The Tea Party Movement Is Worth Keeping an Eye On
As news surfaced that some of the nation’s biggest financial institutions would be paying out record bonuses to executives in 2009 (AIG drew particular fire for planning on dishing out $165 million) following the federal government’s half trillion dollar TARP bailout, a growing and increasingly vocal movement of U.S. taxpayers are letting it be known that they’ve had enough.
The grassroots faction has come to be known as the Tea Party Movement taking its name from the original Boston Tea Party whose protesters lobbied against “taxation without representation”. Except in this case, taxpayers are speaking out against the rising national debt, excessive government spending and the continuing economic struggles of ordinary Americans.
Whereas the Obama administration has used government stimulus packages, tax breaks and mortgage foreclosure moratoriums to invigorate the economy, the Tea Party Movement argues that taxpayers would be better served through limited government spending and controls surrounding government earmarks and pork barrel expenditures. While the idea of reducing government spending is nothing new, it’s becoming increasingly clear that their version of this message is reaching moderate Americans all across the country.
The Tea Party Movement is most visible through the dozens and dozens of protests that have occurred over the last several months objecting to everything from stimulus spending to government bailouts to expensive health care reform. Some have seen as few as a couple dozen protesters while the biggest have turned out several thousand.
The movement appears to be gaining traction. They held their first “national convention” in Nashville earlier this month (although attendance was estimated at a disappointing 600 to 1400 people amid trepidation over excessive ticket prices) and mainstream conservatives like Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have expressed their support for the protests. But its greatest coup may have come with the person who looks to be becoming the de facto face of the movement – Sarah Palin.
While claiming that she is not seeking a leadership position in the movement, the 2008 Republican Vice Presidential candidate was the keynote speaker at the convention and has headlining gigs at future Tea Party events already scheduled. Her involvement is thought to give the movement an added air of legitimacy and could help position her for a 2012 run at the White House.
So what does all this mean for the movement’s ability to institute change in Washington? The idea of protesters effecting change in government is not unprecedented. Citizens of California logged protests some 30 years ago against high taxes and ultimately saw Proposition 13 passed which placed limits on property taxes.
Like many political movements in their early stages, the Tea Party Movement has experienced its own growing pains. Organization still seems to be a problem but there appears to be little doubt at this point they are winning believers. The message of smaller government and lower taxes are reaching members of both parties and should this movement do a better job of coordinating efforts real change could be afoot.
That could mean coming changes in taxes, savings or health care. Whether you’re a fan of Sarah Palin or the Tea Party Movement in general, it’ll be important to keep an eye on what they’re doing and where the movement is headed because it could very well be hitting your bottom line in the not too distant future.
Photo credit: digger5x5
This article was originally written or modified on . If you enjoyed reading this post, please consider subscribing to my full RSS feed. Or you can also choose to have free daily updates delivered right to your inbox.
Author Info
Very well written and explained as always!
“Her involvement is thought to give the movement an added air of legitimacy”
I’m guessing you don’t agree with that David, and I’m right there behind you. Anyone who thinks Sarah Palin’s support will give legitimacy to anything needs to have their head examined.
The simple fact is the Tea Party movement started out with good ideas and concepts but was hijacked by the neo-cons and the religious right. Now it’s about condemning Democrats no matter what action they take while proselytizing the Republican talking points. It’s sad that the idea of a conservative government with socially liberal policies cannot be found anywhere in the mainstream political spectrum.
Good ideas from both sides are ignored so the weak and stupid can declare war on the enemy party. It is no longer about having a discussion on issues affecting us all, but rather confirming biases and promoting hatred.
Until people reject the lies fed to them and think for themselves, this will always and forever be the status quo.
It would be safe to say that I’m not a fan of Sarah Palin.
Me neither
I don’t think the Tea Party movement has the staying power to make it to 2012. They could affect the 2010 races though.
Having Sarah Palin as their leader is an ironic way of protraying their short-attention span. Who better to choose than somebody that only a couple years ago was the antithesis of what they believe in…lobbying for millions of useless dollars for her state. The fact that they take her supposed renaissance so easily in stride speaks to their collective political intelligence.
I see the Tea Party as the “stupid wing” of the Right wing. They want a smaller government because they are upset by the economic conditions that occured because the government was too small and did not regulate wall street. They want no taxes, but ignore all the things taxes pay for. In short they are kind of like a mild version of the KKK…an easily led angry mob looking to linch somebody without a real purpose.
“They want a smaller government because they are upset by the economic conditions that occured [sic] because the government was too small and did not regulate wall street.”
I don’t agree with many of the positions of the Tea Party movement, but this is just flat out wrong. The failure of the government to regulate Wall Street had absolutely nothing to do with lack of resources. It has everything to do with the fact that the government will hire idiots who have no clue what to look for. The evil geniuses at Goldman Sachs are there precisely because of the absurd amount of money they stand to make. The government employees work for the SEC and regulatory agencies because they want a cushy stable job where they don’t have to do anything.
Even William Black, famous bank regulator and one of the last true good guys for the gov, criticizes and condemns the SEC for what it has become.
Alan Greenspan’s philosophy was let business take care of itself, and government should stay out of the way. There was a great Frontline PBS piece on this just recently. The government *can* control business. The problem is lobbyists control the government. The Tea Party movement seems to think the government is too big, when it reality it is too corrupt. It just got even more corrupt when the Republican supreme court recently opened the door to even more money controlling elections.
The problem with American is that we have too many nitwits that want more for less and the idea of paying for our things is quite upsetting to us. We are spoiled and act like babies. If we were a real baby our parents would force us to do the right thing and pay for what we buy (i.e. raise taxes to pay for our crumbling infrastructure and invest in our future), but since we have the ability to choose our parents, they just do what we ask.