Where is the nationwide "Tea Party" taxpayer revolt going?

	SurgeUSA.org
	Grow local leadership, not the federal bureaucracy

Defend our freedom to choose against the liberal insurgency in Congress.

Where is the nationwide "Tea Party" taxpayer revolt going?

Buyer Beware! National retail sales tax or US VAT (Value-Added Tax) proposals

See Glenn Beck's show on May 1 with many participants about the Tax Day Tea Parties. This was a fairly good sample of Tea Party enthusiasts from around the country.

Restoring a Limited Federal Government - Only "we the people" can make it happen now. See "Tea Party Tactics" for our local action suggestions.

Revolution is brewing, as the organizers said. "You say you want a revolution ... We'd all love to see the plan." Everybody made their own plans. This has grown quickly as a completely decentralized grassroots movement, which makes it difficult to predict where it is going next, since there are many competing ideas. Organized in only eithe weeks, the Tea Party protests on April 15 - Tax Day were in 800+ cities, with 600,000-800,000 people. The initial theme suggested by the organizers was "Reduce the Pork, Cut Taxes", but there were other themes, too, because these events were about free individuals voicing their own concerns and ideas. See some of the news and blog coverage.

Plans are in progress for larger Independence Day Tea Party celebrations on July 4 with a suggested "Learn the Constitution" theme. These nationwide public protests, and any local organizational events to mobilize people in between, will be developed locally.

This is not a "top down" initiative by some national "leaders". It's whatever you make it.

Anybody can get involved to help organize such events as project leaders in their community. This is not limited to the big cities or state capitols. Talk to your friends. Spread the word. A suggested venue to consider would be near local Post Office facilities as taxpayers file their returns. The exact timing of the protests may vary according to what the local organizers think is most effective. Since many participants work hard during the day, an early evening event may be favored in some cities, but there should be local coordination with the national effort to present a strong and unified message.

For more information, see Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party Protest - April 15, 2009. There are also Facebook pages for most events, and the national website will have state pages for reference. Check out the Facebook pages from the February 27 events, or the ones which are already being planned, to pick up ideas from your peers in other locations. The national website will also offer some guidance, but these are locally organized events. Attract local media interest, but keep the protests respectful..

The essay below expresses personal views of the author - not the organizers or sponsors of these "Tea Party" events. The author is not the official event organizer or sponsor in Chicago or elsewhere.

March 1, 2009 - The Taxpayer Tea Party Movement - Where Do We Go From Here? Interesting post at FreedomWorks by Brendan Steinhauser. See also tea party protests being organized through FreedomWorks in many cities. Those are in addition to the nationwide Tax Day Tea Party protests which are being organized for April 15, although there has been some overlap in some locations.

March 7, 2009 - Congratulations on the Fullerton, CA Tax Revolt Rally on March 7 in Orange County, CA which attracted an estimated 8000 - 15,000 attendees after just a few days of preparation with the active support of local talk radio hosts John & Ken at KFI AM 640, who broadcast live from the rally. Some more coverage: Orange Juice Blog Hot Air blog Orange County Register

What brought 15,000+ protesters out in 45 cities in just one week despite bad weather?

It is fairly easy to understand why so many taxpayers are upset. They are against the risk that this Congress will bankrupt this country, leaving taxpayers with astronomical bills to pay for generations to come while potentially destroying the foundation upon which our economic prosperity has been built.

It is harder to define what the participants favor as an alternative. There is no broad consensus yet about the way forward, but the first step is to bring individuals together who want to get involved and do something to stop this train wreck of our economy and huge social programs before it is too late.

This surge took only one week to organize. Building consensus across a diverse national base will take time, but the focus is on taking action at the local level - not waiting for national leadership. A very large percentage of the participants have not participated in any such protests before. These were hard-working Americans of all ages. These were not Republican Party events. Many independent voters and even some Democrats with obvious "buyers remorse" showed up. They shared common concerns about the rapid growth of federal spending and other unforeseen government changes.

There should be similar events soon - again and again, growing in size as word spreads. This is the competitive marketplace of ideas at work. No party owns the votes of Americans. We remain free to choose, which provides periodic protection against abuse of power by elected officials. The problem is that a lot of damage can be done quickly between elections, so we can't be slow or complacent.

