Charting a new course
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20131115/OPINION/131119435/1065/charting-a-new-course&template=fairfaxTimes
How things have changed. In 2009, Ken Cuccinelli made his pitch to the Republican Party of Virginia insisting that he would be the best of three candidates seeking the nomination for attorney general. He did it in front of a Gadston “Don’t Tread on Me” flag to a crowd erupting with cheers. It has been said that Cuccinelli was tea party before there was a tea party, but that clearly didn’t help him in 2013.
With the one-two punch of public backlash against tea party activists after the government shutdown and the spiraling descent of Cuccinelli’s gubernatorial campaign, it’s not difficult to see this as a national repudiation of the tea party. The truth is that it is … and it isn’t. It depends what you think the tea party is.
It started off as a sound idea. The tea party talking points started catching traction at the height of the recession — after the corporate bailouts in 2008 and the stimulus package of 2009. While generally considered necessary to stop the economic recession from turning into an irreversible economic crash, the basic idea that this level of economic manipulation is outside the scope of good government is certainly a rational response. Likewise, the movement developed some lasting appeal in the ongoing debate on deficit spending and health care reform.
It’s certainly not everyone’s cup of tea, but few would argue that it isn’t a reasonable point of view.
But then in the months and years that followed, the tea party brand began to be co-opted by those who wanted to combine its basic ideology with other conservative principals. In short, it began to become the base for (and perceived as) the more radical wing of the Republican Party on any issue. The message got blurred, and for many potential voters, the distinction between Republican and tea party was completely lost.
That proved to be a dangerous scenario. The visible face of the tea party began to take on the angry face of those who felt the establishment Republican Party wasn’t responsive enough — particularly on social issues. And true or not, the people who continued to use the tea party logo weren’t interested in compromise or shared government. It became a movement hostile to government in general. And to moderates, it looked angry.
Even on health care reform, the hostility of its opponents has made the troubled program look better than it deserves in comparison. The government shutdown added to the sense that its members had taken a position of small government at all costs — even the destruction of the government and economy. Public opinion polls show that the opinion of the tea party plummeted after the government shutdown.
So what next? Political brands get discarded once they become toxic or irrelevant. Ask the Whigs. But whether it comes under a new name or from a more structured tea party, moderates with small government opinions won’t be going away.
The first step is focus. The tea party can’t just be “Republican-plus.” There needs to be a separation of fiscal conservatism from all of the other items on the party’s platform. The small government position isn’t about immigration, LGBT rights or gun control. Individual members can certainly have beliefs on one side or another, but a focus on fiscal restraint and free markets allows these post-Libertarians to act as consensus builders with candidates of any stripe interested in putting the economic house in order.
The new tea party also needs to become solutions-focused. It’s fine to be against the administration’s health care reform legislation, but that opposition needs to come with an alternative solution to address a broken system of escalating medical costs. Outrage over deficit spending needs to go hand-in-hand with potential cuts and tax reform.
Finally, it requires a bit of statesmanship. While the tea party’s original attraction was a lack of structure, political movements grow up and require an experienced captain to steer the ship. This happens by developing leaders from the ground up and working with them over time. Rather than a wave that sweeps out veteran legislators, you slowly develop a generation of officials with the same core values, but an understanding of how the system works starting from the ground up.
The tea party brand isn’t done yet, although a few more thumpings like they’ve received in the past year will get them there. In either case, there still remains an opening for a grassroots, small government agenda. It’s just a question of who picks up the challenge.
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/article/20131115/OPINION/131119435/1065/charting-a-new-course&template=fairfaxTimes
How things have changed. In 2009, Ken Cuccinelli made his pitch to the Republican Party of Virginia insisting that he would be the best of three candidates seeking the nomination for attorney general. He did it in front of a Gadston “Don’t Tread on Me” flag to a crowd erupting with cheers. It has been said that Cuccinelli was tea party before there was a tea party, but that clearly didn’t help him in 2013.
With the one-two punch of public backlash against tea party activists after the government shutdown and the spiraling descent of Cuccinelli’s gubernatorial campaign, it’s not difficult to see this as a national repudiation of the tea party. The truth is that it is … and it isn’t. It depends what you think the tea party is.
It started off as a sound idea. The tea party talking points started catching traction at the height of the recession — after the corporate bailouts in 2008 and the stimulus package of 2009. While generally considered necessary to stop the economic recession from turning into an irreversible economic crash, the basic idea that this level of economic manipulation is outside the scope of good government is certainly a rational response. Likewise, the movement developed some lasting appeal in the ongoing debate on deficit spending and health care reform.
It’s certainly not everyone’s cup of tea, but few would argue that it isn’t a reasonable point of view.
But then in the months and years that followed, the tea party brand began to be co-opted by those who wanted to combine its basic ideology with other conservative principals. In short, it began to become the base for (and perceived as) the more radical wing of the Republican Party on any issue. The message got blurred, and for many potential voters, the distinction between Republican and tea party was completely lost.
That proved to be a dangerous scenario. The visible face of the tea party began to take on the angry face of those who felt the establishment Republican Party wasn’t responsive enough — particularly on social issues. And true or not, the people who continued to use the tea party logo weren’t interested in compromise or shared government. It became a movement hostile to government in general. And to moderates, it looked angry.
Even on health care reform, the hostility of its opponents has made the troubled program look better than it deserves in comparison. The government shutdown added to the sense that its members had taken a position of small government at all costs — even the destruction of the government and economy. Public opinion polls show that the opinion of the tea party plummeted after the government shutdown.
So what next? Political brands get discarded once they become toxic or irrelevant. Ask the Whigs. But whether it comes under a new name or from a more structured tea party, moderates with small government opinions won’t be going away.
The first step is focus. The tea party can’t just be “Republican-plus.” There needs to be a separation of fiscal conservatism from all of the other items on the party’s platform. The small government position isn’t about immigration, LGBT rights or gun control. Individual members can certainly have beliefs on one side or another, but a focus on fiscal restraint and free markets allows these post-Libertarians to act as consensus builders with candidates of any stripe interested in putting the economic house in order.
The new tea party also needs to become solutions-focused. It’s fine to be against the administration’s health care reform legislation, but that opposition needs to come with an alternative solution to address a broken system of escalating medical costs. Outrage over deficit spending needs to go hand-in-hand with potential cuts and tax reform.
Finally, it requires a bit of statesmanship. While the tea party’s original attraction was a lack of structure, political movements grow up and require an experienced captain to steer the ship. This happens by developing leaders from the ground up and working with them over time. Rather than a wave that sweeps out veteran legislators, you slowly develop a generation of officials with the same core values, but an understanding of how the system works starting from the ground up.
The tea party brand isn’t done yet, although a few more thumpings like they’ve received in the past year will get them there. In either case, there still remains an opening for a grassroots, small government agenda. It’s just a question of who picks up the challenge.