The tea party has emerged as a force to be reckoned with in American politics since 2009. What this means for the 2010 midterm elections and beyond is not entirely clear yet due to the organic nature of this movement, but a path is beginning to take shape.
On the one hand, I am a big fan of what the tea party movement stands for. I admire the grassroots passion for politics. It's sorely lacking amongst the American citizenry. The right to protest against the government when its actions seem unjust is sacred to those of us who value freedom of assembly, speech and expression. Many government policies make no sense. Members of the movement are following the example of the original Boston Tea Party, the very colonial heroes who threw crates of British tea leaves into Boston Harbor in 1773 and in so doing, began brewing the Revolutionary War which created the America we now live in. Members of the modern tea party undoubtedly represent a large groundswell of national sentiment, representing up to 20% of Americans if polls are to be believed.
On the other hand, the tea party disappoints. The movement is fundamentally lacking in practical ideas beyond claiming populist victimhood during a historically bad recession. Being anti-government, anti-tax, anti-Obama, or anti-socialist in a country where socialism is marginalized does not constitute an intelligent belief system. It's one thing to shout slogans such as "Don't tread on me" or "no taxation without representation" if they had any bearing on reality. However, the stimulus bill and health insurance reform do not quite qualify. In fact, when a real-life debate about taxation without representation for Washington, DC residents played out in April and was derailed by the National Rifle Association (NRA), tea partiers were nowhere to be found. This leads us to believe that it isn't principle which drives the tea party movement, but something else.
Bitter to the Taste Tea partiers are easy to spot. They are defined by overwhelming bitterness, and some are willing to take to the streets or march on Capitol Hill to show their anger and even hate. This is not a new phenomenon. During the Bush administration massive crowds gathered across the country and around the world to decry US policy, especially in relation to the invasion of Iraq that was seen as an unnecessary, unjust, and dumb war. State Senator Barack Obama made an anti-war speech at just such a gathering. While largely ineffective in affecting war policy or moving Bush, the anti-war movement did eventually help the Democratic Party take back Congress in 2006, and formed the backbone of the coalition which helped elect Obama as President in 2008. It is unfathomable that Barack Obama could have become President so early in his political career if not for the Bush backlash. But what is it these days that riles up the tea partiers so?
Why the long face? A confluence of factors have come together to put wind in the tea party's sails. Tea partiers peddle the notion that things are very, very bad for the common American person. The sentiment is understandable, and in some ways they are right. We are still in the midst of a massive recession. Other nations are growing in stature while the American state seems stagnant, especially in comparison. US Government is spending like a drunken sailor, whether it's for healthcare, bank bailouts, auto company bailouts, or to support illegal immigrants. Most people still aren't better off. Unemployment is high, and good jobs are hard to come by. Civil liberties (guns and God) are being taken away by the government. America isn't the country that many tea partiers remember from the good old 1950's or 1960's. Meanwhile, the terrorists are out to kill us and we're not being defended from them. The party will go on as long as these problems, real or perceived, are in play.
Who are they? There's some disagreement about who is involved with the tea party movement. Liberals tend to write them off as mostly white and older, like the right-wing base of the Republican Party itself, the type of crabby people who resurface whenever Democrats return to power in Washington. Liberals also point to evidence that the rallies and websites are organized and funded by shadowy operatives of the Republican establishment, trying quietly to garner momentum for the coming elections while turning huge profits for themselves. Meanwhile conservatives have tried hard to portray the diversity of the tea party movement, pointing out the minority members at rallies whenever possible, taking pains to show the movement's independence and disaffection towards both parties, and occasionally attempting to shun the blatantly racist and vitriolic elements of the group. Liberals call them ignorant, while Republicans show polls demonstrating that tea party members are more highly educated than the average American.
In reality it's impossible for anyone to truly know the makeup of the tea party movement. It is less than two years old, and most of its members are people who lurk on websites and make anonymous statements. There are no official leaders, although several established conservative or libertarian politicians are working hard to curry favor with the movement out of ideological affinity or political opportunism.
Affecting the Outcome. It's common wisdom that in order to get elected, many conservative politicians will need to bow at the altar of the tea party, just as liberals in key battlegrounds must get the blessing of the local unions, or face the consequences. Establishment centrist Republicans including John McCain and Charlie Crist are so afraid of their right flank that they dramatically changed issue stances (McCain) or left the party outright (Crist). Most believe Scott Brown won a key Republican victory in January thanks to tea party support in the state where it all started 230 years ago. New politicians like Brown are expected to arrive in Washington beginning in 2010 on the shoulders of the tea party, including people such as Marco Rubio from Florida who may defeat Crist for a Senate seat. And it's no coincidence that 2012 presidential hopefuls like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are actively courting the tea party; they are aware that any chance of defeating Barack Obama will require the movement's help.
Until the Party Ends. The tea party movement is becoming a victim of its own contradictions. Its anti-government message will only resonate until it becomes clear that the economy is improving and the Obama government claims some of the credit. Most members may not be racist and ignorant of the facts, but plenty of them are, and the media loves to focus on the crazies who attend tea party rallies because it boosts ratings. There is passion and energy, but no adult leadership and no responsible platform. Reducing taxes is a great rallying cry, except that's exactly what has already happened for most Americans. Tea party support may appear essential nationally, but it has spectacularly failed to get candidates elected throughout the midwest and significantly, in NY-23 late last year. Finally, if the tea party truly is made up of civil libertarians, then will they also support other causes for civil liberties such as free choice on abortion, gay marriage, immigrant rights, gays openly serving in the military, and Miranda rights for suspected terrorists? I didn't think so.
The tea party may be a worthwhile hand-maiden for the Republican party in the short term, but it's likely that once a few tea party heroes are elected to office in Washington, the contradictions will cause the marriage to unravel. The question is whether the Republicans will read the tea leaves.
Posts
