In Search of the "Jewish Vote"

On Tuesday, November 3, the Jewish voters of New York State will face a difficult decision. Incumbent Republican, Alfonse D'Amato will face the Democratic challenger, Chuck Schumer, in what has become a full blown battle for a seat in the United States Senate. D'Amato, who has held his seat in the Senate for the past eighteen years, has long been known to the Jewish community as a friend and ally. On the other hand Schumer, a Jew from Brooklyn, holds many of the same friends D'Amato has relied on.

"We're dealing with two friends of the Jewish community and it's a very difficult choice to make, to have to opt for one over another," said Michael Miller, executive vice president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York.

For the candidates, the Jewish vote is likely to be critical. Jews comprised roughly 25 percent of the statewide Democratic primary vote, according to Edison Media Research. This strong turnout, in an election whose overall turnout was only 12 percent, magnifies the influence of the Jewish vote well beyond their numbers.

With the Jewish influence on the election so strong, it has become a key battleground for the candidates. Schumer, who hails from the Midwood section of Brooklyn, a strongly Jewish neighborhood, has always depended on the Jewish vote. For Schumer, city votes are especially important since he needs them to combat D'Amato's expected lead among upstate and suburban voters.

However, D'Amato is not willing to concede votes even in Schumer's home district. He has campaigned heavily in Midwood, with his advisors noting how he defeated Robert Abrams in 1992 by capturing 55 percent of the district's vote and 40 percent of the district's Jewish vote. Both candidates are now relying on strong support from within the Jewish community. According to Miller, the "Jewish vote" will play a pivotal role.

While the Jewish vote is clearly crucial, the decision of whom to vote for is more difficult. Both candidates have demonstrated a commitment to Jewish issues, and on many issues they find themselves agreeing with each other. How, then, to vote, is an "agonizing choice."

Both candidates are strong supporters of Israel, and work towards sending both money and aid. Additionally, D'Amato, through his position on the Senate Banking Committee, has been hailed as the hero of the "Swiss gold" for his efforts on behalf of Holocaust survivors in recovering millions of dollars looted by the Nazis. D'Amato also captivated Chassidic voters by appearing in Crown Heights during the 1991 riots.

Schumer has long been identified with national anti-terror efforts, calling for strong punishment of the Hamas organization as well as others. He also led the fight to prosecute a civil rights case against the murderers of Yankel Rosenbaum, the Yeshiva scholar fatally stabbed in the 1991 Crown Heights riots. The perpetrators were ultimately found guilty.

As supporters of purely Jewish causes and on international issues, both candidates stand out. Closer to home, there are key issues which distinguish the two, issues which may sway the vote in either direction amongst various Jewish groups.

Schumer is pro-choice on abortion, which will certainly win him votes from more liberal Jews, yet may alienate him in more Orthodox circles. D'Amato has pushed hard in favor of school vouchers, which would supplement the cost of private schools, easing the burden of sending children to Yeshivot. Schumer, though, has pushed hard for tax credits and low interest rate loans for college students.

On these issues, Dov Hikind, a Democratic Assemblyman from Brooklyn and an Orthodox Jew, noted, "Many liberal Jews vote by party or based on a narrow issue. I do not expect people from the outer boroughs to vote as blindly."

In terms of Israel, D'Amato has been identified more with hard-line Israelis. To differentiate between D'Amato and Schumer in that area, many point to Schumer's vote against the use of force in the Persian Gulf war. "When it came to the defining moment for supporting Israel," notes Hikind, "Chuck Schumer voted against it." While everyone is "for Israel," he noted, this may be considered a sign of lack of support for Israel.

Miller added that, in general, as long as Jewish voters feel that the candidates are within their "comfort zone" on key issues such as support for Israel and anti-Semitism, there is a tendency to vote for whichever candidate is stronger on those particular issues, "even if the other candidate is nearer to them in political mind set."

While all these issues can be used to sway voters' impressions of the candidates, there are more fundamental questions that voters must answer in making their choice. There is the strategic question of removing a highly placed friend from the majority party, in favor of a junior senator with weakened party power. D'Amato heads the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, and is a member of the Finance Committee. If elected, Schumer would not hold such high positions and would not be in such a strong position to advance Jewish concerns when necessary.

Another important issue is whether Jewish voters would prefer a Jewish Senator over a non-Jewish Senator, even in place the hard-working D'Amato. "A question like this has not been asked in many years," said Miller. Former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, a democratic backer of D'Amato, noted that D'Amato's support in the Jewish community has grown because he has stood out. "Jews expect Jewish candidates to be supportive of Jewish concerns," said Koch. "But they are particularly grateful when a non-Jewish official is there with them."

Removing D'Amato could also have other repercussions. "If we throw him out, after years of supporting Jewish causes," noted Nathan Diament of the Orthodox Union's Institute for Public Affairs, "what message does it send to other politicians?" In the future, other politicians may not be similarly motivated to push as hard on Jewish issues.

For Hikind, a long-time D'Amato supporter, the answer is clear. "Al D'Amato has been more than simply a friend of the Jews, he goes the extra mile. Whenever there is a concern in the community, everyone knows that he gets things done." Additionally, there is the matter of simple hakarat hatov. "You don't simply abandon your friends like that," he said. He also noted that the Orthodox community has always been very independent, voting for the candidate who supports their ideals.

D'Amato's friendship is evident in his steering federal funds towards programs for Orthodox and Chassidic neighborhoods. The result is long-standing support that D'Amato is confident will carry him. Schumer, though, in a recent interview with The Jewish Week, contended that D'Amato's support comes more out of "political expediency that personal conviction."

"I think D'Amato has done some good things for the Jewish community," Schumer noted. "I compare my record to his every step of the way. I work just as hard and just as long and, I think, more effectively than he does because when I speak in Washington, people believe it's out of conviction, not simply out of political opportunity."

For Jews, the upcoming vote is certainly important. Both candidates are "good friends" of the Jews and have worked effectively in advancing the needs of the Jewish community. As a Jew, Chuck Schumer is perhaps in a better position to appreciate the needs of the Jewish community and may therefore fight harder and more convincingly on those issues. Conversely, Al D'Amato has fought hard on Jewish concerns, and as an outsider has demonstrated his allegiance to the Jewish community. Who to vote for, then, is a difficult decision to make.

Perhaps, with neither candidate clearly distinguishing himself on Jewish concerns, the vote will come down to larger issues, taking this election beyond the narrow scope of the Jewish community. As one student who planned to vote said, "I don't think I know who I'll vote for until I step into the booth and close the curtain."