The Tea Party Movement: Past and Present - Research Paper Example

The Tea Party Movement: Past and Present Introduction The Tea Party Movement appears to have emerged on thescene suddenly (Katel 2010). It has found expression in a growing tide of dissatisfaction with the current political regime especially with respect to Congress, the President both of which have rated poorly among the American electorate (Rasmussen and Schoen 2010). Staging angry and enthusiastic rallies across the US, the Tea Party has been credited with influencing the Democrats losing its stronghold in the US House of Representative in the November 2010 elections and the successful seating of a number of Tea Party supported candidates (Aberbach and Peele 2011). The Tea Party’s popularity and success among the electorate does not correspond with its negative and often trivial representation in the press (Aberbach and Peele 2011). Lepore (2010) makes a connection between the Boston Tea Party’s rebellion of 1781 which spearheaded the American Revolution and the Tea Party of the 21st century. This study analyzes the Tea Party Movement and identifies how it gained popularity. Lepore (2010) also identifies parallels between the revolutionary thinking and action of the 21st century and subsequent acts of rebellion throughout US history. One example is the Civil Rights Movements of the 1950s and 1960s (Lepore 2010). The parallels between the current Tea Party and American populism throughout history is especially acute because it arose as a result of growing uncertainties, anger and fears primarily among White middle and working classes (Berlet 2011). Thus the Tea Party today is perhaps just the latest replication of the Boston Tea Party or populist revolutionary thinking in the US. This research study analyzes the Tea Parties and identifies its historical origins and explains how today’s Tea Party is the latest in a long trend of populist revolutionary activism. This research study draws on the historical underpinnings of the Tea Party Movement and explains why and how it has gained currency among the electorate. Specifically, this research study identifies how historical associations have invoked emotions both for and against the Tea Party Movement and what this might mean for the future of the Tea Party Movement. I. The Tea Party Movement’s Rhetoric and Meaning The Tea Party Movement embraces the idea that “individual freedoms and economic liberties” are inalienable rights and “one does not exist without the other” (Armey and Kibbe 2010, p. 88). From the perspective of the Tea Party Movement, economic liberties and fundamental freedoms have been jeopardized by a “government that has grown too large, spends too much money,” and as a result, is “interfering with their freedoms” (Armey and Kibbe 2010, p. 88). Eaton (2010) informs that the Tea Party is committed to returning America to the vision that the founding fathers had for America. The founding father’s vision was for “individual liberty, free markets,” and a “constitutionally limited government” (Eaton 2010, p. 262). These three paradigms of the ideal nation state are thus the three pillars of the Tea Party Movement and immediately conjures up images of the American Revolution and other acts of civil disobedience throughout US history. Although not as aggressive as the Tea Parties in American history, the Tea Party Movement today purports to defend the three pillars of American greatness. Eaton (2010) identifies three factions of the Tea Party Movement: orientation and promotion of the Republican Party and its ideology; the libertarian anti-tax, pro-liberties faction; and an anti-government faction. The anti-government faction is perhaps the most active and dynamic leg of the Tea Party Movement (Eaton 2010). The anti-government faction typically opposes and rallies campaigns against specific government policies and strategies (Eaton 2010). The Tea Party Patriots formulate political ad campaigns and back specific politicians. The 9-12 Project which was motivated by Glenn Beck a Fox News commentator, organized and conducted conventions and seminars for introducing a “100-year plan for America on the National Mall in August 2010” (Eaton 2010, p. 261). The Tea Party Express organizes national trips to educate on how to adopt and practice American heritage and its values. The Nationwide Tea Party Coalition holds conferences calculated to discover and prepare leaders of the Tea Party Movement (Eaton 2010). The Freedom Works and Grassfire Nation is among the largest organizations connected to the Tea Party Movement. The organization Freedom Works was established in 1984 and is currently headed by Dick Armey a former House of