast 181 votes — two-thirds of the 270 needed to win the presidential election.

In recent years, Jewish voters have reacted negatively to the prominence of Christian conservatives in the Republican Party and have cast higher Democratic percentages than any ethnic group, except blacks. In fact, according to political scientists, Jewish voters have emerged since the 1960s as one of the most Democratic of the demographic groups, even voting consistently against their own economic interests.

Much of this trend dates back to anti-Communism, World War II, and the recognition of Israel. Democrats were generally more pro-Israel in the post-war years, and President Truman recognized the state of Israel immediately after taking office.

Asian voters, in general — especially those from China, Korea and Vietnam— have tended to vote Republican over the years. Their politics, like most immigrants, have been shaped somewhat by the countries from which they came and the geographic area in which they choose to live in the United States. Japanese-Americans and Filipino voters, in contrast, usually vote heavily Democratic, which likely traces back to World War II.

Italian-Americans have consistently not voted as a unified bloc and have not backed either Democrats or Republicans. Their political preferences seem to be historically shaped more by their geographical origin in Italy and by their local environment in the United States than any predominantly ethnic reason.

The Irish voted as a Democratic bloc almost everywhere into the 1960s but have become increasingly Republican in the four decades since. The early Democratic leanings can be attributed, at least in part, to the strong Democratic influence of the Catholic Church, long dominated by the Irish, but which became less distinctive after the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960. However, they continue to vote in blocs in certain geographical areas of the country, such as Massachusetts, as traditional Democrats.

The practice of bloc voting to influence elections seems to make sense if the candidate of choice can be elected and subsequent legislation can be enacted which might benefit the special interests of the bloc group.

However, bloc voting is often myopic in scope, focusing on narrow issues without regard to the totality of issues that affect our lives. Singular issues (taxes, abortion, immigration, etc.) are important by themselves but less significant in the broad picture, yet their emotional impact has the effect of attracting certain groups of individuals who are willing to forfeit their individuality for a group mentality "just because."

It is only natural for people to think that strength in numbers will give them a greater sense of control over their future, even if their vote often is not based on a knowledge of — or interest in — other issues. Perhaps it is based on the premise that it is better to vote for "something" you believe in than nothing at all. Or is it just voting a certain way only because everyone else in your "group" votes the same way? There’s a difference.

NEXT MONTH: Voting in the Family Tradition.