Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December 2004, pages 26-27

Special Report

Muslim-Americans Gave Qualified Support To Kerry to “Protest” Bush Policies

By Richard H. Curtiss

The long-heralded Muslim-American “bloc vote” was announced Oct. 22 at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. The coalition American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections-Political Action Committee (AMT-PAC) called for a “protest vote” against oppressive laws and gave a qualified endorsement to Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts. Muslims nationwide were urged to vote against President Bush and for Senator Kerry in order to guarantee civil rights.

Although the bloc vote organizing effort got off to a ragged start, it seemed almost certain that this endorsement may have helped Democrat Kerry win much of the popular vote in battleground states in 2004—just as it helped elect Republican George W. Bush four years ago. Not only are there an estimated seven million Muslims in the United States, but Muslims are a potential swing-voting bloc in such key battleground states as Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The AMT is an umbrella organization which includes the American Muslim Alliance (AMA); the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); Islamic Society of North America (ISNA); the Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA); the Muslim American Society (MAS); Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC); the Muslim Student Association-National (MSA-N); the Muslim Ummah of North America (MUNA), Project Islamic Hope (PIH) and United Muslims of America (UMA) which altogether cover virtually all the mosques in the United States.

Two of the AMT’s 11 participating Muslim-American organizations jumped the gun and endorsed Kerry three days early. Except for one group, the Los Angeles-based MPAC, all the coalition members supported Kerry. However, AMT Chairman Dr. Agha Saeed noted at the Oct. 22 press conference, the Muslim endorsement was somewhat conditional, because neither candidate had satisfactorily addressed Muslim-American concerns.

Explaining its decision not to endorse Kerry, MPAC said the Democratic candidate had not met with them, nor did any authorized representative participate in the initial conference call to discuss the prerequisites for an AMT endorsement. According to an MPAC spokesman, “The senior senator from Massachusetts, Sen. Edward (Ted) Kennedy [who did participate in the call], has been very supportive of Muslims, as well as Christian Arabs. But the members of our group felt uncertain that the group would actually be heeded when serious questions arose.”

This writer has tracked the bloc vote for many years. Getting American Muslims to work together to call attention to their needs and issues was first attempted in 1992. That year, however, there were too many cooks who spoiled the broth, and all went off in different directions. Four years later the goal was almost achieved, but failed because the individual players were not used to working together—particularly because they needed the support not only of Arab-Americans, but the much broader range of hyphenated foreign-born Americans and their descendants from Kashmir, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia and, of course, giant Indonesia. All have common interests, however, and when they work together, they can make a huge difference in the U.S. political scene.

Christian Arab-Americans, who number between a million and a million and a half voters, work extremely well together on the issue of Palestine. They, too, noted that a bloc vote could be effective after George W. Bush showed his interest in Muslim- and Arab-Americans early in his 2000 campaign.

The Democratic candidate, Al Gore, and his handlers ignored approaches by Muslim-Americans almost to the end. Confident that most Arab-Americans would back a Democratic ticket and not understanding that Muslim-Americans were not tied to any one party, it wasn’t until about two weeks before the November election that they realized they were very likely to lose the endorsement. At that point Democratic operatives considered sending Gore’s wife, Tipper, to a Muslim-American convention in Chicago. Other Gore staffers vetoed the plan, however, because they feared it would upset American Jews.

At that point, Muslim- and many Arab-Americans realized their bloc vote could make the difference, particularly in a closely contested election.

This election year saw a sea-change in the community’s support for Bush, based on the fact that, as president, Bush seemed to turn his back on Muslim-Americans after Sept. 11 through a number of harmful domestic and foreign policies.

Bush increasingly favored the strongly entrenched neoconservatives in his administration, such as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, former Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle, and Vice President Richard Cheney.

The president also heavily courted his evangelical constituents, including the Armageddonists who are awaiting the reappearance of Christ and who frighten most Americans, not to mention virtually all Europeans.

As a result, American Muslims felt the Bush administration had been insensitive to their civil liberties and human rights.