Representatives majority leader. Freedom Works advocates for freedom and takes a “fiscal conservative stance” and “co-sponsored the massive Tax Day Tea Party” in April 2010 (Eaton 2010, p. 262). Grassfire Nation was established in 2001 and its founder Steve Elliot cooperates with the campaign to restore the Republican Party to “grass roots conservatives” (Eaton 2010, p. 262). There is obviously support for the Tea Party Movement despite the assertion that the Tea Party Movement is incapable of a single definition. Commentators and political observers speculate that the Tea Party Movement is an anti-Obama movement. Others speculate that it is no more than an anti-big government movement manufactured by FreedomWorks. Yet others allege that the Tea Party Movement is an economic movement spurred by the ongoing economic recession (Continetti 2010). Many questions necessarily arise relative to defining the Tea Party Movement. For instance Continetti (2010) questions whether or not the Tea Party Movement is comprised of baby boomers who bring together the social libertarianism of the 1960s with “the laissez-faire economics” (p.1). Continetti (2010) further questions whether or not the Tea Party simply culls together enduring US “constitutional, political and economic” conventions and perspectives that originate from James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson (p. 1). Continetti (2010) finally concludes that the Tea Party Movement is perhaps all of these things because once you look into the Tea Party Movement one will identify members or rhetoric: …from the woolly fringe to Ron Paul supporters, from Americans for Prosperity to religious conservatives, independents, and citizens who never have been active in politics before (p. 1). Regardless of the disparate membership and ideologies, there is one central theme that brings Tea Partiers together: a mutual “concern that supports the overall structure” (Continetti 2010, p. 1). There are essentially three mutual concerns associated with the Tea Party Movement that draws on public sentiment and thus garners support. The first mutual concern is the Movement’s assertion that the US is rapidly and aggressively departing from those ideals and sentiments that made the US strong and successful (Continetti 2010). Secondly, the Movement is further strengthened as a unit by its contention that current political policies and strategies have put the US in its compromising position. Central bones of contention are the bailouts which are believed to be a service for America’s rich and powerful. The Movement is also united in its opposition to what is ritualistically referred to as “out-of-control” government spending (Continetti 2010, p. 1). The Tea Party Movement is also unified in its opposition to the government’s seemingly autonomous rule which is manifested by conduct calculated to make the government more powerful and at the same time neglect fundamental responsibilities for keeping the borders secure, controlling the financial industry and generally ensuring that America is safe and free (Continetti 2010). The third and final backbone of the Tea Party Movement is its identification with America’s founding sentiments. Essentially, the Tea Party Movement is a celebration of the Founding Fathers and their vision for a free and prosperous America. Tea Party Members are known to reference the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence and to express a strong support for the Bill of Rights, particularly the 10th Amendment which mandates that the Federal Government’s power is limited and that significant powers are left to States and the American people. As Continetti (2010) maintains, the Tea Party Movement exists under an umbrella that expresses a “rhetoric” that “invokes the constitutional vision of a limited government with enumerated powers” (Continetti 2010, p. 1). Williamson et al (2011) traces the emergence of the Tea Party Movement and its trajectory. Williamson et al (2011) goes back to the election of Barack Obama in November 2008 and describes the Republican Party as essentially disorganized and without a clear party leader with McCain’s failure in the 2008 presidential election and an outgoing President George Bush whose popularity had taken a huge hit. Moreover, the Democrats had secured significant majorities in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Although seemingly divided, the Republican Party remained united in their opposition to Obama and his policies, much of which were manifested in the first few weeks of Obama taking office. However, the main concern was determining how the GOP in its ongoing weakening state could present formidable opposition to