Yesterday in 820 venues across the country there were "Tea Parties" to protest a bunch of things. The one in Sacramento had a crowd that the Highway Patrol estimated at 5000 - although from the pictures the crowd might have been larger.
Paul Krugman dismissed this movement as a bunch of right wing crazies. Others on the left offered similar epithets. The right praised the events as a rekindling of the spirit of the original Boston Tea Party. Some have claimed this was a plot foisted on us by the Fox News Network. The Sacramento Bee's Steve Weigand wrote a confused or biased (it depends a lot on how the lead is taken) story on the Sacramento event.
My take on this movement is a bit different. I think there are a couple of parts and from my view it is not clear whether the parts will be able to work together. Part of the group is the tax portion of the conservative coalition. In California that is typified by the Howard Jarvis movement. The Jarvis people were the original sponsors of Proposition 13 which brought moderation in property tax increases and depending on where you sit did a couple of other things. If you are a supporter of expansive government 13 destroyed the ability of government to function. If you appreciate the devastating effect that the prior regime on property taxes had on many homeowners, you believe 13 stopped rapacious tax increases on homeowners. One thing which everyone could agree on is that 13 spawned a new era in citizen initiatives. I believe that whether you like those measures or not - in sum total they do not make for a very coherent set of policies.
A second part of the movement is a group of people who are concerned about the stimulus package(s). They see bailouts for corporations and lots of pork and are not at all sanguine that the spending will boost the economy. They're tired of the way that Washington and Sacramento operate. The recent PPIC polling, showing an 11% approval rating for the legislature is one indicator. While the Jarvis people are mostly Republicans - the people in this group are far more diverse in their political approaches.
Krugman and some of his kin sound to me a lot like whistlers in the dark. They understand the potential power of this group - if its elements were to coalesce and they are scared. They should be. But it remains to be seen whether the group has any long term potential or whether these 820 town halls were more than just a protest of one day.
Posts
2 comments:
The power of a group is what got this president elected.
Here is what Obama has said:
"Make no mistake: this tax cut will reach 120 million families and put $120 billion directly into their pockets, and it includes the most American workers ever to get a tax cut. This will boost demand, and save or create over half a million jobs."
The taxes I'm upset about are largely state taxes, like our sales tax increase, for example. Those effect me every day.
Protesting paying taxes is futile and mellow-dramatic. We're not dealing with an British colonial tyranny here - we are all trying to understand the best ways to deal with decades and decades of compounded over-spending and under-saving.
I guess my point is a bit different. If the American people are supportive of the President's efforts to raise taxes (which is ultimately what he is proposing) then the Tea Party movement will indeed be mellow dramatic. But if they turn on him he could find his majority moving away from him.
The California governor was elected in a similar populist uprising and now sits with a 30% approval rating. California with its Prop 13 tradition has a history of populist tax revolts. At this point it is not clear whether the President's policies will prevail. However, it is also not clear whether the conservatives have a coherent set of ideas that are better accepted than the President's.
I thought the Bee coverage of the events on Wednesday were incredibly biased in their coverage.
Post a Comment