The key point is that these were very respectful protests. Thoughtful people, including many small business leaders, came together to show determination to restore and preserve America's success. It was not about making the Republican Party successful in 2010 or 2012. It was about what we can do today to protect our individual freedoms against this liberal onslaught, and restore economic progress. This brought out people who don't usually protest anything, but are concerned friends and neighbors. Some even brought their children along as a learning experience about individual responsibility.

Some Republicans wrote off these initial protests as irrelevant. Such arrogance about the expression of dissenting views among individuals may be expected of liberals who favor the charismatic populist rulers who can deliver the bacon for their voters, but it clearly angers many active conservative voters who feel that both parties are disrespecting such voters and dishonoring their positions of public trust.

After losing the US Senate, House, White House and most Governor positions, conservatives should question Republican leaders, rather than accept their actions in blind faith. If this is the party which values individuals, rather than autocratic rule, then such arrogance by leaders is a serious mistake.

The opening shot in a revolution? Or a few angry people venting their frustrations?

The recent Chicago Tea Party events in 40 cities nationwide clearly reflect the frustration and anxiety of many American taxpayers about the depth of the recession and the trillions of dollars in spending which may put our future prosperity in even greater jeopardy, rather than help solve the current "crisis".

It's relatively easy to get upset about all of the sweeping changes which are being rammed through Congress and by Executive Orders so quickly that it is hard to keep track of them, or read them.

The liberal leadership model seems to be to invite a few Republicans to a "bipartisan" meeting, briefly discuss an issue, ignore their input, and then declare that Republicans are simply intransigent while pushing forward whatever was planned all along. This is tyranny with a fig leaf of political cover, and many ordinary Americans are savvy enough to see through it, even if they can't easily stop this game.

There were easily 6000+ attendees at the various "Tea Party" events on February 27, 2009 - all of them organized in less than one week through grassroots online networking with virtually no party support, funding, or advance media coverage. It may have been well over that turnout.

While 9000 Republicans partied at the big CPAC event in Washington DC, where the familiar political celebrities speak and mix with supporters, future party candidates, news media, lobbyists, and others with campaign $$$, the Tea Party events were a protest by grassroots conservatives, many of whom are clearly as angry at the Republican leaders as they are at the Democrats.

The "Tea Party" attendees predictably expect to have a serious problem with liberal policies. That's no surprise. They're more angry at the Republican wimps, however, who seem to lack the backbone to actually stand up for something more than trying to get themselves elected to power again.

There was very obvious frustration with Arlen Specter, Olympia Snow, Susan Collins and many others. That includes state and local Republican officials and party leaders. There's a lot of frustration. That needs to be converted into shaking up the party leadership by actually winning many key elections.

Opposition to the actions of leaders, or grassroots leadership from the bottom up?

This was not about favoring "third party" candidates, although some Libertarians and Ron Paul zealots were vocally represented in these events. It's a matter of favoring the basic principles on which this country was founded, instead of state socialism or fascism. There is probably a very realistic recognition among most of the attendees that any third party option is not realistic, nor very useful as a way to protest or influence the debate on major issues. There is simply a strong belief that the Republican Party is broken, is not listening to the base, and the leadership doesn't even "get it" - yet.

There are superficial changes in rhetoric among party leaders about "the brand", but fundamentally there's a disconnect between the national leadership and many individuals who they allegedly respect.

The events were therefore not "anti-Obama" or even anti-Congress, or targeted at specific politicians (despite some obvious anger at Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, etc.). The focus was on the alarming new spending programs, "stimulus bill", mortgage initiatives, and other social policies which are being pushed through at a frantic pace.

In other words, the attendees have pretty much written off Obama and many Democrats in Congress as a lost cause. They will not listen, and they will not change. They are doing what they believe in, as fast as they can, and there's relatively little which can be done to stop them at this point.

Thus, there is not much point in insulting them, or complaining about them, or about what they are doing, other than to keep alerting more Americans to the dangers involved despite all the liberal media spin in their favor. The real challenge is to start defeating them consistently - soon - by standing up for basic values which will rally ordinary Americans against all potential abuses of power.

The one area where there seemed to be broad consensus is that, regardless of any good intentions, government intervention in the financial markets, healthcare industry, energy industry, education and other areas are likely to do more harm than good. At the very least, these are not changes to impose without any serious deliberation, and without the promised "transparency" for all Americans to really know what is being done to them. In short, this was a "government is the problem" protest.

United States of America - by the consent of the governed, not benevolent distant rulers

This is a fundamental struggle for the future of America. Will it become a European socialist nanny state, in which the bureaucratic elites rule over everything with the consent of the governing party, or will the limited role (and cost) of federal government finally be restored? Is it too late for the checks on federal government power to work as the states become too reliant on federal budget distributions?

