Is conservatism in style? The readings for this week focused on the topic of polarization. Mann and Ornstein (2012) discussed internal relationships among and between policymakers, McCarty (2007) highlighted factors and consequences surrounding escalated polarization, and Arceneaux and Nicholson (2012) touched on motives and values underlying the "who," "what," and "why" of the Tea Party movement.
Recall that Burstein (2003) stated, "Public opinion affects policy three-quarters of the times its impact is gauged; its effect is of substantial policy importance at least a third of the time, and probably a fair amount more" (p. 36). He further concluded that the impact of opinion is substantial with involvement of interest group activity. This coincides with data from Arceneaux and Nicholson, where less than two years after forming, the Tea Party endorsed several candidates and ultimately won 39 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives along with winning five seats in the Senate. Clearly, an increase in public opinion as well as voter share does matter, as exemplified by the newly formed Tea Party successfully electing politicians who represent their interests in areas of both fiscal and social concerns.
Though Arceneaux and Nicholson argue there is heterogeneity among Tea Party affiliates, the vast majority identify with strict conservative ideologies both on social and economic issues. These interests (e.g. limiting abortion rights, opposing gay marriage, decreasing social program spending, etc.) heavily correlate with that of the Republican party; thus, do you believe the Tea Party movement is indeed a rebranding of Republican interests? Moreover, Arceneaux and Nicholson stress that "Since the 2010 election, Tea Party-linked representatives wield a great deal of power in the Republican Caucus and have constrained the ability of House Republican leaders to compromise with Democrats." This polarization amongst Congressional party members relates to McCarty's claims emphasizing the importance and necessity of bipartisanship in passing policies. How do you believe the relative power of the Tea Party has or will impact democratic interests in Congress or elsewhere?
The combination of far-right views and strong passion/motivation catalyzed the Tea Party in the first place. The Tea Party has backed representatives that largely avoid negotiating with Democrats and have the similar passion and motivation to create bills that reflect the far-right desires of the Tea Party. Our readings this week mentioned that both parties have shifted toward the right over the years and the Tea Party's bill introductions and "grassroots-style" following has made it challenging for Democrats to get anything done without shifting toward the right (negotiating) at least a little bit. Many of the bills that Tea Party representatives have introduced (including voter ID and anti-union bills) have taken time and attention from the Democrats, making it more difficult for leftist action. This grassroots-style passion of the Tea Party does not seem sustainable, as they have been introducing legislation left and right. I had been reading articles recently that suggest the fading power of the Tea Party, but this article suggests some additional counterarguments:
http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/policysocial-context/21482-out-of-step-with-america-tea-party-power-fading.html
The combination of far-right views and strong passion/motivation catalyzed the Tea Party in the first place. The Tea Party has backed representatives that largely avoid negotiating with Democrats and have the similar passion and motivation to create bills that reflect the far-right desires of the Tea Party. Our readings this week mentioned that both parties have shifted toward the right over the years and the Tea Party's bill introductions and "grassroots-style" following has made it challenging for Democrats to get anything done without shifting toward the right (negotiating) at least a little bit. Many of the bills that Tea Party representatives have introduced (including voter ID and anti-union bills) have taken time and attention from the Democrats, making it more difficult for leftist action. This grassroots-style passion of the Tea Party does not seem sustainable, as they have been introducing legislation left and right. I had been reading articles recently that suggest the fading power of the Tea Party, but this article suggests some additional counterarguments:
http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/policysocial-context/21482-out-of-step-with-america-tea-party-power-fading.html
Since the Tea Party started mobilizing, I have scoffed a little. This is not the best reaction, but pretty natural. That being said, I think that the Tea Party's emergence says a lot about our democracy and deserves a little more credit than I gave it at first.
Frankly, it is a reaction, and it doesn't re-brand the Republican Party, but certainly makes it re-evaluate its positions and the two party system in general. The most apparent consequence of polarization has obsessed today's Congress to the extent that the nuance of our society often is overlooked, and the divide in the Republican Party challenges the values they espouse and forces it to look internally- a task that is admittadly becoming more difficult as the world grows even more economically interdependent. Historically, Republicans have been more isolationist than Democrats and perhaps that is their strength. If the U.S. is to be a leader in the modern world and survive, balance in our domestic and foreign policy is key. The tea party might give the GOP an opportunity to reconsider how to implement their policies "with style", not "in style".(Vonnegut, 1959)
Since the Tea Party started mobilizing, I have scoffed a little. This isn’t the best reaction. That being said, I think that the Tea Party's emergence says a lot about our democracy and deserves a little more credit than I gave it at first.
Frankly, it is a reaction, and it doesn't re-brand the Republican Party, but certainly makes it re-evaluate its positions and the two party system in general. The most apparent consequence of polarization has obsessed today's Congress to the extent that the nuance of our society often is overlooked, and the divide in the Republican Party challenges the values they espouse and forces it to look internally- a task that is admittedly becoming more difficult since 9/11, and as the world grows more economically interdependent. Historically, Republicans have been more isolationist than Democrats and perhaps that is their strength. If the U.S. is to be a leader in the modern world and survive, balance in our domestic and foreign policy is key. The tea party might give the GOP an opportunity to reconsider how to implement their policies "with style", not "in style"(Vonnegut, 1959).
Since the Tea Party started mobilizing, I have scoffed a little. This isn’t the best reaction. That being said, I think that the Tea Party's emergence says a lot about our democracy and deserves a little more credit than I gave it at first.
Frankly, it is a reaction, and it doesn't re-brand the Republican Party, but certainly makes it re-evaluate its positions and the two party system in general. The most apparent consequence of polarization has obsessed today's Congress to the extent that the nuance of our society often is overlooked, and the divide in the Republican Party challenges the values they espouse and forces it to look internally- a task that is admittedly becoming more difficult since 9/11, and as the world grows more economically interdependent. Historically, Republicans have been more isolationist than Democrats and perhaps that is their strength. If the U.S. is to be a leader in the modern world and survive, balance in our domestic and foreign policy is key. The tea party might give the GOP an opportunity to reconsider how to implement their policies "with style", not "in style"(Vonnegut, 1959).
Since the Tea Party started mobilizing, I have scoffed a little. This isn’t the best reaction. That being said, I think that the Tea Party's emergence says a lot about our democracy and deserves a little more credit than I gave it at first.
Frankly, it is a reaction, and it doesn't re-brand the Republican Party, but certainly makes it re-evaluate its positions and the two party system in general. The most apparent consequence of polarization has obsessed today's Congress to the extent that the nuance of our society often is overlooked, and the divide in the Republican Party challenges the values they espouse and forces it to look internally- a task that is admittedly becoming more difficult since 9/11, and as the world grows more economically interdependent. Historically, Republicans have been more isolationist than Democrats and perhaps that is their strength. If the U.S. is to be a leader in the modern world and survive, balance in our domestic and foreign policy is key. The tea party might give the GOP an opportunity to reconsider how to implement their policies "with style", not "in style"(Vonnegut, 1959).