A pre-election poll commissioned by Zogby International and Georgetown University showed that 68 percent of Muslim-Americans were likely to vote for John Kerry and John Edwards, 11 percent were likely to vote for Ralph Nader, and only about 7 percent were likely to vote for Bush. Since then, even more Muslim-Americans made the strategic decision to go for Kerry, and fewer for Ralph Nader, even though Nader remains popular.

Of the seven million Muslims in the United states, an estimated 81 percent supported the American Muslim Task Force’s decision. A majority of Christian Arab-Americans have joined with the Muslim-American community on this matter.

Muslims across the country worked very hard on this election—perhaps even harder than on the 2000 campaign. As people left their mosques each night after Ramadan prayers and every Friday before the election, they were handed information on where to register and vote. Volunteers manning phone banks called to make sure registered voters had transportation to the polls.

For example, Hasem Ahmed, who is from Bangladesh and drives a Washington Flyer taxi cab, said he had volunteered to give up a day of work to drive Muslims to the polls. He is one of 30 cabbies who have made such an offer.

Not all Muslims attend mosques, but word got around their communities that they should make sure to vote in the crucial election. American Muslims, it was predicted, would vote in record numbers—somewhere between 80 and 90 percent.

Bush pursued dramatically self-defeating tactics in 2004. His war on Iraq and embrace of Ariel Sharon hurt him both at home and abroad. Brent Scowcroft, the former national security adviser who served in the first Bush administration, said bluntly that Bush has become “mesmerized” by the Israeli prime minister, who is almost universally reviled by Muslims in the U.S. and almost equally so in Europe and the Middle East. These policies have caused Bush to sink steadily in national polls, when just a few months earlier, before the debates, his re-election seemed almost inevitable.

Under President Clinton, well before the 2000 election, Americans were concerned about the admissibility of “secret evidence” and whether its use should be continued. After Bush was elected, despite his words during the debates criticizing profiling and the use of secret evidence, he took even harsher steps under the post-9/11 USA PATRIOT Act, legislation which has angered everyone concerned about human rights. In the last three years, many Americans, particularly those who are foreign-born, have seen their civil rights dramatically curtailed. This is one of the primary reasons Muslim- and Arab-Americans worked so hard this year to defeat Bush.

It is now clear that the Muslim bloc vote was one reason this year’s election was so close. Even if it didn’t carry Kerry into the White House, this voting bloc has come of age as a highly visible player in the American political arena.

Richard H. Curtiss is executive editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.

SIDEBAR

The American Muslim Taskforce’s Endorsement Announcement

“We believe that our vote is the best guarantee of our civil rights and the best expression of our citizenship.

“Unfortunately, the Bush administration has been insensitive to the civil liberties and human rights of American Muslims, Arab-Americans and South Asians. Today, American Muslims are being treated like second-class citizens.

“American Muslims are also disappointed with a number of domestic and foreign policies instituted by the Bush administration since the 9/11 terror attacks.

“AMT-PAC appreciates the outstanding role of Ralph Nader in highlighting the denial of civil liberties to religious and ethnic minorities.

“We acknowledge the considerable outreach to our community by Senator Kerry’s campaign, particularly by his campaign co-chair Sen. Edward Kennedy. We also appreciate the ongoing dialogue with Muslim leaders about problems posed by the USA PATRIOT Act.

“While the Kerry campaign has criticized a number of Bush administration policies, it has so far failed to explicitly affirm support for due process, equal justice and other constitutional norms. We are also disappointed that his campaign has shied away from expressing unambiguous support for principles enshrined in the U.S Constitution that prohibit use of ex post facto laws, secret proceedings and secret evidence.

“Because pluralism is based on partial agreements, support for Senator Kerry is premised on our overall effort to help restore liberty and justice for all.

“Mindful of disagreements with Senator Kerry on some domestic and international issues, including the war in Iraq, we are willing to work with him to help restore due process and equal justice in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.

“AMT-PAC therefore urges American Muslim voters and their allies in the struggle for civil rights to focus on the real issues: civil liberties, human rights, international peace and justice, jobs, education, health care, economic development of inner cities, and sound foreign policy. It is vital for the protection of our liberties to vote together, in high numbers, and for a common purpose.”