Obama and his administration (Williamson et al, 2011). According to Williamson et al (2011) an “opportunity presented itself” for the GOP to make a united stance against the Obama administration in February 2009 on “the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange” (p. 26). At the time, Rick Santelli, a CNBC reporter expressed opposition to Obama’s mortgage strategy and argued that the government was “rewarding bad behavior” (Williamson et al, 2011, p. 26). Santelli went on to invite Americans in support of capitalism to attend a “Chicago Tea Party” to voice opposition to the mortgage plans (Williamson et al, 2011, p. 26). Conservative and Republican supporters immediately cashed in on Santelli’s idea of a Tea Party and by virtue or social networking tools such as Twitter organized a number of protests under the auspices of Tea Parties (Williamson et al, 2011). By February 27 a number of small protests attracted supporters in several US cities. In subsequent months larger protests were stages with “protesters waving incendiary signs and dressed up like Revolutionary-era patriots” (Williamson et al 2011, p. 26). Conservatives and Republicans were not the only protesters and observers drawn to the Tea Party Movement. Other groups and individuals were drawn to the Tea Party Movement. Groups were being organized and mobilized all across the country to hold “events between protests” and in the meantime, rallies were increasing in size and momentum at national rallies (Williamson et al 2011, p. 26). By the April Tax Day, Tea Party protests had reached a peak and again in September 2009 when thousands of Tea Party supporters “marched on Washington” (Williamson et al, 2011, p. 26). In 2010, the Tea Party Movement had a significant presence in the US. Williamson et al (2011) explain that by 2010, the Tea Party movement “were exercising significant clout in dozens of electoral races nationwide” (Williamson et al 2011, p. 26). (See Appendix for the time line for the 21st century Tea Party Movement). Based on the developments and dynamics shaping the Tea Party Movement of the 21st century, Williamson et al (2011) conclude that the Tea Party should be regarded as: A new variant of conservative mobilization and intra-Republican party factionalism, a dynamic, loosely-knit, and not easily controlled formation of activists, funders, and media personalities that draws upon and refocuses longstanding social attitudes about federal social programs, spending, and taxation (p. 37). Berlet (2011) argues that the emerging Tea Party Movement of the 21st century has “turned into the type of right-wing populist movement seen previously throughout US history” (p. 11). The current Tea Party Movement is reminiscent of the angry expressions of libertarian and populist discontent beginning with the Boston Tea Party in 1773 (Freeman, 2010). Indeed, populism is traced back to President Andrew Jackson who during his two terms from 1829-1837 espoused the view that “a financial elite threatened popular control of national institutions” (Katel 2010, p. 249). From a Libertarian perspective, the same Libertarian sentiments that lead the Founding Fathers and populists movements throughout history animates the 2st Century Tea Party Movement (Harris 2010). Tea Partiers today and throughout US history are thus bound by a desire to make their own decisions and are staunchly opposed to big and autonomous governments that force their choices on them. The history and development of populism and Libertarianism is thus crucial to understanding the undercurrents of the 21st century Tea Party Movement. The history of populism and libertarianism will now to examined by reference to significant events in US history that can properly be characterized as Tea Parties. This history informs of the connection between the Tea Party of the 18th century and subsequent uprisings throughout history culminating in the Tea Party Movement of the 21st century. II. Tea Party Uprisings Throughout US History Opposition to big government politics and government autonomy and its expression among populists and libertarians is traced back to the colonial era. At the time colonists were particularly miffed with British taxation and regulations. The Stamp Tax Act 1765 was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. The Stamp Tax Act 1765 called for taxes to be applied to all published items inclusive of decks of cards, legal instruments, diplomas, calendars and newspapers (Lepore 2010). From the perspective of the American colonists, tax practices and policies, and in particular the Stamp Tax Act 1765 was tantamount to “taxation without representation” (Ishiyama and Breuning 2010, p. 688). Fueled by