Focus on Issues the Indebtedness Factor

Prominent Jewish Republicans are claiming that Jewish voters played a pivotal role in electing Ronald Reagan the next President and defeating President Carter in his bid for a second term in office.

According to them, and on the basis of some random samplings by the television and print media, Reagan received about 45 percent of the Jewish vote and Carter got about 43 percent. According to the prestigious CBS News-New York Times poll, Carter received 45 percent and Reagan 39 percent of the Jewish vote. The Coalition for Reagan-Bush, the Jewish organization set up last summer in support of the Republican candidates, noted soon after the election results were known that “many political experts have determined that the Jewish vote now represents a swing constituency.”

Many in the Jewish community, especially those who supported Reagan during the election campaign, now apparently feel that he should be, or will be, indebted to the Jewish electorate, in fact, some prominent Jewish Republicans are already saying that in view of the great support Reagan had in the Jewish community, the Jewish community has earned the right to be heard on matters of concern and interest to American Jews in international and domestic affairs.

This is at best an assumption or at worst a misreading of national and international developments. No candidate who wins so sweepingly feels the need to be indebted to any one segment of the electorate. Obviously. Reagan had support in the Jewish community.

ACROSS-THE-BOARD MANDATE

However, the sweeping victory for Reagan showed also that he received an across-the-board mandate from all segments of the voting population and from regions that included traditional Democratic strongholds; white collar and blue collar workers; Blocks and whites; urban, suburban and rural districts; Catholics, Protestants as well as Jews; young and old; men and women; intellectuals and know-nothings; liberals and conservatives. It is apparent that all these segments feel that they have earned a right to be heard on matters of concern and interest to them in international and domestic affairs. The question is whether Reagan will feel beholden, and to whom.

The New York Times, which grudgingly supported Carter for reelection, noted yesterday that the pattern of the vote Tuesday for Reagan recalled one of his favorite descriptions of his party which he offered on a number of occasions last year and again early this year. The Times quoted Reagan as saying:

“Let us reveal to the people that we are not a stodgy, fraternal organization beholden to big business and the country club set. We’re the party of Main Street, the small town, the former, the city neighborhood where the working people live. Our strength comes from the shopkeeper, the craftsman, the farmer, the cop on the beat, the fireman, the blue collar and the white collar worker.

Cutting through the Walt Whitmanesque description of Americana, and given the fact that Reagan stayed clear, in this statement and subsequent ones, of identifying the GOP with any racial or ethnic groups, along with Tuesday’s across-the-board win, Reagan does not have to feel — and it is obviously too early to tell if he may later on — an indebtedness to any one social, ethnic or racial group for helping him achieve his stunning victory.

PLEDGES ARE NOT PROMISSORY NOTES

Reagan, like previous Presidential candidates, made promises to many segments and interest groups, but once elected, all the Presidents have disappointed one or another, or several, of their constituencies by backtracking or reversing themselves on some of their promises. In terms of promises Presidential candidates have made regarding support of Israel, for example, many Jews were keenly disappointed with the White House occupants from President Eisenhower right through Carter.

The American Jewish community has all too often learned the hard way that election campaign pledges are not promissory notes that can be cashed in on a given date. Moreover, American Jews have also learned that campaign pledges often lose in value because of the very nature of the inflated statements.

This is not to say that Reagan will not want to keep his pledges and promises; but the dynamics of notional and international developments are frequently not determined by what any one person would, like to happen, nor to have them happen under the most favorable circumstances.

Reagan, for example, made a telling point when he observed at the B’nai B’rith International convention in Washington last September that neither Israel’s survival nor the ability to help “dissidents against tyranny can become realistic policy choices if our American economy continues to deteriorate under Carter policies of high unemployment, taxes and inflation.

This was one of the rare instances in which a candidate for the Presidency indicated the interrelationship between domestic economic policies and foreign affairs.

