religion in the 115th Congress

[justfollowingtheelections]

Also here's the religion of all 535 members.

Only 1, Kyrsten Sinema is unaffiliated and 10 others didn't give a response (Huffman, Chu, Foster, Bennet, Duckworth, Bonamici, Blumenauer, Jayapal, Pocan, Baldwin).  Most of these (Sinema, Huffman, Foster, Pocan, Baldwin) have consistently stated they don't follow a religion, Chu and Payapal don't surprise me since they descend from countries where what Westerners consider the major religion, isn't really a religion, Bonamici and Blumenauer come from Portland, which is the most irreligious city in the country so I'm not surprised, Bennet has also refused to answer the question in the past (his mother is Jewish and his father Christian and I guess he doesn't want to pick a side), and Duckworth used to say she was a Christian but at a townhall recently she was asked a question by an atheist, and she gave a very good response that convinced me she is an ally to irreligious people such as myself, and it's possible she has reconsidered her position on the issue and isn't religious anymore.
Huffman, Foster I don't know much about but given their background I'm not surprised.


Most over-represented groups:

Christian as a whole 19.7% above their % in the nation
Catholic 10.4
Protestant as a whole 7.9
Anglican/Episcopal 5.5
Presbyterian 4.5

Most under-represented
Unaffiliated 22.8% below their % in the nation
Pentecostal 4.6
Baptist 1.5
Restorationist 1.3
Holiness 0.8

[Zioneer]

Mormons seem to be at the expected percentage, and of course they're probably centered in the states you'd expect them to be in.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

"22.8% below their % in the nation".

Using "percentage" in this context is misleading, as it implies that unaffiliated ("u") comprise in Congress an amount equal to u-(u * .228)¹ as a percentage. I think the proper terminology would be "22.8 points below".

1. Someone lemme know if I'm screwing up the math here.

[RINO Tom]

I mean, unaffiliated is such a broad term that I think it's odd that anyone would feel they should be represented in any specific number, as if they're a coherent group.  According to Pew, 22.8% of the country is "Unaffiliated," and only 3.1% are atheists.  Heck, only 4.0% are agnostic, meaning that 15.7% (in other words, 68.9% of "Unaffiliated" Americans) probably believe in a higher power or at least have no grudge against such a belief and would therefore not care at all that their representative was religious.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I mean, unaffiliated is such a broad term that I think it's odd that anyone would feel they should be represented in any specific number, as if they're a coherent group.  According to Pew, 22.8% of the country is "Unaffiliated," and only 3.1% are atheists.  Heck, only 4.0% are agnostic, meaning that 15.7% (in other words, 68.9% of "Unaffiliated" Americans) probably believe in a higher power or at least have no grudge against such a belief and would therefore not care at all that their representative was religious.

We don't know how many of those who are simply unaffiliated do believe in a religion. Or at least this poll doesn't say. But people who explicitly don't believe in any religion make up at least 7.1%(How many atheists just say unaffiliated to avoid stigma?) of the population, and yet we only get one congressional representative(or at the absolute most 11, which is still only about 28% of what they still have).

[RINO Tom]

I mean, unaffiliated is such a broad term that I think it's odd that anyone would feel they should be represented in any specific number, as if they're a coherent group.  According to Pew, 22.8% of the country is "Unaffiliated," and only 3.1% are atheists.  Heck, only 4.0% are agnostic, meaning that 15.7% (in other words, 68.9% of "Unaffiliated" Americans) probably believe in a higher power or at least have no grudge against such a belief and would therefore not care at all that their representative was religious.

We don't know how many of those who are simply unaffiliated do believe in a religion. Or at least this poll doesn't say. But people who explicitly don't believe in any religion make up at least 7.1%(How many atheists just say unaffiliated to avoid stigma?) of the population, and yet we only get one congressional representative(or at the absolute most 11, which is still only about 28% of what they still have).