this belief a meeting was convened in New York City in October 1765 to give expression to this sentiment. A petition was conducted urging Parliament and the Crown to reverse the new taxes and promised to avoid purchasing all goods from Britain. In support of the boycott of goods from Britain, groups referred to as the Sons and Daughters of Liberty were formed. The most notorious group was the Boston Tea Party and its protests on December 16, 1773 (Ishiyama and Breuning 2010). The Boston Tea Party’s protests of December 16, 1773 is noted for its 200 patriots dressed as Indians storming three ships in Boston’s harbor and throwing tea into the harbor protesting British taxes on tea. Ishiyama and Breuning (2010) inform that the British responded by “imposing additional taxes in 1774” (p. 688). The new taxes referred to as the Coercive or Intolerable Acts”, only “galvanized the colonists’ resolve” (Ishiyama and Breuning 2010, p. 688). In order to amplify pressure on the British government, colonists delegates from around the US excluding Georgia convened at Carpenter’s Hall in Philadelphia in September 1774. Among the delegates were Patrick Henry, George Washington, John Adams, Samuel Adams, John Dickenson, John Rutledge and Roger Sherman. Again the colonists called on the British to reform the Tax laws and practices and once again the British remained unrelenting. On April 19, 1775, fighting erupted in Lexington and Concord in Massachusetts between the British and colonial factors. The ensuing shots were referred to as the “shot heard around the world” and symbolize the start of the American Revolution (Ishiyama and Breuning 2010, p. 688). The shot heard around the world is further symbolized by frequent references to CNBC’s Santelli’s public opposition to mortgage policies in 2009 as the “rant heard around the world” (Lepore 2010, p. 3). The formation of the Tea Party Movement in the 21st century is thus founded on a similar sentiment as those driving the spirit of the Boston Tea Party and the surrounding protests of the 18th century. In both instances, public sentiment is culled together pursuant to oppressive economic practices and policies that are said to further the interests of the elite and oppress the interests and needs of the downtrodden. The rant heard around the world is symbolic of the shot heard around the world because like its predecessor, the 2009 rant heard around the world was a lead in to the formation of tea parties around the nation. As Lepore (2010) informs: Within hours, Santelli’s call to arms was dubbed “the rant heard around the world”, a reference to a poem written by Ralph Waldo Emerson in 1836…on the occasion of the erection of a statue memorializing the men (including Emerson’s grandfather) who faced the British in Concord in 1775. Almost overnight, Tea Parties sprang up across the country (p. 3). The Chicago Tea Party espoused a logo that postulated “Revolution is Brewing” (Lepore 2010, p. 3). Thus there is a deliberate parallel between the Tea Party Movement of the 21st century and the Tea Parties of the 18th century. The Tea Parties of the 17th century not only preceded the American Revolution but actually instigated the revolution. Moreover, the Tea Parties of the 18th century were directly linked to tea and thus references to tea (brewing) and the American Revolution can be seen as deliberately calculated to cash in on American patriotism and conventions as expressed by the Boston Tea Party and its populist stance. The Boston Tea Party is said to have given way to the movement characterizing the American Revolution and the underlying Declaration of Independence. On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee drafted the motion to the Second Continental Congress which read as follows: Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right out to be free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved (Cited in Bardes et al 2010, p. 35) Again these sentiments correspond with the stance taken by the Tea Party Movement of the 21st century. One of the major contentious issues fueling the current Tea Party Movement is its stance against empowered Federalism and its increasing reach across and over state powers (Foley 2011). Indeed the American Revolution and the Civil War were both intricately tied to the right of the state and the free man (Foley 2011). As Foley (2011) informs the current Tea Party Movement is entrenched in a “perjorative label” or more especially a “constitutional idolatry” (p. 752). Foley (2011) goes on to note: Buried not too deeply behind this label is a liberal-progressive ideology harboring a deep-seated fear that federalism is secret code for supporting slavery and