Do Not Reelect Your Tea Party Representative

You live in a District that is represented by a Tea Party enthusiast. You supported that individual in the 2010 election. You were concerned about the economy, and you believed what you understood to be the Tea Party philosophy. You believed in smaller government, lower taxes, less spending, and a different way of doing business in Washington. Do you, however, agree with the way these representatives have refused to work with others to solve problems? Is that really what you were looking for when you sent your new Representative to Washington? Additionally, was it your desire to dismantle Medicare, cut Social Security, and balance the budget on the backs of the poor, the elderly, and others in need?

What has been the result of what seemed initially to be a not unreasonable experiment in government? We have seen a downgrade in our government's credit rating for the first time in our history. We have seen intransigence and rigidity, including a fierce adherence to a dangerous ideology which has resulted in an inability to achieve even the most rudimentary tasks of government. We have watched as the Republican Party has allowed the Tea Party minority to determine the agenda of government and to thwart reasonable proposals that could have a positive result for our country.

The Tea Party has demonstrated a refusal to participate in government. They have shown an inability to understand what it means to govern. It seems that they prefer doing harm to their country rather than working with anyone in government to move the country forward. They even have no use for members of their own party if they don't adhere to every jot and tittle of their agenda. These are the representatives who have attached themselves to the anti-tax hero Grover Norquist and have signed his petition. Your Representative has to check with him to determine what they are or are not allowed to do. It is he, not the Congress, that determines what is or is not a tax increase. Is this anyway to run a government?

Part of the difficulty is that like religious fanatics, they are so convinced of the rightness of their beliefs and plans, they do not value the ideas of others. They do not even value other individuals. Their plans and intentions are so perfect and so pure that anybody who does not jump on their bandwagon needs to be eliminated from the field of battle. It is this blindness to the real world we live in that makes it possible for them to say no and refuse any deal that comes along because only their vision of the world is an acceptable one.

So what may be the result if your Tea Party representative remains in office? It will likely result in a failure to allow the new congressional committee of twelve to reach a deal that will prevent a second credit rating downgrade. Continued adherence to this no new revenue pledge, dooms the Congress to be unable to address the very issue you sent your representative to Congress to address, namely the deficit and government spending. This dangerous stalemate will continue on every budget issue as time goes on. These members do not appear to want movement. Either they want stalemate or they prefer to be able to use failure as an issue rather than actually achieve progress. I don't see how such an approach to governance can be considered democratic or useful.

Tea Party supporters were asked at a recent presidential debate for Republican Candidates if they would accept a deal that was 10 to 1 in favor of spending cuts over revenue enhancements. The answer was a resounding no. This kind of approach to solving our nation's problems cannot be seen as serious or helpful. Since all the presidential candidates at the debate acquiesced to such a belief one has to wonder about the seriousness of their candidacies as well, but that is a subject for another time.

So, I recommend that each voter begin to seriously consider now, the implications of retaining in office any representative who does not appear to understand the Constitution or the operation of the legislative branch of government. You cannot reach meaningful compromise with a group of legislators who refuse to compromise. The issues facing our country today require serious individuals with an openness to reasonable ideas. Those in this category have strongly endorsed a balanced approach that includes spending cuts and revenue enhancements to work toward a balanced budget. Those who would obstruct meaningful movement in that direction need to be replaced by folks who are committed to work towards forming a more perfect union.