36 POLITICAL INSIGHT APRIL 2014

T
he linguistic meaning of tea has
a cultural fuidity that meets the
needs of the consumer both
physical and spiritual and
occasionally political. The English, drinking
tea to keep calm, may struggle to grasp
fully the rebelliousness of the US Tea Party.
In my American South, the oppressive heat
called for sweetened ice-tea. As a native of
the Bible Belt, my research interprets cultural
and political aspects of the American Right
through participant observation of large
group events, interviews with movement
leaders and journalists expert on all things
Republican. So what is it about the Tea
Partys particular political brew that has
intoxicated so many American voters?
Getting this (Tea) Party started
While the date of birth for the Tea Party is
contested, various signs of dissatisfaction
with Democratic Congressional eforts to
stimulate the economy and avoid further
economic meltdown began in early January
2009. Even before President Obamas
inauguration, Graham Makohoniuk, a part-
time trader, posted a blog inviting those
unhappy with the direction of government
intervention to begin sending tea bags to
their congressional representatives. Over
the next few weeks, various seemingly
Tea Time?
The Rise of the Tea Party
Was the Tea Party a spontaneous
uprising of US citizens against
the economic bailout? Was it a
protest against President Obama?
Has the Tea Party replaced
the Christian Right as the
powerhouse of the Republican
Party? Angelia Wilson
investigates.
Picture credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque
PSA Political Insight Issue 1 2014.indd 36 21/03/2014 11:38
APRIL 2014 POLITICAL INSIGHT 37
independent protests took place from
Seattle to Colorado to Washington DC.
Building on the iconography of the Boston
Tea party, others articulated their frustration
as Taxed Enough Already. The viral video
of a trader on the Chicago Merchantile
Exchange railing against government
plans to refnance sub-prime mortgages
caught the attention of Fox News. This anger
began to morph into a national movement
fanned by fnancial investment from the
billionaire brothers Charles and David
Koch and given ideological cohesion by
Republican stalwarts such as Dick Armey at
FreedomWorks.
Based on my research, locating an exact
time of birth of the Tea Party is a futile
exercise. In late 2008, President Bush had
brought together senior Congressional
Finance Committee members to put
together the bailout package. Months
before the inauguration, Republican
operatives were well aware that the
economic crisis necessitated interventionist
federal legislation and they made sure the
blame for it landed on Obamas White House
doorstep. So in this instance, identifying
the exact moment of birth is less politically
interesting than identifying those involved
in the conception.
What can be articulated with certainty
are the ideas motivating much of the Tea
Party leadership and its fnancial supporters:
a libertarian, anti-federalist agenda. For
example, Rules for Patriots, published by
Tea Party campaign group FreedomWorks,
begins with the simple assertions that
Freedom Works and Freedoms Right as
justifcations for the fundamental principles
of individual responsibility, economic
opportunity, and constitutionality limited
government. FreedomWorks began as
the anti-taxation Citizens for a Sound
Economy, funded by the Koch brothers
with signifcant links with the Cato Institute.
Since its nationwide Tea Party Tour in
September 2009, FreedomWorks, with Dick
Armey (former US House majority leader
and author of former Republican speaker
Newt Gingrichs Contract with America) and
sidekick Matt Kibbe (former Republican
National Committee economist) at the
helm, has been the leading organisation
reaching out to the grassroots organising
local protest and ofering training to every
state-based group. Armey famously rowed
with the socially conservative Christian
Right leadership such as Frank Dobson,
referring to them as a gang of thieves and
nasty bullies. Arguably then, the Tea Party
was to be the reassertion of familiar tenets
of economic libertarianism small federal
government with minimal interference in
citizens private lives and the economy.
But it is more than that. From the
beginning, various groups claimed to be a
part of the Tea Party movement: ResistNet.
com, the Tea Party Nation, the Tea Party
Patriots and the Tea Party Express. The latter
began as a bus tour and presented itself as
a movement of the people through images
of local grassroots rallies. However, it was
largely funded by a coalition of economic
libertarians and social conservatives.