One of the challenges is that conservatism means different things to different people, and is not synonymous with the policies in practice of Republican Party leaders and elected officials. Unlike a liberal model in which dissent is ridiculed or channeled into narrow interest groups, conservatives should be intellectually capable of accepting diverse points of view and fundamental disagreements over some specific policies.

We do not need to have "litmus test" issues to define whether somebody is a member of our interest group or not. Our interest is in the success of all Americans - not just those who are most like ourselves. If we value the individual, and basic rights such as freedom of speech and others, then we need to focus again on what unites us, rather than what divides us. Divided we fail - again and again.

For example, the debate over earmarks and "pork" spending is fundamentally about the proper role of government. Are US Senators and Representatives elected to bring back as much as they can for their constituents to feed at the federal trough, whether through obscure earmarks or openly debated legislation? Are they elected for some higher purpose by Americans in their state or district, rather than just to serve the special interests of their own campaign supporters, fundraisers, and friends? Do we elect public servants to try to advance the interests of everyone, or just their own supporters?

Likewise, what is the role of the President? We don't have a Parliament and a Prime Minister - for good reason. That was a familiar model for the founding fathers, and they clearly rejected it. At the time, the British empire was a global superpower. Even so, we rebelled against it - copying some ideas about the rule of law, but rejecting what were perceived to be fundamental weaknesses in all of the prevailing European and other models of government, both at the time and throughout history.

It was not our ambition to model the United States after other countries, other than to adopt good ideas while innovating where there seemed to be needs for improvement - including in particular the respect for the rights and freedom of ordinary individuals by those who are elected to positions of power.

Success tied to political connections and bureaucratic programs - not individual innovation

That is the essence of the "Tea Party" revolts. This is about the rights and economic futures of many individuals potentially being trampled by abuses of government power which impose the temporary will of a political majority by making very permanent changes to our economic and social system.

Instead of liberty and the individual pursuit of happiness within a few basic social constraints, the government regulatory and legal system is becoming the arbiter of "fairness" to favor one interest group over others. This is dividing the country by pitting interest groups against each other to compete for government favor, as in the corrupt regimes and authoritarian bureaucracies of many other countries.

Instead of reliance on the creativity and competition of free individuals, liberals embrace the wisdom of benevolent populist rulers, distant legislators, bureaucrats, and lawyers as the key to success. This growing role of government in private business is a potential path to more corruption, state socialism, or even fascism. The concern isn't just about what has happened already. it's about the future risks.

That includes the risk that innovation will be stifled in some areas as resources are forcibly shifted through the power of government taxation and spending to favor specific groups at the expense of others. Instead of a "level playing field", the game becomes one of rewriting the rules in your favor. That is a proven recipe for competitive failure in the world, as many countries have demonstrated.

We have been able to outperform the rest of the world for a very long time. It is very dangerous to make sweeping changes to an economic system which has been the envy of the world. This is not a country in which government is relied upon to pick the winners and losers. To the extent that government has intervened in the economy, it has often led to unintended bad consequences.

That doesn't mean that absolute laissez faire capitalism is the solution to meet every social need, but it does mean that there should be greater humility and caution about expecting government to be the solution. There's strong evidence that, despite good intentions, intervention makes things worse. Multilateral bureaucracies become even more detached from market realities and checks on power.

That's one of the most fundamental things about conservatism. It isn't about defense of the status quo against all changes. Many changes have been embraced throughout our history. The point is that there should be very careful deliberation about any significant changes to avoid making things worse.

There should be thoughtful and respectful debate about what is best for the country as a whole, rather than authoritarian rule like a one-party state in which any dissent is crushed by government power.

Conclusion: The "Tea Party" movement should be driven at the local level

It feels good to rant and vent about frustrating problems. At the end of the day, however, that really accomplishes very little. There needs to be some strategy, plan, and course of action through which people actually work together to improve the situation, rather than just complain about it.

Conservatives know how to do that. There is no reason to fear the "community organizers" or other activists who are trying to expand what they can get for their own groups from government. They are free to try to corrupt politicians to do their bidding. We are free to work hard to defeat such politicians.

Think about it. If other events were like the one in Chicago, many local small business owners chose to participate. They know how to create a successful venture despite many challenges. They know how to build teams of individuals who work together efficiently for competitive advantage. Engage them actively in the process.