Oh, I'm not saying this "group" is underrepresented, because they certainly are.  However, I think it is certainly different to expect these people to want their group represented with as much passion and unity as Jewish, Muslim or Evangelical people would, for example.  They're all too different and, by definition of the group, care less about this.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I mean, unaffiliated is such a broad term that I think it's odd that anyone would feel they should be represented in any specific number, as if they're a coherent group.  According to Pew, 22.8% of the country is "Unaffiliated," and only 3.1% are atheists.  Heck, only 4.0% are agnostic, meaning that 15.7% (in other words, 68.9% of "Unaffiliated" Americans) probably believe in a higher power or at least have no grudge against such a belief and would therefore not care at all that their representative was religious.

We don't know how many of those who are simply unaffiliated do believe in a religion. Or at least this poll doesn't say. But people who explicitly don't believe in any religion make up at least 7.1%(How many atheists just say unaffiliated to avoid stigma?) of the population, and yet we only get one congressional representative(or at the absolute most 11, which is still only about 28% of what they still have).

Oh, I'm not saying this "group" is underrepresented, because they certainly are.  However, I think it is certainly different to expect these people to want their group represented with as much passion and unity as Jewish, Muslim or Evangelical people would, for example.  They're all too different and, by definition of the group, care less about this.

Most people who explicitly identify as atheists tend to care a bit more about it. But why should that be relevant?

[RINO Tom]

I mean, unaffiliated is such a broad term that I think it's odd that anyone would feel they should be represented in any specific number, as if they're a coherent group.  According to Pew, 22.8% of the country is "Unaffiliated," and only 3.1% are atheists.  Heck, only 4.0% are agnostic, meaning that 15.7% (in other words, 68.9% of "Unaffiliated" Americans) probably believe in a higher power or at least have no grudge against such a belief and would therefore not care at all that their representative was religious.

We don't know how many of those who are simply unaffiliated do believe in a religion. Or at least this poll doesn't say. But people who explicitly don't believe in any religion make up at least 7.1%(How many atheists just say unaffiliated to avoid stigma?) of the population, and yet we only get one congressional representative(or at the absolute most 11, which is still only about 28% of what they still have).

Oh, I'm not saying this "group" is underrepresented, because they certainly are.  However, I think it is certainly different to expect these people to want their group represented with as much passion and unity as Jewish, Muslim or Evangelical people would, for example.  They're all too different and, by definition of the group, care less about this.

Most people who explicitly identify as atheists tend to care a bit more about it. But why should that be relevant?

Right, but that would be 3% of Congress, or 16 Congressmen/Senators.  Certainly underrepresented, but they have a low ceiling if they actually want Congress to reflect the population.

And I'm not saying it should be relevant, but it is.  There are lots of areas of the country where it's really hard for a non-Evangelical or non-Mormon to win ... there's nowhere in the country where you'd be at an inherent advantage off the bat being "unaffiliated."

[Frodo]

Something seems off with those numbers.  It says that 56% of all Christians in Congress are Protestants, and another 31% are Catholics.  Who composes the remaining 13%?  The percentages for Orthodox Christians and Mormons are miniscule, so they can't be it. 

[DC Al Fine]

I mean, unaffiliated is such a broad term that I think it's odd that anyone would feel they should be represented in any specific number, as if they're a coherent group.  According to Pew, 22.8% of the country is "Unaffiliated," and only 3.1% are atheists.  Heck, only 4.0% are agnostic, meaning that 15.7% (in other words, 68.9% of "Unaffiliated" Americans) probably believe in a higher power or at least have no grudge against such a belief and would therefore not care at all that their representative was religious.

We don't know how many of those who are simply unaffiliated do believe in a religion. Or at least this poll doesn't say. But people who explicitly don't believe in any religion make up at least 7.1%(How many atheists just say unaffiliated to avoid stigma?) of the population, and yet we only get one congressional representative(or at the absolute most 11, which is still only about 28% of what they still have).

Oh, I'm not saying this "group" is underrepresented, because they certainly are.  However, I think it is certainly different to expect these people to want their group represented with as much passion and unity as Jewish, Muslim or Evangelical people would, for example.  They're all too different and, by definition of the group, care less about this.

Most people who explicitly identify as atheists tend to care a bit more about it. But why should that be relevant?

Right, but that would be 3% of Congress, or 16 Congressmen/Senators.  Certainly underrepresented, but they have a low ceiling if they actually want Congress to reflect the population.