DEALING WITH THE ECONOMY

The question now is, how Reagan will deal with the present tried of massive unemployment, skyrocketing inflation and staggering taxes with its concomitant social, ethnic and racial tensions which intermittently flare up into violence in various urban centers across the country. The President-elect has promised to make America’s socio-economic problems a top priority item, recognizing that the longer this problem festers, the more exacerbated the situation will become.

But this is precisely the area in which Reagan has not yet formulated a coherent and cohesive program, other than some generalized panaceas and good intentions. And this is precisely the area which so many of his Jewish supporters one either ignoring or unquestioningly accepting his nostrums. It is imperative, therefore, for the leadership of American Jewry to help formulate a viable economic program that will be beneficial for this country and, thereby, be helpful in providing Israel with the aid required to maintain its safety and security.

One of the major problems American Jews will have to deal with in the next period after Reagan is sworn in as President is how to effectively link American economic and foreign interests with Israel’s needs. If Reagan really is intent on dealing with the economy and at the same time strengthening America’s military posture, then the U.S. foreign aid programs, including that for Israel, may be put to the back burner.

Realistically, a Reagan Administration with a Republican controlled Senate where many conservative Republicans now seem slated to head influential committees, and a conservative oriented House, will be focusing less on foreign aid packages and more on domestic affairs — again, if Reagan intends to keep his pledge to revitalize this nation’s economy. But international developments may force domestic programs to be put aside and this, in turn, may intensify dissatisfaction among those segments of the electorate which voted for Reagan on the basis of his promises for economic palliatives.

ISSUE OF THE ‘NEW RIGHT’

American Jewish leaders who have been minimizing the danger of anti-Semitism and neo-Nazism in this country will also have to face the fact that the “new right” — the Moral Majority, Christian Voice, the National Conservative Political Action Committee and other conservative and church-oriented groups which poured millions of dollars into the election campaign to help defeat liberal Congressmen who were also staunchly pro-Israel — has gained ground as a result of Reagan’s victory, not because Reagan personally espouses and endorses their views but because they feel that they, too, helped influence his victory and have “one coming to them.” The “new right” also feels that they have a persona around which to concentrate and crystalize.

There is no way to determine at this point how Reagan will deal with the “new right” since he was not asked to go on record on this issue. To be sure, he branded the Palestine Liberation Organization an outright terrorist combine and unambiguously denounced the anti-Semitic attacks against Jews in France.

But he was not asked – and he did not volunteer — his views about the terrorism of American anti-Semites and neo-Nazis or the long-range implications for Jews of the increasing strength of the ultra-conservative Evangelical fundamentalists.

The Moral Majority and their allies are, in the words of Albert Vorspan, vice president of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, “cannibalizing American society.” The growing danger of the “new right” was also described by Dr. Alfred Gottschalk, president of the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, as “a new fascism … arising” and as fascism “in its incipient stage.”

AN AGENDA, PRIORITIES ARE IMPERATIVE

If Jewish supporters of Reagan feel that American, Jewry has earned the right to be heard on matters of concern and interest to the Jewish community in domestic as well as international affairs, then a high priority item is to make their voices heard on the issue of the “new right” which is both a domestic and international development. In fact, there is a link between the emergence and growth of the “new right” and the ongoing economic problems in this country and abroad.

The “new right,” as did the old right and Nazi movements, feeds upon the discontent and alienation of lower middle class and working class elements who suffer most from a chaotic economic system. Economic revitalization, therefore, is basic to reversing the growth of the “new right.” And it is, therefore, in the interest of the American Jewish community to develop an agenda and to draft blueprints and to establish priorities for an economically healthy and crises-free nation.

American Jewry must not let itself vacillate on this issue or to drift aimlessly on the assumption that the indebtedness factor will automatically operate in its favor. There will be a great deal of competition “for a change.” And in those circumstances, the indebtedness factor will not be sufficient to assure the safety and security not only of American Jews but of Israel as well.