Focus on spreading the word among business leaders who are not reliant on government contracts and political or regulatory influence. Think about how much they stand to lose if some of the proposed or potential changes occur - both in their businesses and as individuals. They have a huge stake in not changing the "rules of the game" in ways which will destroy their hard-earned success.

Another focus should be the local professional service providers who have a big stake in the success of the companies they serve. Economic recovery may be crucial to their operations, and they also have many useful relationships since effective B2B networking is fundamental to their success. They can help to spread the word quickly, may have staff who will volunteer valuable time and skills, and often have pretty sophisticated research and communications tools at their disposal, especially at some of the larger firms with offices in many cities. Even if they don't want to become overt sponsors as a company because of any political risks, they are likely to have many conservative staff members who can choose to get actively involved as private individuals. That can help to spread the word through local professional organizations such as executive clubs, other event organizers, etc.

The local "Tea Party" groups should probably stay away from a divisive single issue focus. In other words, the key is to come together to discuss the way forward, rather than to stake out positions. Everyone can share their private views through blogs or meetings, but they don't have to all be in lockstep agreement on everything. They need to find the common ground which they share, and what they can do together, as in a business environment.

Successful businesses are inclusive of many individuals with diverse capabilities and interests who work together toward a common purpose. They are free individuals, but choose to work within an organizational structure to achieve their own goals as well as those of the company as a whole. That's something to consider for the Tea Parties. Focus on shared goals and actions which advance your mutual interests, rather than concentrating on all your differences. If conservatives respect individuals, then respect all of those around you. Figure out who you want to work with to get specific things done.

Finally, businesses and professional service providers are more comfortable with complex "matrix" organization structures and networks of business relationships, such as supply chains through which many specialized companies work together toward a common purpose. As a simple example, a company may outsource some administrative functions, component products, logistics, call center or online customer response / fulfillment operations, public relations work, advertising, etc. They may work with tax advisors, legal advisors, auditors and other professionals. That experience can be very valuable to help create very efficient and effective local networks for Tea Party groups to grow rapidly and have a greater impact.

Like it or not, the Republican Party is really the only serious option for conservatives. It certainly needs some changes, and these changes need to be driven from the bottom up. While liberals focus on the concentration of power in national leaders as the key to distribute federal resources in their favor, conservatives really need to focus on what can be accomplished to improve the economic and social climate today in the communities where they actually have more influence than Washington DC.

There are probably few Congressional districts in the entire country where a well-organized base of local conservatives could not have enough of an impact to swing key elections, whether in 2010 or 2012 or local ones at other times. That includes paying attention to many local races, rather than just the headline national ones. In effect, the organization can develop and learn by getting more involved as soon as possible. As in business, focus on competitive opportunities. Some races may clearly be a lost cause and a waste of resources to fight, but even so, a tougher than expected fight can shift resources away from other races where success is more attainable. It's all a local judgment call.

The way to have an impact on the Republican Party is to improve it at the local and state level. If the base is clearly mobilized for success, the national leadership will have a vested interest in paying attention, rather than ignoring the base. The local organizations in every city and every district of the country need to find innovative ways to work together to win consistently. Otherwise, the Tea Party events will just fade away into political irrelevance, and this opportunity to really capitalize on the fears which Democrats have been spreading recently will be lost.

Republicans need to clearly position themselves as the people who are actually leading their local areas to faster economic recovery, while the liberals keep trying to push their national power agenda and more handouts for their supporters. Sooner or later, they are going to have to raise taxes to pay for what they are doing. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire, and slipping in new sources of revenue (such as cap and trade, cutting tax breaks for the "rich", etc.) will simply not be sufficient.

They may try to stall the tax increases until after the 2010 election, hoping that an economic recovery will already start to limit the unsustainable deficits, but a steady flow of local Tea Party events can spread the word about the fiscal reality regardless of their campaign spin. The facts will be against them - even if the national economy starts to show some signs of life again after they finish their spending spree and more predictable visibility returns to the market.

For now, as Congress imposes one sweeping change after another, it's hard for anyone in business to even plan seriously for long-term investments. That will change once it becomes clear that their changes are stalled by opposition, or have already been implemented so that the new rules are known. Until then, they're making the economy worse as they push their agenda through. That's why the Tea Parties can't wait until July. They need to happen month after month - or even every few weeks - to build momentum before the changes we are worried about become a fait accompli.