segregation and opposing things like abortion, gay marriage and, most recently, health care reform (p. 752). Today’s Tea Party Movement however is not directed toward returning America to segregation and constraints on freedom. Rather, today’s Tea Party Movement is aimed at containing the authority of the Federal government. The Tea Party Movement of the 21st century is intent on maximizing individual liberties by “identifying and enforcing meaningful limits on federal power” (Foley 2011, p. 752). Foley (2011) further defends the current tone of the Tea Party Movement by arguing that its proponents are not attempting to romanticize “a bygone era” (p. 752). Instead they are attempting to “preserve a constitutional principle”: duality of sovereignty that is calculated to “compete for the affection of citizens and jealously guard their rights” (Foley 2011, p. 752). Foley thus draws attention to James Madison’s comments in 1806 when Madison cautioned that “the operation of the federal government will by degrees prove fatal to the State governments” (Cited by Foley, 2011, p. 752). Therefore the Constitution was entirely necessary for promoting and supporting state sovereignty which was an essential ingredient of the people’s power (Foley 2011). Today’s Tea Party Movement is in many ways a revival of the spirit that pervaded American colonists in the late 1700s. Just as the sentiment during the late 1700s rejected British rule, today’s Tea Party Movement rejects “European-style socialism” and have made it abundantly clear that American’s will “vote”, “march” and take their “country back” (Hennen and Denney 2010, p. 21). American history is colored by recurring incidents of movements much like the Boston Tea Party of the 18th century and the Tea Party Movement of the 21st century. These movements are characterized by citizens’ expressions of intolerance with respect to the government and the “business elites” determining the course of politics and public policies (Katel 2010, p. 251). In 1832 President Andrew Jackson vetoed a bill intended to expand the premise of a private bank servicing the Federal government and providing private services. In vetoing the bill, Jackson noted: It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes (Cited in Katel, 2010, p. 250). There was a growing anti-government sentiment at the time. This sentiment is largely the same as the sentiments and ideologies that guide and fuel the current Tea Party Movement. During the 1800s, an emerging train of thought espoused the belief that corporations, banks and other commercial entities were beneficial to the wealthy and functioned to shift the government into a “an engine of corruption and inequality” (Murin et al 2011, p. 329). Andrew Jackson expressed a view that resonates with today’s Tea Party Movement. Jackson in vetoing the Bill of 1832 observed that in any given society and under the fairest of governments, there will be “distinctions” (Cited in Murrin et al 2011, p. 329). However: In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, everyman is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society-the farmers, mechanics and laborers-who have neither the time not the means of securing the favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their Government (Cited in Murrin et al 2011, p. 329). Although the Tea Party Movement is divided on equality in that only a minority support gay rights and gay marriages, and many believe that Blacks have a duty to “try harder” to have equality, the Tea Party Movement is reminiscent of Jackson’s argument on containing government control and the power of the elites (Barreto et al 2011, p. 2). Somin (2011) argues that “the Tea Party movement and its predecessors serve a useful role as a check on the power of the political elites” (p. 301). The anti-elite sentiments of the Tea Party Movement also found currency with Reverend Charles Coughlin in the early 20th century. Coughlin a Catholic Priest in Royal Oak, Michigan with a radio show that drew millions was initially a staunch supporter of President Roosevelt. Coughlin was particularly drawn to Roosevelt following his inaugural comments that: The money-changers have fled their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths (Cited in Carpenter 1998, p. 39). By 1935, Coughlin was disappointed in Roosevelt’s failure to make the necessary economic reforms and was particularly opposed to Roosevelt’s New Deal. As a result, Coughlin turned against Roosevelt in a manner that characterizes the seemingly energetic and radical Tea Party Movements of the 18th and 21st centuries. Putting his support behind Congressman William Lemke of the Union Party for President, Coughlin spoke