Most of these had an agenda that built
on libertarianism, but they also included
leaders from the Ku Klux Klan, birthers
who questioned whether President Obama
was in fact an African Muslim, members
of the John Birch Society and Civil War
secessionists. The Tea Party that emerged
in 2009 cast a wide net for grassroots
supporters and found signifcant discomfort
across America not just with government
sponsored economic bailout, but also
among those angered at a black man living
in the White House. This anxiety mobilised
into grassroots anger, but outrage was not
the only political goal at play.
With the election of President George W.
Bush in 2000, social conservatives believed
they had fnally managed a takeover of the
Republican Party. As a born again Christian,
Bush endorsed a range of measures dear
to the hearts of social conservatives, such
as limiting abortions and fghting the
federal recognition of same-sex marriage.
His 2004 re-election escorted in numerous
state Defence of Marriage Acts (DOMAs)
defning marriage as between a man and
a woman in many cases refusing to
recognise same-sex marriages performed in
other US states. The Republican grassroots
fnally had their President. Of course,
some would argue that the libertarians
had their Vice-President in Dick Cheney.
Nevertheless, it is this ongoing tension
between economic libertarians and social
conservatives within the Republican Party
that set the backdrop for the resurgence of
the libertarian message in early 2009. With
the stimulus package in Congress, now was
the time to rally the libertarian Republican
elites in the hope of regaining some ground
back from the Republican Christian Right.
What followed the 2008 election was a civil
war undermining a coherent message,
and ultimately the political direction, of the
Republican Party.
Grassroots v astro-turf
Who exactly are the Tea Party's constituents?
According to an New York Times/CBS poll
in April 2010, 91 per cent of Tea Party
supporters back the Republican Party, 89
per cent are white, 70 per cent are married,
75 per cent are aged over 45, 63 per cent
get their news from FOX, 58 per cent own a
handgun, 33 per cent have some university
education. They are generally middle
income with 56 per cent earning over
$50,000 (30,000) annually, compared to
44 per cent of the general population. The
key analytical question focused on the true
roots of the Tea Party: was this a grassroots
or an astro-turf movement? Did the level of
dissatisfaction following the frst election of
President Obama lead to a groundswell of
the population or was the backlash against
the frst Black president whipped up by
investment from key Republican operatives
inside the Washington DC Beltway?
Like most questions of political science,
the answer is more complex than a binary
construction supposes. Arguably, this
was no spontaneous uprising. According
to a PRRI poll also in 2010, 81 per cent
of Tea Party members are Christian, with
57 per cent considering themselves as
part of the religious right. Various pieces
of evidence demonstrate that there are
signifcant links between Tea Party and
Christian Right organisations at the local,
state and national levels. State and national
Tea Party organisations shared leadership
and constituencies with Christian Right
organisations; they purchased email contact
lists from Christian Right organisations, and
they held joint rallies with Christian Right
organisations. The Christian Right was keen
to claim this movement as their own. While
attending the Family Research Council
Values Voters Summit in 2009 and 2010, I
observed speakers shifting talking points
from historically prioritised social issues to
PSA Political Insight Issue 1 2014.indd 37 21/03/2014 11:38
38 POLITICAL INSIGHT APRIL 2014
the importance of theocratic government
alongside economic libertarian principles.
Perhaps surprisingly for some social justice
Christians, there is little ideological gap on
economic issues between the Christian
Right and libertarianism. Since the Civil
War, the Christian Right has been preaching
a doctrine of states rights and Christian
Reconstructionism which combines
laissez-faire capitalism with the belief in
theocratic government enforcing Gods
Law. There have been signifcant mutual
political benefts for this marriage between
the Christian Right and libertarianism.
Libertarian elites, such as the Koch brothers,
have learned that they need the grassroots
organisation of the Christian Right in order
to mobilise voters. The constituents are
largely the same with some Tea Party
organisations widening these concentric
circles of constituents to include those more
anti-state militants or racists. In 2014, the
Tea Party has become a new articulation of
the long-standing marriage between social
conservatism and anti-federal government,
economic freedom loyalists. With hindsight
and much to the dismay of some anti-
tax libertarians one can more accurately
describe the evolution of the Tea Party as a
successful mobilisation of the grassroots of
the American right by both libertarian and
Christian Right elites.