And I'm not saying it should be relevant, but it is.  There are lots of areas of the country where it's really hard for a non-Evangelical or non-Mormon to win ... there's nowhere in the country where you'd be at an inherent advantage off the bat being "unaffiliated."

RINO's got the right idea. There's two things going on here:

1) Congress is mostly older and well off, hence lots of mainline Protestants and Jews, few Pentecostals and atheists.

2) While there might be a disadvantage to being a "bible thumper" in some parts, nominal religion is a net positive for a politician compared to atheism. There are plenty of people in congress who might say "unaffiliated" on a survey but for their political careers.

[DC Al Fine]

Something seems off with those numbers.  It says that 56% of all Christians in Congress are Protestants, and another 31% are Catholics.  Who composes the remaining 13%?  The percentages for Orthodox Christians and Mormons are miniscule, so they can't be it. 

It says 56% of Congress is Protestant, not 56% of Christians in Congress are Protestant.

[Frodo]

Something seems off with those numbers.  It says that 56% of all Christians in Congress are Protestants, and another 31% are Catholics.  Who composes the remaining 13%?  The percentages for Orthodox Christians and Mormons are miniscule, so they can't be it.  

It says 56% of Congress is Protestant, not 56% of Christians in Congress are Protestant.

That's not how it is presented -if you look at it, it says 90% of all congressmen are Christians, and of those Christians, 56% of whom are Protestants.  And then another 31% are Catholics, with 13% by and large unaccounted for.  

Wait -oh, I see.  So the percentages (for Christians in general) are supposed to add up to 90%.  That makes more sense.  

Protestants: 56%
Catholics: 31.4%
Mormons: 2.4%
Orthodox: 1%

And then there's everybody else who comprises the 10% non-Christian element.  

[America Needs R'hllor]

Frankly, these kinds of polls, as well as very similar polls in Israel, kind of disgust me. Nearly no politician is brave enough to admit that he's an atheist, and I bet there's at least 30% of Congress, if not more, that do not believe in any religion. Greatly increased my respect to Kristen Synema.

[RINO Tom]

Frankly, these kinds of polls, as well as very similar polls in Israel, kind of disgust me. Nearly no politician is brave enough to admit that he's an atheist, and I bet there's at least 30% of Congress, if not more, that do not believe in any religion. Greatly increased my respect to Kristen Synema.

Of course, the bolded aren't even CLOSE to being the same thing.  Being a sure atheist takes a pretty big leap of faith (believing, at the end of the day, that the physical Universe and time created themselves with no outside action or cause) that a lot of people aren't willing to make, so they just identify as "non-religious."

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Something seems off with those numbers.  It says that 56% of all Christians in Congress are Protestants, and another 31% are Catholics.  Who composes the remaining 13%?  The percentages for Orthodox Christians and Mormons are miniscule, so they can't be it.  

It says 56% of Congress is Protestant, not 56% of Christians in Congress are Protestant.

That's not how it is presented -if you look at it, it says 90% of all congressmen are Christians, and of those Christians, 56% of whom are Protestants.  And then another 31% are Catholics, with 13% by and large unaccounted for.  

Wait -oh, I see.  So the percentages (for Christians in general) are supposed to add up to 90%.  That makes more sense.  

Protestants: 56%
Catholics: 31.4%
Mormons: 2.4%
Orthodox: 1%

And then there's everybody else who comprises the 10% non-Christian element.  

I wonder what Pence would be counted as, since he considers himself an Evangelical Protestant AND a Catholic.  It's also worth noting that all but two Republicans in Congress are Christians (Zeldin and Kustoff are Jews).

[Zioneer]

You should see the Utah legislature. All but two Republican legislators are Mormon, while only two Democratic legislators are Mormon. That's including both houses, for the entire 104 person legislature. So out of 104 people, there's 91 Mormons.

[Antonio the Sixth]

You should see the Utah legislature. All but two Republican legislators are Mormon, while only two Democratic legislators are Mormon. That's including both houses, for the entire 104 person legislature. So out of 104 people, there's 91 Mormons.

Really? That's a shame. I thought there was a sizable minority of Mormon Democrats.