bitterly of Roosevelt at the new Party’s convention in July 1935. Coughlin stated: The great betrayer and liar Franklin D. Roosevelt, who promised to drive the money changers from the temple, has succeeded only in driving the farmers from their homesteads and the citizens from their homes in the cities (Cited in Cashman 1998, p. 316). Coughlin had a persuasive voice and a forum via the radio to arouse US emotions by inspiring the country’s “malcontents”, however he was unable to arouse the kinds of emotions previously manifested by the Boston Tea Party and those aroused by today’s Tea Party Movement (Underhill, 2011). Coughlin’s public rants however, do represent an episode in US history where government power and the support of the elites was the subject of a public outcry. In Coughlin’s case, the public outcry was made by virtue of the media and while it reached millions, it failed to inspire a movement against the government. The Tea Party Movement of the 21st century particularly the FreedomWorks branch aligns itself with the nonviolent civil rights protests of the 1950s and the 1960s. Attention is turned to the “brave civil rights activists who started pushing back against the Jim Crow laws in the late 1950s” (Armey and Kibbe, 2010, p. 99). The Tea Party Movement is particularly impressed by the fact that civil rights leaders such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. opposed laws that legalized segregation and racism. These civil rights leaders challenged these laws in non-violent ways and yet managed to orchestrate social change and thus succeeded in accomplishing another American revolution in American history (Armey and Kibbe 2010). Like the Civil Rights activists, the anti-war protesters of the Vietnamese War era of 1968 “paid a hefty price” (Hall 2009, p. 193). The hefty price tag came as a result of clashes between anti-war/civil rights movement and government supporters and law enforcement. The protests began peacefully by teach-ins on school and college campuses across the US. A majority of the anti-war activists were either liberals or moderates and libertarians were particularly drawn to the anti-war protests because they harvested the belief that the draft encroached upon the inalienable right to freedom (Hall, 2009). Just as the anti-war protesters of 1968 were willing to go up against government policies and practices, so are the Tea Partiers of the 21st century. In each case, a common thread runs throughout, the expression of conscience and thought and a check on government exercising exorbitant powers over the will of the people. The civil rights movements of the 1950s and the 1960s and the War protests of 1968 represents a voice calling for recognition of the rights of the collective people and thus functions as a check on government powers. This is precisely the sentiments that the Tea Party Movement of today espouses in its anti-government stance. Richard Nixon in his presidential address in 1969 may have distanced the antiwar protests from revolutionary change in America. Nixon addressed the antiwar sentiments in two parts. First he stated that he recognized the right of the people to “dissent” (Hall, 2009, p. 79). He pleaded with this silent majority for patience as he gradually withdrew Americans from the Vietnamese War. However to the more radical anti-war factions Nixon stated: For almost 200 years, the policy of this nation has been made under our Constitution by those leaders in the Congress and the White House elected by all of the people. If a vocal minority, however fervent its cause, prevails over reason and the will of the majority, this nation has no future as a free society (Cited in Hall, 2009, p. 79). Thus, Nixon, like the current Tea Party Movement appeals to the public on a platform that supports the power of the majority rather than the minority. Although Nixon referred to the radical anti-war protesters that insisted on an immediate withdrawal from the way as the loud minority that threated to disrupt social order, the current Tea Party Movement refers to the elite as the minority that threatens to disrupt social order. Nonetheless the platform cashes in on a popular and shared emotion: the suppression of the rights of a few in favor of giving expression to the interests of the majority of Americans. In 1972, Nixon too castigated the democrats whom he characterized as a group of elites that looked down on “good decent people” (Katel 2010, p. 251). Thus Nixon also ran on a platform that highlighted the unevenness between the common man and the rich and powerful elite. Nixon’s silent majority sentiments were polished off by Ronald Reagan who did not have to respond to an antiwar