So, the Tea Party does it again. Admittedly, looking out for the country's best fiscal interest is admirable. The thought of the U.S. spending an additional $1.1 trillion for (discretionary government spending) is enough to churn the stomach of most budget-loving Americans. But, we must also remember that the Tea Party has its own political agenda.
Just to recap; the ideals of most Tea Partiers are proclaimed on many of its websites: fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, free market and lower taxes. On its face, these American ideals are used to propagate their position, but under the surface, it seems that there is no room for "compromise" or flexibility in this, mostly conservative, grassroots movement. There is almost a camouflaged, exclusivity within the Tea Party itself, as well as how Tea Partiers believe the constitution should be applied. Some argue that the Tea Party appears to be comprised of a group bordering closely on nationalism, and to that point, any idea or thought that deviates from the Constitution, as it stands, is implausible.
Interestingly, there has been a proposition floating around '"T" Party"' circles, to change the name from "Tea Party" to "Independent Patriot Party" and, ultimately, become a third party. A move as simple as this one, begs the question; does the "Patriot" part of the possible new moniker insinuate that anyone other than a Tea Party member is a non-patriot? Reaching? Maybe. Consider this: what about a second Tea Party proposal to nationalize English, which according to the Tea Party, will help "...avoid separation or isolation of Americans by ethnic grouping, and so we may continue to communicate properly with each other." What happens to those people that don't happen to speak English? The Tea Party tries to make its case, here, to make English the "official" language, so that no feels left out or isolated. This is a pretty weak argument. With this proposal, you are essentially, isolating English speaking Americans from non-English speaking Americans; which is the actual reality behind the term (the Tea Party uses) "isolation of groups".
What about repealing health care? What is the Tea Party's plan to insure over 32 million Americans; cover those with pre-exisiting conditions and bring down medical costs? Those that can't afford health care; do they just suffer because the Tea Party advocates the right to chose whether or not you want health coverage (without it being mandated by the government)? Is having the "right", for some, to choose, ultimately, greater than the majority actually having health care?
What about repealing health care? What is the Tea Party's plan to insure over 32 million Americans; cover those with pre-exisiting conditions and bring down medical costs? Those that can't afford health care; do they just suffer because the Tea Party advocates the right to chose whether or not you want health coverage (without it being mandated by the government)? Is having the "right", for some, to choose, ultimately, greater than the majority actually having health care?
Without going into the vitriolic behavior and speech that erupted when several Democratic House members were in the process of voting on the health care bill back in March; in this particular instance, the democratic principle of these members' right to vote was infringed upon by angry protesters at the Tea Party rally. Although Tea Partiers feel that mandating health care is unconstitutional, it could be argued that hurling threats or epithets, interfere in that right to vote and is equally unconstitutional.
Proudly waving signs, held high that warn "Don't Tread on Me"; Tea Party Nation news articles that declare: "Real Americans Did Not Sue Arizona"; anti-Muslim rhetoric; a vehement opposition to birthright citizenship (per the Fourteenth Amendment); and many divisive arguments as to why President Obama is not American, are all examples of a widely held, yet, seemingly, inarticulated notion that unless you agree with these same ideals; you can not possibly be an American.
 |
| Courtesy of Tony Avelar/AP |
The Tea party has come out and publicly denounced earmarks under any circumstance. Tea Party Express Leader, Amy Kremer says, "We will go after them. We're not going to accept it." "I mean there are all kinds of pork in there." As a result of this latest Tea Party rant, some House and Senate Republicans are pledging a two year moratorium on earmark spending in Congress. Surprisingly, a few Republicans have not signed on to the pledge, over fears that the White House would actually incur more power to spend the funds.
In addition to comprising less than one percent of the overall spending in the omnibus spending package, not all earmarks in and of themselves are inherently evil. Many in Congress (Republicans included) and even in the Department of Defense, would attest to that very fact. Recently, Secretary of Defense, Bill Gates, pushed for the bill to be funded by congress, rather than in the continuing resolution that was passed by the House. The Senate version of the bill would allow Defense to pursue critical national security initiatives, such as standing up the new Cyber Command and increasing special operations forces. According to the Government Executive.com, "The Defense Department would receive an additional $4.9 billion, including $1.56 billion to cover cost increases in its health initiatives. Veterans' programs would see a $3.7 billion boost". Another Democratic Senator, Tom Harkin, says the omnibus bill contained things that pertained to "....homeland security, education, health, energy, and infrastructure...". Some even argue that "removing selection of local tasks like widening crowded roads, improving harbors, purchase of police, fire and school equipment, from input by representatives and senators who know the area best and transferring that decision-making authority to bureaucrats in Washington is the absolute antithesis of Tea Party objectives."
Whatever the stance on the issue, ironically speaking, the very thing that Tea Partiers and their Republican cohorts are attempting to do away with, may very well be appropriated by federal or state bureaucracy, anyway. What many in the Tea Party may not understand, is that the funds are already approved for spending. Its just now, with the moratorium, someone else will have to do the spending for Congress (at least on the Republican end). In a sense, it may just be the type of back-door politics the GOP pledged to run away from.
