Conclusion:
The significant change currently underway in the federal judiciary is actually the direct result of increased evangelical voter turnout in recent elections. Regrettably, those numbers steadily fell for almost a decade until by the 2000 election, of the 60 million estimated evangelical voters in America, only 15 million voted – and 24 million were not even registered to vote. However, in 2002, that trend reversed and there was an upturn in evangelical voter that directly produced a 7 percent national advantage for federal pro-life candidates. As a result, of the 54 Freshmen elected to the U. S. House in that election, 36 were pro-life (a 67 percent pro-life class), and of the ten Freshmen elected to the U. S. Senate that election, eight were pro-life (an 80 percent pro-life class – and the Senate is where the help is most needed). The 2004 elections continued the increase in evangelical voter turnout, with numbers rising from 15 million evangelicals voting in 2000 to 28.9 million in 2004. (Although this is nearly double the numbers of four years earlier, it is still less than half of evangelicals voting.) This second increase resulted in a 12 percent national advantage for pro-life federal candidates. Consequently, of the 40 Freshmen elected to the U. S. House in 2004, 25 were pro-life (a 63 percent pro-life class), and of the nine Freshmen elected to the U. S. Senate, seven – or 77 percent – were pro-life. The pro-life congressmen elected over those two elections quickly became instrumental in the passage of Congress’ first four major pro-life federal laws that were free standing bills (previous pro-life victories were typically riders attached to funding bills, such as the famous Hyde Amendment which prohibited federal funds from being used to perform abortions). America’s first four stand-alone pro-life laws were: (1) the Infant Born-Alive Protection Act, (2) the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, (3) the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban, and (4) the Fetal Farming Ban.
Additionally, the election of fifteen pro-life U. S. Senators into the Senate over those two elections resulted in the confirmation of two pro-life Supreme Court justices and dozens of lower federal court judges, thus producing the changes that are now becoming evident.
Regrettably, in the 2006 elections, there was a dramatic fall in evangelical voter turnout, with numbers plummeting from 28.9 million in 2004 to 20.5 million in 2006 – a drop of 8.4 million evangelical voters and a decline of 30 percent. As a result, of the 54 Freshmen elected to the U. S. House in 2006, only 17 were pro-life (a 31 percent pro-life class), and of the ten Freshmen elected to the U. S. Senate, only two were pro-life (a 20 percent pro-life class – and one of those two has declared opposition to preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman).
Clearly, there is a direct correlation between evangelical voter turnout and electing leaders who reflect basic Judeo-Christian values. Therefore, while Christians may not always see the immediate tangible results of their vote on the evening news, nevertheless, their vote does have a significant impact. Consequently, even if Christians are frustrated over the direction of Congress (or its lack of spending restraints, or moving forward highly publicized legislation, or whatever), they must always remember that elections do have a direct impact on so many issues rarely mentioned by the media, such as pro-family legislation and the confirmation of judges. So, regardless of whatever else may be discussed in the upcoming presidential election, citizens should vote with an awareness that the Supreme Court needs just one more strict-constructionist Justice to have five solid votes on the Court, thus potentially ending the federal judicial element of the culture war.
Christians must therefore remain faithfully involved at the ballot box. As the Rev. Matthias Burnet reminded Christian citizens in his day:
Finally, ye . . . whose high prerogative it is to . . . invest with office and authority or to withhold them and in whose power it is to save or destroy your country, consider well the important trust . . . which God . . . [has] put into your hands. To God and posterity you are accountable for them. . . . Let not your children have reason to curse you for giving up those rights and prostrating those institutions which your fathers delivered to you. [84]
I watched something on TV recently with O’Connor whining about the serfs trying to undermine the judiciary. If I had my way, she’d be locked in an 8x8 cell with no other reading material than the Constitution.