Tea Anyone?

Louis Currier – September 22, 2010


“I'll show you politics in America. Here it is, right here. 'I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs.' 'I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking.' 'Hey, wait a minute, there's one guy holding out both puppets!'” ~ Bill Hicks


It is becoming more evident than ever that we are in need of a third political party in American politics. The two party system has been hijacked by the likes of George Soros, Peter Lewis, Rupert Murdoch, Harold Simmons, and many other wealthy contributors who seek to control government by buying it. How many elections of recent past can you think of where your choice was that of the “lesser of two evils?” Reality is; most people are not extremist left or right wingers but lay somewhere in between. We are tired of our paychecks being bilked more and more, tired of big government telling us what to do [because we don’t know any better], and just want government to be efficient allowing us the right to… life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The Tea Party movement, although not an official organized party has sent the political establishment scurrying around wondering what to do about the evil people who dare to enact their rights. The most recent tantrum is that of Karl Rove who was taken back in his Delaware loss to the Tea Party backed candidate. Katy Abram in her statement “You have awakened a sleeping giant” was right on the mark and the establishment did not head her warning. This was not a warning to democrats but all politicians who fail to stand up for the American people. There has been a lot of talk as to who the Tea Party is. Many encourage that it is part of the vast Right Wing extremists. Others assert that it is a re-branded republican party. Now that the Tea Party has affected the Right [Republicans] we again assess; who is the Tea Party?

Has it occurred to anyone that the people who make up the Tea Party are average everyday Americans, like Katy Abram, who are sick and tired of the political elitist ruling class? In my opinion that is exactly who they are. They are everyday people who are tired of being ignored, tired of politicians favoring the special interest over the people, and tired of runaway government that is threatening their normal way of living. It is not left or right but comprised of many people with one issue in mind – “We the People!”

Even though there is a movement afoot to shake up politics as usual, the establishment and the media continue to paint Tea Partiers as “angry voters.” Joshua Spivak, in an AOL News Op Ed, dismissed the Tea Party movement by stating that “Any possible third party has the same nonexistent chance of success as all the ones that went before” and he equates the movement to [perceived] voter anger and goes on to state that “The tea party movement and the increasing anger [there’s that word again] with the political process makes a third party look like an appealing option to many. But it is simply a mirage.”

Spivak seems to be right about one thing – what stifles the emergence of any third party is its ability to break into the entrenched two party system establishment, however a recent Gallop Poll has indicated that “The desire for a third party is fairly similar across ideological groups, with 61% of liberals, 60% of moderates, and 54% of conservatives believing a third major party is needed.”¹ Is a third party movement taking hold? I am not sure but what seems to be obvious is that voters are disenchanted with the political establishment and seem to be sending a message. The poll results also seem to re-enforce my belief that the Tea Party is not left or right but comprised of many people with one issue in mind – “We the People!”

Those who say, "it cannot be done" should not interrupt the person doing it! ~ Chinese proverb

___________________

¹ September 17, 2010 Americans Renew Call for Third Party
http://www.gallup.com/poll/143051/americans-renew-call-third-party.aspx

You work for Me!

IN 2010 YOU WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO GET RID OF THE SITTING CONGRESS: Up to 1/3 OF THE SENATE, AND 100% OF THE HOUSE.

Let’s face it – the average blue collar worker donates very little to the political candidates campaign coffers. The costs of running a campaign are enormous for anyone desiring to seek elected office and this is simply out of reach for the average American. If the average American donates a minor portion of the campaign contributions, where does the money come from? Special interest groups, lobbyist, and political action committees. Are you naïve enough to believe that these donors freely give out millions of dollars without an expectation of return on their investment?

In the game of politics there is no such thing as something for nothing – the ideology of quid-pro-quo runs rampant through political circles [just look at the recent Healthcare Bill negotiations in the Senate]. As I alluded to in a previous post [The Problem of Incumbency] politics has become a business. People and organizations make investments into the business [government] with an expectation of return. Because of the large flow of money into political campaigns from special interest groups, these special interests will always garner the support of legislators over the needs of the taxpayer [taxpayer dollars don’t pad their pocket but campaign contributions do]. After all – in the world of business – would Sprint invest capital in NASCAR if there were not a return on the investment? Would Anheiser Busch invest in the Super Bowl advertisements if there were not a return on the investment? And would Companies invest millions in advertising capital through celebrities and sports stars if there were not a return on the investment?

