Why the Ultra-Orthodox Vote Republican

Democrats were stunned this fall when the Brooklyn congressional seat vacated by disgraced Rep. Anthony Weiner, in a heavily Jewish district that had been reliably Democratic for almost a century, went to a Republican. Even more surprising, the change was widely attributed to ultra-Orthodox Jews, or Haredim, who make up the bulk of the more than 170,000 Jews in the 9th district and who voted for the non-Jewish Bob Turner over an Orthodox Jew, David Weprin. Before this, Haredim were seen as relatively safe votes for Democrats running for Congress. A generation ago, their allegiance to the Democrats would have been almost universal.

Turner, a political neophyte, ran against President Obama’s record (and Weiner’s indiscretions). The result was seen as reflecting President Obama’s deep unpopularity in Haredi and Orthodox communities, where he is perceived as being pro-Arab, anti-Israel—and even secretly Muslim. Although the district’s voters are predominantly registered as Democrats, Obama carried it by only 55 percent in 2008. A pre-election survey this fall by Public Policy Polling found that 54 percent of district voters disapproved of Obama’s policy toward Israel. Turner won by a margin of 54 to 46 percent.

Not all of the opposition was domestic. Some of it came from Israel, where Obama is even less popular than he is in Haredi Brooklyn. Cross-pollination is significant between the 700,000 Haredim in Israel and the 250,000 to 500,000 (estimates vary) in the United States. Twenty years ago, the West Bank was not a Haredi issue, and Haredi political parties could enter into coalition agreements with the dovish Labor party without facing blowback from the Haredi street—in Israel or here. But this is no longer the case.

Israel’s housing shortage is especially severe in Haredi neighborhoods of Jerusalem, forcing some Haredim (with their large families) to take extreme measures such as living in storage lockers or on parking ramps. But many have left the city for the Haredi neighborhoods of West Bank cities like Beitar Illit and Beit Shemesh, or for the all-Haredi Emmanuel. Approximately 30 percent of the Jewish population of the West Bank is now Haredi. As a result, Israeli Haredi political views have hardened.
The newfound Haredi concern for retaining the West Bank is skillfully exploited by politicians on both sides of the Atlantic, from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to New York City’s former mayor Ed Koch. Koch, a Democrat who is hawkish on Israel-related issues, told Weiner’s old voters to vote Republican to send a message to President Obama, to let him know that adopting policies not in sync with Israel’s current right-wing government is unacceptable. New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, a former member of Rabbi Meir Kahane’s Jewish Defense League who represents some of the same constituency Weiner did, endorsed the Republican for the same reason.

Of course, there are many broader factors in the Haredi shift to the right. As a rule, Haredim do not watch television, and many don’t read secular newspapers or use the Internet. In America, that leaves only two main news sources: talk radio and Haredi newspapers. The former trends to the political right; the latter are socially conservative.

In the special election for Weiner’s seat, a particular social issue played an enormous role. Although Orthodox, Weprin voted for same-sex marriage in New York’s legislature less than three months before the election. In response, many Haredi rabbis banded together and issued a ruling forbidding Jews from voting for him.

Education is another factor. Many male Haredim receive no secular education after eighth grade. Even before that, secular subjects are taught late in the afternoon after students have spent four to six intense hours on Jewish studies—so students are often less attentive. Most of these schools don’t teach civics, which means many graduates have little grasp of how our democracy works. Interface with politicians and with government is left to community leaders, and bloc voting is common. This helps to guarantee government funding for Haredi community projects.

Bloc voting also allows Haredim to vote against their apparent self-interest. For example, Hasidim are disproportionately poor and rely heavily on social programs created by and kept alive by Democrats. But they will vote for candidates, who, like Turner, seek to cut those programs, confident that their leaders—and God—will protect the aid that benefits Haredim, and that politicians, fearful of losing the Haredi bloc vote, will find ways to do the same.

The most important reason so many Haredim identify with the conservative movement and the Republican Party may be the most obvious. The barriers to being a very identifiable Jew and Republican have fallen. William F. Buckley worked to exorcise anti-Semitism from the conservative movement, and he largely succeeded. In addition, pro-Israel evangelicals made fundamentalist religious observance a Republican norm and are welcoming Haredim with open arms.

By voting for candidates who are conservative on social issues and hawkish on defense and Israel, Haredim believe they are doing God’s will, and this is how most will vote unless their leaders tell them otherwise. It is almost as if Haredim possess a different Torah from the rest of us, one that is missing every other sentence, and a Tanakh that is missing most of the Prophets. It is a Judaism that owes as much to Rush Limbaugh as it does to the rabbinic sages, and it bodes ill for liberals and moderates—and perhaps for Haredim themselves—for years to come.

Shmarya Rosenberg writes the blog Failed Messiah.