protest. In 1992, H. Ross Perot also emerged as a powerful and formidable populist expressing the views now salient in the Tea Party Movement. In his bid for the presidency as an independent candidate, Perot stated: America today is a nation in crisis with a government in gridlock. We are deeply in debt and spending beyond our means (Cited in Katel 2010, p. 255). These 1992 sentiments expressed by Perot represent a salient feature of the current Tea Party Movement. Perot was staunchly against the North American Trade Agreement between the US, Canada and Mexico. His major concern was that the priority should be the creation and protection of “jobs in America not Mexico” (Katel 2010, p. 255). Perot also spoke out against government benefits stating: We have government turned upside down, where the people running it act and live at your expense like royalty, and many of you are working two jobs just to stay even (Cited in Katel 2010, p. 255). Perot’s populist views obviously found currency among Americans. He ran against Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and managed to garner 19% of the votes. Moreover, he attracted votes from both Democrats and Republicans (Katel 2010). In other words, what can be gleaned from Perot’s experience is the fact that populist views appeals to both Democrats and Republicans and thus represents a view swing vote in American politics. It therefore follows that populism is non-partisan in nature and tends to distance itself from party politics, particularly since it takes a position against Washington and Congress in general. Conclusion The Tea Party Movement of the 21st century is platform for populist malcontents. It also transforms the political landscape by invoking the emotions and interests of those who were otherwise detached from politics. As demonstrated throughout this paper, the Tea Party Movement and its platforms have significant ties to a long history of episodes in US history that draw on libertarian and populist views. In this regard, the Tea Party Movement resembles historical radicalism and even has similarities to militia groups. The common theme that runs throughout is the right of the people over government and with the latter’s power held in check by the people. The Tea Party Movement, like similar episodes throughout US history is aimed at gathering momentum against the government and in particular the President Obama administration. There is a prevailing feeling that the Washington takes on the role of issuing commands that inform the people of what’s best for them and therefore usurps their right to choose. The Tea Party Movement insists that freedom to choose is a fundamental right of the American people. Like the Boston Tea Party of the late 1700s, the Tea Party Movement resists government interference and seeks to revolutionize politics in America. Appendix 21st Century Tea Party Timeline January 20, 2009: President Barrack Obama is inaugurated. January 28, 2009: Rush Limbaugh referred to the planned stimulus package as Porkulus which was publicized in the New York Times on February 8, 2009. February 16, 2009: Dozens of protesters gathered in Seattle to express opposition to the Stimulus plan. Hundreds of protesters gathered in Denver when President Obama signed the Stimulus bill into law and in Mesa, Arizona where President Obama announced his mortgage plan. February 19, 2009: Rick Santelli of CNBC condemned the government’s mortgage plan and publically promised a Tea Party in protest. February 27, 2009: The first Tea Party Protests of the 21st century were organized and conducted in several cities and towns across the US. The majority of protests attracted hundreds of supporters while others drew dozens. April 15, 2009: Hundreds of Tea Party protests are hold nationally attracting hundreds and sometime thousands of supporters. April 21, 2009: the Tea Party Nation is registered as a for-profit organization in Tennessee. June 1, 2009: the Tea Party Patriot is registered in Georgia as a nonprofit organization. August 2009: Protests organized by American for Prosperity and FreedomWorks interrupt a town hall meeting held by Congress. The Tea Party Express bus tour run under the theme Our Country Deserves Better tours several cities and is met by sizeable crowds. September 12, 2009: A Taxpayers’ March organized by FreedomWorks, the Tea Party Patriots and 9/12 Project and others is conducted in Washington with thousands of protesters converging on the Washington Mall. January 19, 2010: Tea Party activists and affiliated groups supported and funded Scott Brown who defeated Martha Coakley for the late Edward Kennedy’s Massachusetts senate seat. February 4-6 2010: the National Tea Party