Good and bad of tea party movement

The angers and fears that fed the tea party movement are genuine. When people who normally monitor politics only from afar begin earnestly organizing fellow citizens to their cause, take up protest signs and confront their elected leaders, something is going on.

Harkening to populist movements that arose during previous times of economic distress, its course is difficult to predict. Where recent political causes typically saw young people taking to the front lines, this is a movement of largely older Americans. Unlike the anti-Vietnam War and civil rights movements, its goals are harder to define.

A typical tea party rally may feature libertarians who want only minimal governance, gun rights advocates, alongside demonstrators concerned about what health care reform may do to Medicare and small business owners chafing under government regulation.

A common theme, however, is frustration that their federal government seems unable or unwilling to control spending and that excessive taxation, regulation and an erosion of privacy threaten individual liberty. Tea partiers fear if that course is unaltered, it will leave their children and grandchildren a bankrupt nation that does not hold the same promise of advancement through personal motivation.

This fear and anger is not without some basis. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that President Obama's 2011 budget proposal would result in budget shortfalls above 4 percent of gross domestic product for several years, with the publicly held debt reaching $20.3 trillion, or 90 percent of GDP, by 2020. The nation cannot safely maintain such levels of deficit spending.

Where the movement falters is a yearning for simple solutions to exceedingly complex problems. The nation's massive spending is tied to programs that the people of the U.S. largely support and depend on, with 22 percent of the budget going to Social Security, 21 percent to Medicare and Medicaid, and 21 percent to defense. The first two expenses are only likely to increase as the nation ages, while global military commitments and the ongoing war on terrorism suggest continued spending on defense.

A point of emphasis for many tea party warriors is the 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

Some, it seem, would throw out generations of court precedent and political decisions that have defined the roles of the state and federal governments and instead vest most responsibilities with the states. The idea of suddenly denuding the federal government, of eliminating the social, transportation and financial programs that serve the nation's populace, is not a reasonable argument to have.

The constitutional framers intended to provide a framework that could adapt to changing times. There is no returning to the relative governmental simplicity of the colonial era and its agrarian economy, no matter how many colonial outfits a person may dress in.

The us-against-them nature of many tea party rallies is troubling. Advocating for fiscal conservancy and limited governance is no more or less patriotic than advocating that government play a larger role in meeting societal needs and regulating business. They are differences of opinion.

A frequent demand of movement supporters is that they "want their country back." From whom? We expect this means retrieving the nation from lawmakers who tea partiers fear would spend it into ruin. But coming from a movement that is probably 99 percent white, a group that is slipping towards minority status, it has an ominous tone.

The fringe groups that gravitate to the tea party movement - birthers questioning the legitimacy of the president, conspiracy theorists, anti-immigration zealots and militia groups preparing for a coming Armageddon - undermine its seriousness.

People getting involved in the political process, fervently arguing their positions, is a good thing. Growing budget deficits are a serious concern and those in the tea party movement are shouting a warning. But when passion turns to resentment, mistrust and intolerance of differing opinions, democracy suffers.