I am always suspicious about the casting of enemies as crazy and friends as reasonable, so I have been curious to see what would come out of the Tea Party movement. Today they realeased their agenda, the Contract From America. The 10 points, chosen by polling among members, are-
(1) Require each bill to identify its constitutional authorization
2) Defund, repeal, and replace government-run health care
(3) Demand a balanced budget
(4) End runaway government spending by imposing a statutory cap limiting growth in federal spending
(5) Enact fundamental reform to simplify and lower taxes
(6)Create a Blue Ribbon task force that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs
(7) Reject cap-and-trade
(8) Pass an “all of the above” energy policy
(9) Stop the 2011 tax hikes
(10) Stop the pork.
Greater detail on these points can be found here-
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tea-party-activists-unveil-contract-america/story?id=10376437
This news dove-tailed nicely with this article-
http://pajamasmedia.com/ejectejecteject/2010/04/13/reasonable-men/
Although the latter reference is exegetical,and therefore subject to significant editorial bias, I do think it is basically on track in pointing out how far we have come from our governmental conception.
This raises two issues for me. First, is it reasonable and right that we depart from our constitutional framework? Is this document simply out of date? As the oldest continuous form of government in the world, is it now time to admit we have changed, and depart from a document that wrongly restrains socio-political progress? Second, based on the above platform, am I a Tea Partier?
Rome's social changes eventually outgrew its republican institutions. The state was ungovernable under republican auspices. I do not feel that way about our nation. I feel most of our trouble has come not from the inadequacy of our constitutional institutions, but rather from attempts to gain party advantage by spending money and circumventing existing legal structure. This applies to both parties, who have been engaged in a race to see who can spend more to please more voters. While a superfically appealing strategy, it is nothing more than monetary demagoguery. So no, I do not feel our constitution is outmoded. It is a subtle and comprehensive document, which we would do well to honor not by paying lip service, but by remembering that it was created to preserve the rights and power of individuals against the government, not of government over individuals.
On the second issue, I am not sure if I am a Tea Party member. I have never felt strongly affiliated with any party, let alone a political movement or cause. However, I support all of the items in the 'Contract From America'. I am revolted by deficit spending and redundant, multiple governmental agencies. I favor a flat tax and a consumption tax, with a simplification of our tax code. I strongly favor limited government with a preservation of individual rights, responsibilities and liberties. So maybe I am a Tea Party person.
What is hard to reconcile with the Tea Party agenda is a modern, social welfare state. This is especially true in considering the questionable constitutional basis of social welfare programs, and their inherent clash with individual, versus collective, responsibility for outcomes.
When our constitution was written, there was no societal sense of collective responsibility for poverty, ignorance, age or health. I believe the fundamental philosophical argument to be resolved in the US is whether, after about 100 years of experimentation, we believe these issues to be collective responsibilities through government, because all benefit from the improvement of health, education and old age security, or whether we believe all these issues to be private responsibilities.
It is tempting, and frequently argued, to say that providing social safety and service nets is a matter of 'social justice', or 'moral compassion'. What is easily forgotten is what is lost when such responsibility is given to others. My wife waited in line for nearly two hours today to get our son his learners' permit. A man was furious because he did not have the necessary documents, and waited for nothing. He left cursing a governmental functionary. My wife said, after he left, 'just wait- this is what your health care will be like'.
Indeed. Giving responsibility to another gives them power over you. Maybe I am a Tea Partier.
Ted
(1) Require each bill to identify its constitutional authorization
2) Defund, repeal, and replace government-run health care
(3) Demand a balanced budget
(4) End runaway government spending by imposing a statutory cap limiting growth in federal spending
(5) Enact fundamental reform to simplify and lower taxes
(6)Create a Blue Ribbon task force that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs
(7) Reject cap-and-trade
(8) Pass an “all of the above” energy policy
(9) Stop the 2011 tax hikes
(10) Stop the pork.
Greater detail on these points can be found here-
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tea-party-activists-unveil-contract-america/story?id=10376437
This news dove-tailed nicely with this article-
http://pajamasmedia.com/ejectejecteject/2010/04/13/reasonable-men/
Although the latter reference is exegetical,and therefore subject to significant editorial bias, I do think it is basically on track in pointing out how far we have come from our governmental conception.
This raises two issues for me. First, is it reasonable and right that we depart from our constitutional framework? Is this document simply out of date? As the oldest continuous form of government in the world, is it now time to admit we have changed, and depart from a document that wrongly restrains socio-political progress? Second, based on the above platform, am I a Tea Partier?
Rome's social changes eventually outgrew its republican institutions. The state was ungovernable under republican auspices. I do not feel that way about our nation. I feel most of our trouble has come not from the inadequacy of our constitutional institutions, but rather from attempts to gain party advantage by spending money and circumventing existing legal structure. This applies to both parties, who have been engaged in a race to see who can spend more to please more voters. While a superfically appealing strategy, it is nothing more than monetary demagoguery. So no, I do not feel our constitution is outmoded. It is a subtle and comprehensive document, which we would do well to honor not by paying lip service, but by remembering that it was created to preserve the rights and power of individuals against the government, not of government over individuals.
On the second issue, I am not sure if I am a Tea Party member. I have never felt strongly affiliated with any party, let alone a political movement or cause. However, I support all of the items in the 'Contract From America'. I am revolted by deficit spending and redundant, multiple governmental agencies. I favor a flat tax and a consumption tax, with a simplification of our tax code. I strongly favor limited government with a preservation of individual rights, responsibilities and liberties. So maybe I am a Tea Party person.
What is hard to reconcile with the Tea Party agenda is a modern, social welfare state. This is especially true in considering the questionable constitutional basis of social welfare programs, and their inherent clash with individual, versus collective, responsibility for outcomes.
When our constitution was written, there was no societal sense of collective responsibility for poverty, ignorance, age or health. I believe the fundamental philosophical argument to be resolved in the US is whether, after about 100 years of experimentation, we believe these issues to be collective responsibilities through government, because all benefit from the improvement of health, education and old age security, or whether we believe all these issues to be private responsibilities.
It is tempting, and frequently argued, to say that providing social safety and service nets is a matter of 'social justice', or 'moral compassion'. What is easily forgotten is what is lost when such responsibility is given to others. My wife waited in line for nearly two hours today to get our son his learners' permit. A man was furious because he did not have the necessary documents, and waited for nothing. He left cursing a governmental functionary. My wife said, after he left, 'just wait- this is what your health care will be like'.
Indeed. Giving responsibility to another gives them power over you. Maybe I am a Tea Partier.
Ted
Comments
Post a Comment