Convention is held by the Tea Party Nation. March 20, 2010: Protesters in the thousands gather in Washington in opposition to health care reform. March 27, 2010: the Tea Party Express organized and conducted another bus tour. April 15, 2010: Several hundred Tax Day protests are held across the US attracting crowds of protesters between 5,000-10,000 in Washington, D.C. April 28, 2010: Republican Governor Charlie Grist facing opponent Tea Party supported Marco Rubio nominated by the Republican Party decided to run as an independent candidate. May 10, 2011: Tea Party activists led the Maine Republican Party in the replacement of a “moderate platform” with one that warns against the risk of a universal government and called for the abrogation of the Federal Reserve and the Department of Education (Williamson et al, 2011, p. 38). August 28, 2010: Dr. Martin Luther King’s I have a Dream is 47 years old. Ex-Governor Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck of Fox News conduct a rally at the Lincoln Memorial. August 31, 2010: Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska loses the Republican Primary in favor of Joe Miller Tea Party supported candidate. September 12, 2010: the Tea Party Patriots, FreedomWorks and other Tea Party groups conduct a Taxpayer March on Washington. November 2, 2010: Tea-Party supported candidates secure 39 out of 129 seats in the US House of Representatives. Five Tea Party supported candidates succeed to the Senate. References Aberbach, J. D. and Peele, G. Crisis of Conservatism?: The Republican Party, The Conservative Movement, & American Politics After Bush. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2011. Armey, D. and Kibbe, M. Give Us Liberty LP: A Tea Party Manifesto. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2010. Bardes, B.A.; Shelley, M. C. and Schmidt, S. W. American Government and Politics Today: The Essentials. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Political Science. Barreto, M. A.; Cooper, B. L.; Gonzalez, B.; Parker, C. S. and Towler, C. “The Tea Party In the Age of Obama: Mainstream Conservatism or Out-Group Anxiety?” Political Power and Social Theory, (2011) Vol. 22: 1-29. Berlet, C. “Taking Tea Parties Seriously: Corporate Globalization, Populism, and Resentment.” Perspectives on Global Development and Technology, (2011) Vol. 10(1): 11-29. Carpenter, R. H. Father Charles E. Coughlin: Surrogate Spokesman for the Disaffected. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Cashman, S. D. America Ascendant: From Theodore Roosevelt to FDR in the Century of American Power, 1901-1945. New York, NY: New York University Press, 1998. Continetti, M. “The Two Faces of the Tea Party: Rick Santelli, Glenn Beck, and the Future of the Populist Insurgency.” The Weekly Standard, (June 28, 2010) Vol. 15(39): 1-3. Eaton, W.D. Liberal Betrayal of America and the Tea Party Firestorm. Oakland, OR: Eldeberry Press, Inc., 2010. Foley, E. P. “Sovereignty, Rebalanced: The Tea Party and Constitutional Amendments.” Tennessee Law Review, (2011) Vol. 78: 751-764. Freeman, J. B. “In the Rearview Mirror: History’s Mad Hatters: The Strange Career of Tea Party Populism.” New Labor Forum, (Fall 2010), Vol. 19(3): 75-81. Hall, M. K. Vietnam War Era: People and Perspectives. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2009. Harris, L. The Next American Civil War: The Populist Revolt Against the Liberal Elite. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2010. Hennen, S. and Denney, J. Grass Roots: A Commonsense Action Agenda for America. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 2010. Katel, P. “Tea Party Movement: Will Angry Conservatives Reshape the Republican Party?” CQ Researcher, (March 19, 2010) Vol. 20(1): 241-264. Lepore, J. The Whites of Their Eyes: The Tea Party’s Revolution and the Battle Over American History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010. Murrin, J. M.; Johnson, P. E.; McPherson, J. M.; Fahs, A. et al. Liberty, Equality, Power: A History of the American People, Volume 1: To 1877. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, 2011. Rasmussen, S. and Schoen, D. Mad As Hell: How the Tea Party Movement is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two Party System. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, 2010. Somin, I. “The Tea Party Movement and Popular Constitutionalism”. Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol.105: 300-314. Underhill, R. First the Black Horse. Pittsburgh, PA: Dorrance Publishing Co. Inc. 2011. Williamson, V.; Skocpol, T. and Coggin, J. “The Tea Party and the Remaking Republican Conservatism”. Perspectives on Politics, (March 2011) Vol. 9(1): 25-43. Read More