Tea Party Champions
Those emerging from the Obama backlash
as politically powerful voices, continue to
boast a Tea Party label, including Ted Cruz,
Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio. Others who
have profered leadership such as Sarah
Palin, Michelle Bachman, Rick Santorum, and
Ron Paul, similarly benefted from various
connections ideological and fnancial
to Tea Party organisations. Unsurprisingly,
this new leadership also shares a political
heritage frmly rooted in the Christian
Right. Bachman, a graduate of Oral Roberts
University, was the sweetheart of the
Christian Right, long before the emergence
of the Tea Party. Senator Ted Cruz, a born
again Southern Baptist, has interesting
religious and economic links. His father,
Rafael Cruz, is the director of Purifying
Fire Ministries, advocate of dominionism
theology and, until recently, his sons only
political strategist. Dominion theology holds
that Christians are Biblically mandated to
occupy all secular institutions until Christ
returns a rather non-compromising basis
for political engagement.
Rand Paul, arguably a serious Tea
Party contender for the 2016 Republican
presidential nomination, is a fan of atheist
Ayn Rand and does have some difculties
convincing social conservatives that he is one
of them. However, his message is one honed
to appeal to Christian Reconstructionist
anti-federalist economics. His voting record
on social issues such as abortion, same-sex
marriage, support for Israel and federal health
care, is far more in line with the Christian
Right than libertarianism. Finally, while not
an elected candidate, Ralph Reed has held
Picture credit: Reuters/Lucy Nicholson.
PSA Political Insight Issue 1 2014.indd 38 21/03/2014 11:38
APRIL 2014 POLITICAL INSIGHT 39
sway over much of the Republican Party for
decades. As the frst executive director of the
Christian Coalition, Reeds fnger is always
on the pulse of the movement. His Faith &
Freedom Coalition, founded alongside the
Tea Party in 2009, ofers a new home for
those loyal to the Christian Right and those
rising leaders of the Tea Party. Emerging
as the leading organisation to train and
mobilise the Republican grassroots, Reeds
Faith & Freedom embodies the ideological
fusion between these two forces of
Republican politics.
Cobelligerents
The plethora of Tea Party and Christian
Right groups share constituents, fnancial
supporters and political objectives, in
what Francis Schaefer labelled tactics of
co-belligerency. Over the last couple of
years, belligerent is an apt description of
Tea Party Congressional representatives.
Their collective no compromise stance on
key libertarian issues such as anti-federal
intervention and fscal responsibility,
underpinned their staunch opposition
to Obamacare and budget negotiations.
For them, shutting down the American
government was a small price to pay in
order to win the austerity debate. However,
given the ideological and personnel
overlap noted above, it is difcult to
unpick which issues were Tea Party and
which were traditional Republican social
conservativism. For example, Congressional
representatives afliated with Tea Party
organisations were central to the new war
on women, placing new restrictions on
access to reproductive services, including
contraception and abortions, as well as
defning legitimate rape and opposing
renewal of the Violence Against Women
Act. At the state level, Tea Party legislators
voted for vaginal probes (a state mandate
required transvaginal ultrasounds before
allowing access to reproductive health
care), defunding Planned Parenthood and
redefning personhood in order to limit
abortions. At present, the wedge most
apparent in the Republican Party is not
between Tea Party libertarians and social
conservatives, but between their combined
forces and more moderate Republicans.
Such moderates, who occasionally opt for
bipartisan compromise, are the most at risk
in the upcoming mid-term elections.
The 2014 mid-term elections are predicted
to be, in the words of the Washington Posts
Kathleen Parker, a carnival of gore. With
21 Democrats and 14 Republicans up for
re-election, the Senate could become as
elephantine and obstructionist as the House.