There is never really a black and white remedy for what ails America. In fact, that is what makes this country so great; the foundation of Democracy. We are a diverse nation of people that continues to evolve and change and the proverbially, digging-of-the-heels-in-the-ground way of operating won't cut it in Washington. Not after the mid-term election results. It can't. The American people, outside of the Tea Party, don't want gridlock; they want results. In order to move any piece of legislation, there has to be compromise. That's the reason why we have a two-party system and the Legislative, Judicial and Executive branches of the government that preside. The Founding Fathers knew that we needed some governing document to apply to everyone (perhaps to avoid complete anarchy) and, in turn, came up with the U.S. Constitution. Incidentally, the same Constitution Tea Party members are sworn to defend, was born out of compromise. The three bodies of government are in place to encompass a rich and varied way of thinking, living, governing and doing business. We have rights and freedoms that are protected and while these are the very same set of ideals the Tea Party so fervently protects, ironically, in some instances, they are the ones that the Tea Party seems to be also be so fervently against.
Not everything the Tea Party considers "American", embraces an America that is constantly evolving, changing and growing; the danger in that, is to view our country and its future through a narrowly, skewed and conservative lens. Such constitutes the Tea Party quagmire. The Tea Party, whether unconsciously or not, deals in absolutes. The only problem with absolutes, is that you have an almost impossible standard that you have created and are expected to live by and, at the same time, is what you are, ultimately, judged by. Heaven forbid that those who live by these absolutes, act out or endorse anything other than what is in the constitution. Their fate is inevitable. They will immediately lose their "credibility card" and there will be no more absolutes, no more extremes and no more credibility left for such a "patriotic" movement as the Tea Party.
In addition to comprising less than one percent of the overall spending in the omnibus spending package, not all earmarks in and of themselves are inherently evil. Many in Congress (Republicans included) and even in the Department of Defense, would attest to that very fact. Recently, Secretary of Defense, Bill Gates, pushed for the bill to be funded by congress, rather than in the continuing resolution that was passed by the House. The Senate version of the bill would allow Defense to pursue critical national security initiatives, such as standing up the new Cyber Command and increasing special operations forces. According to the Government Executive.com, "The Defense Department would receive an additional $4.9 billion, including $1.56 billion to cover cost increases in its health initiatives. Veterans' programs would see a $3.7 billion boost". Another Democratic Senator, Tom Harkin, says the omnibus bill contained things that pertained to "....homeland security, education, health, energy, and infrastructure...". Some even argue that "removing selection of local tasks like widening crowded roads, improving harbors, purchase of police, fire and school equipment, from input by representatives and senators who know the area best and transferring that decision-making authority to bureaucrats in Washington is the absolute antithesis of Tea Party objectives."
Whatever the stance on the issue, ironically speaking, the very thing that Tea Partiers and their Republican cohorts are attempting to do away with, may very well be appropriated by federal or state bureaucracy, anyway. What many in the Tea Party may not understand, is that the funds are already approved for spending. Its just now, with the moratorium, someone else will have to do the spending for Congress (at least on the Republican end). In a sense, it may just be the type of back-door politics the GOP pledged to run away from.
There is never really a black and white remedy for what ails America. In fact, that is what makes this country so great; the foundation of Democracy. We are a diverse nation of people that continues to evolve and change and the proverbially, digging-of-the-heels-in-the-ground way of operating won't cut it in Washington. Not after the mid-term election results. It can't. The American people, outside of the Tea Party, don't want gridlock; they want results. In order to move any piece of legislation, there has to be compromise. That's the reason why we have a two-party system and the Legislative, Judicial and Executive branches of the government that preside. The Founding Fathers knew that we needed some governing document to apply to everyone (perhaps to avoid complete anarchy) and, in turn, came up with the U.S. Constitution. Incidentally, the same Constitution Tea Party members are sworn to defend, was born out of compromise. The three bodies of government are in place to encompass a rich and varied way of thinking, living, governing and doing business. We have rights and freedoms that are protected and while these are the very same set of ideals the Tea Party so fervently protects, ironically, in some instances, they are the ones that the Tea Party seems to be also be so fervently against.
Not everything the Tea Party considers "American", embraces an America that is constantly evolving, changing and growing; the danger in that, is to view our country and its future through a narrowly, skewed and conservative lens. Such constitutes the Tea Party quagmire. The Tea Party, whether unconsciously or not, deals in absolutes. The only problem with absolutes, is that you have an almost impossible standard that you have created and are expected to live by and, at the same time, is what you are, ultimately, judged by. Heaven forbid that those who live by these absolutes, act out or endorse anything other than what is in the constitution. Their fate is inevitable. They will immediately lose their "credibility card" and there will be no more absolutes, no more extremes and no more credibility left for such a "patriotic" movement as the Tea Party.
Do you view the Tea Party as an extremist organization or just one that loves its country?
No comments:
Post a Comment