Jeanfromfillmore
07-26-2010, 09:15 PM
The risks of the Tea Party Caucus
Don't expect conservatives to line to up to join the new group.
By Ambreen Ali
It's no surprise that conservative lawmakers are wary of the new Tea Party Caucus .
The House group created to bring together lawmakers who want to pass bills that fit tea-party principles could put those members in a precarious situation.
Though the tea-party badge may help conservatives at the polls, it also means that those lawmakers could find themselves defending the actions of an unwieldy grassroots movement.
"When you affiliate with a group, you take on all of their baggage," said Larry Sabato, who runs University of Virginia's Center for Politics .
That baggage comes from the tea party's decentralized nature.
Tea partyers pride themselves on having no single leader , but that also means that the action of a rogue protester can taint the entire movement.
Last week's controversy over whether the tea parties sanction racism is a prime example.
The National Tea Party Federation made an unprecedented move when it booted tea partyer Mark Williams out of its ranks over a satirical piece he wrote. But Williams continues to play a leadership role in Tea Party Express, the group that has organized rallies with former Alaska governor Sarah Palin.
Williams can't be kicked out of the tea party because no single group has that authority.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) defended her Tea Party Caucus as that controversy unfolded, saying the group's job will be to pass policy, not vouch for the grassroots.
Unlike Bachmann, who hails from a strongly conservative district, other Republicans seem wary of what tea-party ties could imply.
"I think it’s better left with the people," Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Politico when asked whether he would join.
Democrats have learned the hard way that even the loosest affiliation with controversy can yield trouble.
President Obama's experience with ACORN – which stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now – serves as a tale of caution.
For years, he and his party benefited from the liberal organizing group's voter-registration drives and advocacy work.
Obama, who defended the group in a lawsuit years ago, came under fire when the group was accused of voter fraud during the 2008 election campaign.
Last year, camera footage of ACORN employees giving what appeared to be illegal advice to conservative activists posing as a pimp and prostitute forced the group to disband.
Republicans seized the political opportunity to criticize the president and lawmakers with ties to the group.
Democrats had to defend themselves against the attacks, much like tea-party supporters have been asked to in the racism controversy.
"Nobody can be so prescient as to know that a group like ACORN down the line is going to find itself in quite the trouble that it did," Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsbility and Ethics in Washington said.
With the tea parties, Sloan said it's more obvious that there is a danger.
"The tea parties seems much riskier because there are fringe elements that act rashly and get press," the government watchdog noted.
Lawmakers could have seen trouble coming in a few other instances over the years.
Opponents launched attack ads against Democratic Senator Kay Hagan two years ago when she attended a New England fundraiser with atheist activists.
"If Godless Americans threw a party in your honor, would you go," one of the ads endorsed by rival Elizabeth Dole said.
Hagan, a Presbyterian who relied on her role as a former Sunday school teacher to debunk the ads, still went on to win the campaign.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) got in trouble a few years ago without even officially joining a group.
Critics jumped on the senator for saying he was willing to speak at Bob Young University , the conservative campus that just lifted its ban on interracial dating in 2000.
And Van Jones, an environmental adviser under President Obama, had to step down last year after it was revealed that he signed on to a petition questioning the U.S. government's role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Jones later told CBS that he had no idea what he had signed at the time.
Not every advocacy group spells trouble, though. More established groups often enjoy the endorsement of politicians eager to tap their voter base.
"If it were a motherhood caucus, people would be clamoring to get in," Sabato said, adding that it's the controversial groups that tend to get officials in trouble with voters.
But with a movement as uncontrollable as the tea parties, lawmakers can't predict what controversies may lie ahead.
Ambreen Ali writes for Congress.org.
http://www.congress.org/news/2010/07/21/the_risks_of_the_tea_party_caucus
Don't expect conservatives to line to up to join the new group.
By Ambreen Ali
It's no surprise that conservative lawmakers are wary of the new Tea Party Caucus .
The House group created to bring together lawmakers who want to pass bills that fit tea-party principles could put those members in a precarious situation.
Though the tea-party badge may help conservatives at the polls, it also means that those lawmakers could find themselves defending the actions of an unwieldy grassroots movement.
"When you affiliate with a group, you take on all of their baggage," said Larry Sabato, who runs University of Virginia's Center for Politics .
That baggage comes from the tea party's decentralized nature.
Tea partyers pride themselves on having no single leader , but that also means that the action of a rogue protester can taint the entire movement.
Last week's controversy over whether the tea parties sanction racism is a prime example.
The National Tea Party Federation made an unprecedented move when it booted tea partyer Mark Williams out of its ranks over a satirical piece he wrote. But Williams continues to play a leadership role in Tea Party Express, the group that has organized rallies with former Alaska governor Sarah Palin.
Williams can't be kicked out of the tea party because no single group has that authority.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) defended her Tea Party Caucus as that controversy unfolded, saying the group's job will be to pass policy, not vouch for the grassroots.
Unlike Bachmann, who hails from a strongly conservative district, other Republicans seem wary of what tea-party ties could imply.
"I think it’s better left with the people," Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Politico when asked whether he would join.
Democrats have learned the hard way that even the loosest affiliation with controversy can yield trouble.
President Obama's experience with ACORN – which stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now – serves as a tale of caution.
For years, he and his party benefited from the liberal organizing group's voter-registration drives and advocacy work.
Obama, who defended the group in a lawsuit years ago, came under fire when the group was accused of voter fraud during the 2008 election campaign.
Last year, camera footage of ACORN employees giving what appeared to be illegal advice to conservative activists posing as a pimp and prostitute forced the group to disband.
Republicans seized the political opportunity to criticize the president and lawmakers with ties to the group.
Democrats had to defend themselves against the attacks, much like tea-party supporters have been asked to in the racism controversy.
"Nobody can be so prescient as to know that a group like ACORN down the line is going to find itself in quite the trouble that it did," Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsbility and Ethics in Washington said.
With the tea parties, Sloan said it's more obvious that there is a danger.
"The tea parties seems much riskier because there are fringe elements that act rashly and get press," the government watchdog noted.
Lawmakers could have seen trouble coming in a few other instances over the years.
Opponents launched attack ads against Democratic Senator Kay Hagan two years ago when she attended a New England fundraiser with atheist activists.
"If Godless Americans threw a party in your honor, would you go," one of the ads endorsed by rival Elizabeth Dole said.
Hagan, a Presbyterian who relied on her role as a former Sunday school teacher to debunk the ads, still went on to win the campaign.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) got in trouble a few years ago without even officially joining a group.
Critics jumped on the senator for saying he was willing to speak at Bob Young University , the conservative campus that just lifted its ban on interracial dating in 2000.
And Van Jones, an environmental adviser under President Obama, had to step down last year after it was revealed that he signed on to a petition questioning the U.S. government's role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Jones later told CBS that he had no idea what he had signed at the time.
Not every advocacy group spells trouble, though. More established groups often enjoy the endorsement of politicians eager to tap their voter base.
"If it were a motherhood caucus, people would be clamoring to get in," Sabato said, adding that it's the controversial groups that tend to get officials in trouble with voters.
But with a movement as uncontrollable as the tea parties, lawmakers can't predict what controversies may lie ahead.
Ambreen Ali writes for Congress.org.
http://www.congress.org/news/2010/07/21/the_risks_of_the_tea_party_caucus