But perhaps not. Tea Party candidates are
contesting seven Republican incumbents
accusing them of not being Republican
enough, particularly on social issues such
as abortion, contraception, womens rights,
same-sex/civil partnerships and Obamacare
construed as government spending
to support abortions. These challengers
may split the Republican vote, allowing
Democrats a momentary political win.
Have the American people had enough
of the Tea Party? It doesnt matter. The
American people do not vote in mid-term
elections: Republicans do. These mid-terms
will be nothing less than a poll about the
soul of the Republican Party. Will calmer,
bipartisan-leaning, heads prevail or will the
GOP make an even harder right turn? Given
recent Republican turmoil, I suspect the
results will prove to be mixed. Bad news for
the Republicans; possibly good news for
Democrats.
Some political commentators naively
pronounced the death of the Christian Right
alongside that of Jerry Falwell, Paul Weyrich,
or Ronald Reagan. Still others question its
virility with the aging leadership of Richard
Viguerie, Tim Lahaye, Pat Robertson and
Phyllis Schlafy. Naturally, the same voices
predict the Tea Party will be a limited
afair. There is some evidence to support
this claim: Liz Cheney bowing out of the
Wyoming US Senate race; Matt Kibbes
takeover of FreedomWorks and Dick Armeys
unsuccessful attempt to take control back
at gunpoint. But to think the party is
over would be misreading the tea leaves.
Following what they perceive as legislative
wins, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and co. will be
re-grouping, preparing for the 2016 Anti-
Hillary Clinton Fest. For those of us on this
side of the pond, I suggest we keep calm,
make a cuppa and watch the drama in
fascinationbecause something so crazy
could never happen here. Right?
Angelia R. Wilson is professor of politics
at University of Manchester.
Tea Party Reading List:
Armey, D. and Kibbe, M. (2010)Give Us Liberty: A Tea
Party Manifesto, New York: William Morrow.
Clement, Scott and John C. Green, The Tea Party,
Religion, and Social Issues, PEW Research Center http://
pewresearch.org/pubs/1903/tea-party-movement-reli-
gion-social-issues-conservative-christian.
Diamond, S. (1995) Roads to Dominion, New York:
Guilford.
Hazen, D. and Stan, A.M. (eds) (2010) Dangerous Brew:
Exposing the Tea Partys Agenda to Take Over America,
San Francisco, CA: AlterNet Books.
Heritage Foundation (2010) Indivisible: Social and Eco-
nomic Foundations of American Liberty. Washington,
DC: Heritage Foundation.
Kibbe, M. (2012) Hostile Takeover: Resisting Centralized
Government's Stranglehold on America, New York:
William Morrow.
Lappore, J. (2010) The Whites of their Eyes, Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Paul, R. (2011) The Tea Party Goes to Washington, New
York: Hatchett Book Group.
Parker, C. (2010) Multi-State Survey on Race and Politics,
available at: http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/race-
politics.html.
Phillips, K. (2006) American Theocracy, New York:
Penguin.
Posner, S. (2010) The Non-Existent Tea Party-Religious
Right God Gap, Religion Dispatches, September 10.
Posner, S. (2010) The Tea Partys religious roots exposed
The Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/commentis-
free/belief/2010/oct/12/tea-party-religious-right
Stan, A. M. (2013) Anatomy of the War on Women:
How the Koch Brothers Are Funding the Anti-Choice
Agenda, RH Reality Check. Available at:
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/11/05/anatomy-
of-the-war-on-women-how-the-koch-brothers-are-fun-
ding-the-anti-choice-agenda/
Weigel, D. (2010) Five Myths about the Tea Party, The
Washington Post, August 8.
Williams, D. (2010) Gods Own Party, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Wilson, A. R. (2013) The Southern Strategies: Preaching,
Prejudice and Power American Review of Politics Spring
pp. 299-316.
Wilson, A. R. and Burack, C. (2012) Where Liberty Reigns
and God is Supreme New Political Science 34:2 pp.
172-190.
Zernike, K. (2010) Boiling Mad, New York: Times Books.
PSA Political Insight Issue 1 2014.indd 39 21/03/2014 11:39