Growing up in a fairly liberal Mormon household, I was specifically told that my church would not endorse any political candidate from any party.
As I read Quinn's article, I was amazed to know that I had been yet again "brainwashed" by my family & the church about just what the LD$ GAs were up to.
In 1960 (I was 10), most of my neighborhood friends liked J.F.K. more than Nixon. So I decided to join them. I wore a J.F.K. button around my house. Mom saw it and I thought she'd be mad at me. But she wisely said, "Well, if you want him, you should stand by your man."
"While Mitt Romney’s interactions with the L.D.S. hierarchy regarding his political fortunes will probably forever remain a matter of speculation, in October 2006 the L.D.S. Church’s newspaper nervously reminded its readers that “proof of blatant support of any candidate puts the church at risk of losing its tax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service and could damage Romney’s prospects of getting the GOP nomination.” Why they were so nervous became clear in the next sentence: “The Boston Globe over the past week has reported that an e-mail by Don Stirling, a Utah-based political consultant for Romney, said that LDS leaders, including church president Gordon B. Hinckley, knew about the meetings between Elder Jeffrey R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve and Romney supporters, including [Kem] Gardner.”
Stirling’s e-mail to the C.E.O. of the Church-owned Deseret Book Company outlined a covert strategy (which Apostle Holland approved) of “coordinating” donations for Romney through Deseret Book and Brigham Young University’s Management Society of M.B.A. alumni, “while not creating undue heartburn” (i.e., media attention).
In an obvious (but unacknowledged) response to that dustup, Hewitt’s 2007 laudatory biography replayed the following dialogue with Mitt Romney:
“Would you ever expect a call from [L.D.S.] President Hinckley or his successor?” I asked.
“No,” [Romney] emphatically replied. “Absolutely not. . . . For those sworn into national office, their obligation is to the nation.”
Romney was merely re-stating the verities of U.S. political discourse about church-state boundaries, but Americans should now ask themselves three questions.
Is there any evidence that L.D.S. headquarters has abandoned its interest in influencing the decisions of L.D.S. officeholders in Washington, D.C.?
Have Mormon Republicans departed from their historical patterns of embracing political direction from the L.D.S. Church hierarchy?
Is Mitt Romney an unwavering statesman who is resistant to such pressures?
Only time will tell, if America’s voters elect him."
Excerpt from the article, concerning mormon Democrats:
By contrast, L.D.S. Democrats in public office have often rejected the hierarchy’s efforts to persuade them to vote contrary to their political principles…. In June 1965, Senator Moss joined with four Democratic L.D.S. congressmen in publicly defying the voting instructions they had received from the First Presidency. At issue was the anti-union section of the Taft-Hartley Act, about which the First Presidency had written to each Mormon member of Congress, asking them to vote to sustain it….
In 1978, the First Presidency sent a letter asking every L.D.S. member of Congress to vote against the proposal to deregulate the airline industry. [The Church owned stock in airlines.]...
Excerpt from the article concerning mormons who hold office and are Republicans:
In August 1956, L.D.S. president David O. McKay’s office diary noted, “Met Senator Wallace Bennett. I took him into the meeting of the First Presidency so that he might make his report also to my Counselors. He discussed general matters pertaining to political affairs of the country.” In December 1957, Senator Bennett wrote to those “Dear Brethren. . . . I would welcome an opportunity to cooperate with a person or persons who may be assigned by the First Presidency…”
In 1975, after Republican Utah state legislator M. Byron Fisher sponsored a bill to ratify the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Church’s newspaper, the Deseret News, published a typically unsigned editorial, which opposed ratification. Within days, Fisher reversed himself and voted against the bill he had sponsored, explaining, “It is my church and as a bishop [of a local L.D.S. congregation], I’m not going to vote against its wishes.”
Typical LDS response in the comments: Quinn is just embittered and offended because he's gay and the Church ex'd him.... Yes, I'm sure that somehow changes all the facts of the article, which are facts. And, Quinn was ex'd because he published truths about the Church that they didn't like very much.
Vanity Fair today carries an article by Michael Quinn, a controversial historian of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, titled When Mormons Go To Washington. It argues that
"Though Mitt Romney and his supporters invoke J.F.K.’s 1960 talk, most Mormons do not believe in the America of which Kennedy spoke. He described a nation “where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from” any “ecclesiastical source.” By contrast, L.D.S. politicians (both Democrats and Republicans) have sought instructions from their church’s leaders for more than a century. Republican officeholders have been most susceptible to such political “counsel,” while L.D.S. Democrats have often objected to it—sometimes stridently."
Quinn goes on to chronicle a notable exception who strongly resisted Church pressure-- Utah Republican Senator Reed Smoot, and quotes a Romney assertion that he would never expect a call from the L.D.S. Church president, because the obligation of national officials is to the nation. Quinn, who was excommunicated from the LDS Church in 1993, ends his article with these tendentious questions:
"Is there any evidence that L.D.S. headquarters has abandoned its interest in influencing the decisions of L.D.S. officeholders in Washington, D.C.? Have Mormon Republicans departed from their historical patterns of embracing political direction from the L.D.S. Church hierarchy? Is Mitt Romney an unwavering statesman who is resistant to such pressures?"
One need look no further than the annual meddling by the LDS Church in the Utah legislature. The church seems to have a standing (if invisible) place on any committee that discusses alcohol legislation, and it was reported recently, I believe in a Rolly article, that the head of DABC must have church approval before being appointed.
The Utah legislature operates in lockstep with church wishes. At the national level, I don't believe Harry Reid listens much to Salt Lake, but I don't trust Mitt to refuse their phone calls.