I'm Trying to Understand the Tea Party

We were watching a PBS documentary a few nights ago about the history of health care reform. It was fun because it was very immediate (watch-history-as-it-happens) and also because it reminded me of events that I had forgotten about.

Remember when Obama campaigned for a public option and criticized Clinton for having an individual mandate?

Remember when Obama demanded that Congress pass the bill before the summer recess?

Remember when that summer recess went horribly, horribly wrong?

They had clips of all the people holding signs and shouting and whatever. Maybe it was a signal of the documentary's liberal bias that they only showed the krazies, but there were a lot of drawn-on Hitler mustaches and dead grandmothers involved.

They showed one man who was asked why he was at the rally who responded, "I'm here because President Obama is trying to replace our Republic with Socialism!"

I hate to be That Guy On The Internet who quibbles with definitions and apologizes for the atrocities of Communism and stuff, but I will anyway. What the man meant was, "I'm here because President Obama is trying to replace our Capitalism with Socialism!" Republicanism is a system of government where people elect representatives. Socialism is a system of economics where that said government owns stuff. It is not-at-all contradictory to be a socialist republic: indeed the United Soviet Socialist Republic claimed to be such, as does The People's Republic of China today.

Anyway, this is supposed to be about more than just snarkily criticizing a guy I saw on TV because I am a Democrat and he is a Republican and I am much smarter than he is. I'm trying to document and understand a certain part of the political landscape, the part that went to health care rallies in late-summer 2009 and is going to Tea Party rallies today.

Are these the same people?

I think so. I think they're connected. For one thing, they seem to include angry shouting and angry signs. Proof positive right there, I say! Further proof:

1. The populist argument. The rhetoric of both the Tea Party people and the Health Care people relies on a populist message: "The voice of The People is not being heard. In a poll, less than half of the people wanted health care reform. But Barack Obama wants it. Health Insurance Companies (in backroom deals) want it. The people don't want the government to spend all this money, but Obama is doing so anyway. The people don't want terrorists tried in criminal courts, but Eric Holder is trying to do so anyway."

2. The Republican argument. Barack Obama is a Democrat. His health care reform is opposed by Republicans. His domestic priorities are opposed by Republicans. His foreign policy priorities are opposed by Republicans. Therefore, people who oppose health care reform are Republicans, and probably oppose other stuff, too.

*I should note here that I am well aware of the "All squares are rectangles" angle to this. And, in fact, there have been a few polls that say that conflating Tea Partiers with Republicans is bad- only 49% say they are Republican, while 43% identify as Independent.

But come on. This is like those 'undecided voters' who have really made up their minds but enjoy being pandered to and asked their opinions. Also, because of increased polarization (and proportional increased lamenting of polarization), some people like to think of themselves as Very Special Snowflakes who are above the political fray because they are wise and conciliatory and moderately fair to both sides. But they vote party-line literally 100% of the time. I leave this point completely unsupported by facts because I am too lazy to cherry-pick evidence that agrees with me.

3. The Sarah Palin argument. Sarah Palin famously started the death panel rumor. She also was the keynote speaker at the National Tea Party Convention.

The National Tea Party Convention should not be confused with the Tea Party Movement. It's a broad movement, it has a lot of people, it's very amorphous, yadda, yadda. But whether or not Sarah Palin is co-opting the movement, whether it's an astro-turf movement, whether she only controls a small part, I don't know.

This is an entirely-too-long, entirely-too-boring way to say that there exists a political movement that unites opposition to health care reform, socialism, Obama, taxes, bailouts, and deficit spending. Why is it prevalent, and what are the things driving it? Some possibilities in the order I think of them:

1. Economic Unrest. The unemployment rate is really high, and when this happens, people like to congregate together with signs and yell "Rabble! Rabble! Rabble!"

2. Political Crying Over Spilled Milk. Barack Obama, a Democrat, is now the President, and this upsets some people greatly. Jimmy Carter (I think) said this opposition is a little racially motivated. Maybe, but I don't think so: if Hillary Clinton had been elected, it still would have hit the fan.

3. Fear of creeping socialism. Even though I think this fear is unjustified, I can understand how someone could be stirred to political action when they see the government seizing and recapitalizing banks, car companies, and spending lots of money on health care.

4. Populist anger in general. If fears of Socialism get conservatives involved in the movement, fears of special interests and Corporations get liberals involved. Liberals can look at bailouts as just giveaways to special interests. Perhaps they would be happier with nationalizing banks instead of just recapitalizing them, but they find common cause with movements opposing these policies.

5. Financial Future concerns. Health care reform, bailouts, and stimulus packages all cost money and hurt the long-term financial options for the country. Won't someone please think of the debt burden? I tend to think of this reason as an after-the-fact rationalization, but I'm sure there are some people who just hate deficits.

All of this matters because Democrats are running scared for re-election. If the Tea Party movement is influential and can be placated by balancing the budget (somehow), then Republican gains can be avoided by cutting spending.

But, if the movement is just channeled fears about the economy, all Democrats can do is hope that the economy improves. I know that's a boring political analysis. But remember, it's the economy, stupid!

This is rambling, unhelpful, and not insightful, but I really just felt like writing something today. I'll try to write about baseball, soon, I promise!