Tea Party Needs To Be
Careful
Gary Gerard,
dumbhoosier.com
I have been watching politics for more than 30 years.
But I must say, I have never seen the level of bitter partisanship I
see in Washington today. And I have never seen the level of angst among
average Americans leveled at politicians. Congressional approval
ratings are in the toilet.
I think a good bit of this is attributable to the level of
communication available to the average person these days. It used to be
if you really wanted to understand a political issue, you had to buy a
newspaper, sit down and read about it.
Slowly, over the past 20 years or so, that has evolved. With the advent
of cable news first, and then the Internet, it has become easier and
easier to be informed.
But, of course, this phenomenon cuts both ways. While the average
American has much greater access to the workings of government, our
esteemed leaders in Washington get lots of feedback they never got
before. Generally, I would say that the more information you have the
more likely you are to make an informed decision. So being continually
bombarded by all this knowledge must be a good thing.
But sometimes I think with all this information flying around, perhaps
certain groups or constituencies wind up being perceived as having far
more influence than they actually do. The squeaky wheel gets the
grease, if you will. And when that happens, things tend to get a little
whacky.
Let’s look at the Tea Party for a bit here.
Seems to me, during the election in 2010, there was this overarching
sentiment that the Tea Party and its candidates were a force to be
reckoned with and were responsible for handing over the House of
Representatives to the Republicans. To be sure, plenty of Tea
Party-backed candidates got elected. And I actually really like the
small-government principles the Tea Party pushes. But at the same time,
I think the Tea Party needs to be careful.
Polling shows the Tea Party already has lost half its followers because
of its incessant demands for conservative ideological purity among
Republicans. It seems the Tea Party spends more time and effort
targeting Republicans than Democrats in their quest to hold politicians
accountable. That’s happening right here in Indiana with the campaign
to unseat Sen. Richard Lugar.
In the end, I think that hurts their cause overall because, more likely
than not, it will alienate swing voters. Even a dumb Hoosier like me
knows that elections are won by wooing the center, the independents,
those likely voters who don’t necessarily vote for the same party each
election.
A perfect example is the current debt-limit debate. The Tea Party is
expending tons of political capital on this. The Tea Party has taken
the position that its members will not vote to raise the debt limit no
matter what. That means risking default and all the likely negative
economic consequences. Now, one could pat these people on the back, say
“attaboy” and congratulate them for standing on principle. Or one could
view this uncompromising position as dangerously counterproductive.
So what do Americans think?
Pew Research has a poll out this week, the results of which were quite
revealing to me. Here was the question: “What would you like lawmakers
who share your views on this issue to do? Should they stand by their
principles, even if that means the government goes into default, or
should they be willing to compromise, even if that means they strike a
deal you disagree with?”
Americans, by a 68 to 23 margin, favor a compromise. In other words,
they aren’t as concerned with principle as they are with results. Pew
broke it down further: Democrats favor compromise at a rate of 81
percent; Independents, 69 percent; and Republicans, 53 percent;
Republicans who identified themselves as Tea Party supporters, 24
percent.
The poll also showed that 60 percent favored a combination of spending
cuts and tax increases to deal with the deficit. Nineteen percent said
the focus should mostly be on cutting spending, and 8 percent said the
focus should be mostly on raising taxes.
So, clearly, the middle of the political spectrum – independents and
swing voters – favor compromise, raising the debt ceiling and a blend
of tax hikes and spending cuts. Those positions are antithetical to the
Tea Party.
See, the thing is, lots and lots of people have 401(k) plans or IRAs.
They don’t want to see a bunch of uncertainty in the markets. They
don’t want to see stock prices fall. They don’t want to see interest
rates rise. They don’t want to see inflationary pressures. All those
things are likely if the U.S. defaults on its fiduciary obligations.
The vast majority of Americans simply do not want that to happen. Yet
the Tea Party views that as a viable option to achieve some sort of
ideological purity. I’ve listened to presidential hopeful Michelle
Bachmann, the darling of the Tea Party. She says straight up that she
will not vote to increase the debt limit no matter what. I think that’s
wrongheaded.
And I don’t think any of this bodes well for Tea Party candidates in
the next election. I think you will see Republicans unafraid to flee
from Tea Party positions in the not-too-distant future and I think the
Tea Party’s influence will wane.
Already, a recent Gallup poll shows the Tea Party with an unfavorable
rating of 47 percent, the highest since it burst on the national scene.
Tea Party events are down more than 50 percent in 2011 compared to the
same period in 2010. Nikki Haley, Tea Party governor of South Carolina,
has seen her approval drop 17 points since her election. Governor Paul
LePage of Maine is facing a serious push back from Republicans in his
state.
Tea Partyers beware: I – and I think most Americans regardless of
politics – believe absolute, unyielding positions lead to flawed,
misguided outcomes.
Archives
|