[DC Al Fine]

You should see the Utah legislature. All but two Republican legislators are Mormon, while only two Democratic legislators are Mormon. That's including both houses, for the entire 104 person legislature. So out of 104 people, there's 91 Mormons.

Really? That's a shame. I thought there was a sizable minority of Mormon Democrats.

Me too. I assume Utah politics are (d?)evolving into Mormon vs. non-Mormon?

[Zioneer]

You should see the Utah legislature. All but two Republican legislators are Mormon, while only two Democratic legislators are Mormon. That's including both houses, for the entire 104 person legislature. So out of 104 people, there's 91 Mormons.

Really? That's a shame. I thought there was a sizable minority of Mormon Democrats.

Me too. I assume Utah politics are (d?)evolving into Mormon vs. non-Mormon?

According to this article, there is one non-Mormon Republican (State Senator Ann Milner, a Baptist), and one State Senator who declined to list his religion (Daniel Thatcher).

On the Democratic side, there is one state representative who is Mormon (House Minority Leader Brian King), and two state senators (Senate Minority Leader Gene Davis and Senator Luz Escamilla). The rest of the Democrats are as follows:

State Senate:

Jim Dabakis (nonaffilated, former LDS and now openly gay)
Jani Iwamoto (Japanese Church of Christ)
Karen Mayne (Baptist)


State House:

Patrice Arent (Jewish)
Rebecca Chavez-Houck (Episcopalian)
Lynn Hemingway (Methodist)
Sandra Hollins (Baptist)
Karen Kwan (nondenominational)
Angela Romero (Catholic)
Elizabeth Weight (Unitarian)
Mark Wheatley (Catholic)

There's quite a few Mormon Democrats in the base, and in recent years the LDS Dems Caucus has gained some popularity, but unfortunately, the perception of Utah politics is Mormon Republicans against non-Mormon Democrats, a perception that is aided by the rabid anti-Mormon attitudes of some of the Democratic base. Calling the LDS Church the "Corporation" or the "LD$ Church" or making jokes about "following the profit", that sort of thing. Some of our candidates haven't helped matters.

I'm a committed Mormon Democrat myself, and I really want to bring more Mormons into the Democratic fold so we don't remain the "non/anti-Mormon party", but it's quite frustrating when say, the gubernatorial candidate does a fundraiser off of a musical mocking Mormonism. Or the supporters of one Senate candidate harass their primary opponent for being pro-life (and by implication, disapproving of his Mormon faith). In the upcoming state party chairman elections, I intend to vote for the candidate who can best explain how they would appeal to Mormon voters, because we really do need to appeal to them.

[DavidB.]

What does "unaffiliated" actually mean? Like, if you go to church at times but you're not a member of it yet you do self-ID as a certain denomination, are you considered to be unaffiliated?

Anyway, great to see quite some Congresspeople don't want to come out regarding their irreligiosity. It should not be normalized or promoted.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Those IDs are usually self reported so I'd imagine an occasional church attendee who isn't a formal member would be more likely to just put down that denomination, also a lot of churches don't even have formal memberships. Mine doesn't but I wouldn't identity as "unaffiliated".

It could in theory include people who still see themselves as Christian but not part of any denomination, but such people in such a survey would probably answer just "Christian" or "nondenominational"

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

What does "unaffiliated" actually mean? Like, if you go to church at times but you're not a member of it yet you do self-ID as a certain denomination, are you considered to be unaffiliated?

Anyway, great to see quite some Congresspeople don't want to come out regarding their irreligiosity. It should not be normalized or promoted.

What the hell?

[Figueira]

Mormons probably benefit from being concentrated in Utah and other small western states that inflate their numbers in the Senate. I wonder what this would look like if it was just the House.

[they don't love you like i love you]

You should see the Utah legislature. All but two Republican legislators are Mormon, while only two Democratic legislators are Mormon. That's including both houses, for the entire 104 person legislature. So out of 104 people, there's 91 Mormons.

Really? That's a shame. I thought there was a sizable minority of Mormon Democrats.

Look at the parts of Utah that actually vote for Democrats. They are majority non-Mormon.

[Figueira]

Why are non-Mormons in Utah so Democratic compared to non-Mormons in the surrounding states?