The only way to control the influence of money in politics is to vote anti-incumbent until politicians understand that the will of the people must be addressed before the special interest money. Politicians do not serve for the sheer pleasure of doing a good thing – they are paid and paid well for what they do [or don’t do in some cases]. When we hire these elected officials we must make sure that they understand that they work for We the People. I am tired of sitting back saying - there is nothing just one person can do to correct the problem. I have decided to become an active participant and maybe – just maybe – inspire others, who too have been sitting on the sidelines saying that - there is nothing they can do, to get involved and finally take charge and tell our legislators – You work for Me!

The Problem of Incumbency

What does it mean to be a Public Servant? The dictionary defines Public as:

of, pertaining to, or affecting a population or a community as a whole; done, made, acting, etc., for the community as a whole; open to all persons; of, pertaining to, or being in the service of a community or nation; pertaining or devoted to the welfare or well-being of the community;

–noun the people constituting a community, state, or nation; a particular group of people with a common interest, aim;

The dictionary defines Servant as:

–noun a person employed by another, esp. to perform domestic duties; a person in the service of another; a person employed by the government.

To be a true Public Servant one would purport to work for a group as a whole. Our legislative members contend that they are Public Servants who serve at and for the will of the people they serve. Why is it then that these so called Public Servants seem to serve only those who are associated with their political party or special interest? The reason is simple! As Senator Chris Dodd admitted “This is not a fraternity, it’s a business…and that’s the way it should be–the business of governing”[1]

Congressional service does not conform to the definition of Public Servants when viewed from the perspective of Sen. Dodd [a business]. He is correct in his summation in that politicians view their service as a business and the purpose of a business is to; “improve the long term well being of customers whilst providing the owners of a business with a good return for money, time, energy, ideas and imagination invested in a business.”[2] Successful business people spend much of their time and energy working on their profit model [campaign finance], finding new or better ways to fulfill that need or expanding on what needs they can fill, after all; a business with no customers isn't a business, a business with unhappy customers is a bad business and doesn't deserve to survive, a business that is losing money and consuming cash[deficit spending] is a bad business and won't be around for long, and a business that makes a pitiful return to the business owner[remember deficit spending] is a problem business and the owners need to take action to fix the problem.

So with these thoughts, why does the business of government survive? Simple–the very essence of a business is about the customers and the owners, but in the case of the government, the customers and the owners are one-in-the-same and therefore cannot qualify as a business at all. With the profit element removed and those running the business satisfying personal needs why do the owners continue to hire them? Because the operators [congress] have learned that if you can attract a majority of the customers [voters] – successes will follow; remember a business with unhappy customers is a bad business and doesn't deserve to survive. Phil Valentine The Conservative’s Handbook [3] identified it well when he talks about the Haves and Have Nots. If you create a majority of happy have not’s then your personal value goes up and so too does your electability. The customers are the source of all the revenue [taxes] and have to be the focus of the business [social services]. George Bernard Shaw once said that “A government with the policy to rob Peter to pay Paul can be assured of the support of Paul.”

So on to Sen. Dodd’s assertion that this is a business – it is time for the owners to fire those who have festered in the business far too long for personal benefit rather that the benefit of the public [remember that public servant diatribe?]. Candidates for public office often promise us the world only to deliver a shovel of dirt. Tell people what they want to hear- the people eventually fall for the rhetoric [change we can believe in] only to become dissatisfied later. Looking at the trends in Congressional job approval ratings [see the Gallup Poll] it is easy to see that the vast majority of the time people are dissatisfied. Why then do they continue to vote in the same incumbents year-after-year only to be surprised that the change they were promised never comes to fruition?

You see it really does not matter who controls congress as an indicator of public approval. The biggest spike in congressional approval in 2002 was statistically equal among both major parties and was at a time when Americans were joined together to oppose the evil doers in the world who had attacked our country. Now that the war has lingered on, Americans have gained focused on the material issues that are the real forces attacking this country – these are domestic issues that our elected officials continue to falter upon. If you were a business owner [and you are as determined by the Dodd business system] would you continue to allow an individual or entity [in this case Congress] to continue to run your business with such dismal statistics on job approval? Then why are the same people [incumbents] continually placed in a position to continue with such poor performance or worse yet promoted, i.e. presidency?

It is time for the owner/customer [we the people] to take control of this business [government] and only allow those who intend to serve the will of the owners and customers the ability to be public servants. This can only be done through anti-incumbency. Like the presidency in 1951 – congress needs to be exposed to term limits as a control to their loyalty. Today they only serve those who place the largest donation into their campaign coffers. Politics has become a family affair and a career not a public service.

[1]Hosenball, M., Smalley, S. and Thomas, E. (June 8, 2009). Like Father, Like Son. Newsweek
[2] Business Coaching. (07 April 2009). What Is The Purpose Of A Business?
[3] Valentine, P. (2008). The Conservative’s Handbook. Nashville: Cumberland House