Tom Kawczynski - Off the Record

I believe the "Tea Party" movement will diminish far more quickly than most people anticipate.  It does not make me happy to see this happen, but the decisions and conflicts that are happening today make me think that it is inevitable.

The basic concept in all marketing is that you want your product or service to appeal to the largest number of possible consumers.  When it was first introduced last year, the "Tea Party" represented a fresh movement for citizen protest, that was not explicitly linked to any one party or ideology, and that recognized that Bush as much as Obama were just as responsible for the growth of a rapidly expanding state.  There were Democrats, Republicans, and Independents motivated and hopeful.  This is rapidly changing.

With the Democratic Party controlling the government, their more liberal wing is in ascendancy and has been pushing with surprising force and speed to expand the role of government.  Despite loud and vociferous protests, they have continued forward and are now actively pursuing a strategy of division, where they seem willing to stand and fight for their beliefs.

In contrast, the Republican Party has made extensive overtures to the "Tea Party" movement after the drubbing they took in 2008.  With the Democrats offering no alternative that would be acceptable to these voters, the nature of our system is such that the small government voters are coming en masse into the GOP, despite many having reservations.  Promises are being made, but will they be kept?  I tend to think not, but more on that later.

Recognizing their problem, that they lack the infrastructure to compete with the forces of the conventional left, the Republicans are trying to co-opt the "Tea Party" into their ranks.  Through funding, name recognition, and the selective use of media, I believe they are succeeding.  I've watched over the last few months how a message of liberty and limited government is being subtly expanded to seem more like the GOP platform, with values and military flexing being added.  There is, perhaps, a new coalition forming in this, as both the GOP and "Tea Party" will be changed by their encounter, but it strikes me as a bad marriage for both political reasons and practical ones.

As stated at the beginning, the real value of the "Tea Party" was that it was perceived as independent.  It meant people had a reason to listen.  If the GOP provided that, there would not have been the need for this movement.  Now that the "Tea Party" is quickly becoming "Teabaggers" in the eyes of much of the public, unfortunately defined by the most extreme elements, their efficacy will decline and politicians will keep them at arm's length.  Being loved in a primary, neglected in the general, and forgotten once elected will not endear these voters to the politicians who are now pandering to the "Tea Party" movement.

For their part, I think the Republicans will find the voters whom they assume are their new groundswell of support will not stay behind them.  Should they succeed in 2010, there will be high expectations that will not be met because of the divided nature of government, the corrupting influence of money, and the impracticality of seeking so much reform at once.  It won't happen.  But the politicians are raising such expectations with campaign rhetoric, as I watch repeatedly, and should a few be fortunate enough to get elected, I wonder whether the amount needed for re-election will be enough of a draw to encourage those first compromises.

Contrary to popular belief, politicians are not usually bad people.  They are, however, often vain, and rarely like to lose.  The rationale becomes that I make one deal so that I can fight for another day.  That is why many successful politicians position themselves as reasonable and moderate (especially in fairly drawn districts), because they can shift to reach the largest number of voters.  I am betting most of the conservative constitutionalists will soon discover this fact for themselves to the lament of their current supporters.

You can see some fault lines emerge where the movement and politicians will part ways.  But between the expectations of ideological purity from the base, and the pramgatic calculations of the politicians, hearts will be broken on both sides.  If you're still not convinced, look at some of the issues.  The values stand that the GOP is bringing to the "Tea Party" means government regulation about how to live, anathema to liberty.  Or, look at the aggressive foreign policy posturing:  How can you spend indefinitely in wars without bankrupting a budget?  I could go on, but I don't think I need to do so.

Desperation over the successes of the Obama Administration have forced this alliance and I suspect it will hold through the 2010 elections to good benefit in many places.  Electoral success is a priority of most "Tea Party" groups, and you see the leadership of these movements becoming GOP leaders like Dick Armey through FreedomWorks and other similar organizations.  It is true that the movement has no leader, but that is because no one had the money or media savvy to make it so.  As that changes, so changes the movement, the identification, and the grassroots nature.  The Republican Party will gain new infrastructure from this and will change somewhat, but I don't think it will be anything other than an elephant with makeup in the end.

In 1994, promises were made by a starry eyed Republican Congress.  By 2006, judge for yourself the successes of their accomplishments.  Republicans, conservatives, limited government, Contracts with America, and promises of a smaller state.  What happened?  Why did it happen?  Would it happen again the same way?

If you read here often enough, you know that I think it will, and you know why I think that.  The nature of the two-party system, how it selects winners and bend lines, and how it is funded makes this inevitable.  It's winning politics, and losing government.  In the "Tea Party", there was hope for change based on principle first, but as winning becomes more important to those frustated, the future loss will be twofold:  loss on principle, lost in a party.

I've never been happier to be an independent, but as a fan of liberty, localized government, and sanity, I sometimes feel that it is a very lonely place to be.  I hope more of you will join me there.