A new poll shows that Tea Party activists are well-educated, well-informed and financially independent. This does not exactly fit with the image the New York Times is trying to sell at the expense of small government activists…
Angry white males who are opposed to anti-poverty initiatives fuel and animate the Tea Party movement, according to a front piece in the New York Times that explores the results of a new poll the newspaper organized in tandem with CBS News.
The report includes interesting nuggets of information that highlight the very strong libertarian impulses evident among average Americans who have taken part in rallies across the country.
For example, the poll shows that eight of 10 activists are primarily concerned with economic issues; a statistic that is more or less in sync with the sentiments of the public at large. Even as the Tea Party movement prides itself on decentralization and spontaneity, activists are united around a few key themes, the poll shows.
“When talking about the Tea Party movement, the largest number of respondents said that the movement’s goal should be reducing the size of government, more than cutting the budget deficit or lowering taxes,” the report says. “And nearly three-quarters of those who favor smaller government said they would prefer it even if it meant spending on domestic programs would be cut.”
Although social conservatives are certainly part of the coalition, they are not front and center at Tea Party events aimed against profligate government spending and burdensome regulatory schemes; The Times is correct to point this out.
This is a good example of a report that could have a done a great service to the readership by simply playing it straight with the poll results instead of working to advance an agenda. Unfortunately, the report opens with snide suggestions about race that subtract away from other observations in the report that are more detached and objective.
“A broad cross-section of Americans from a variety of backgrounds and age groups have a real stake in the Tea Party movement and the principles of limited government that have found expression among activists,” said Howard Rich, chairman of Americans for Limited Government (ALG). “I understand The Times has a big government agenda on its editorial pages, but this does not give editors and reporters a license to misrepresent activists who seek policy changes that would help secure the financial future of younger Americans. Tea Party activists are not detached elites, they are concerned citizens who want the federal government to honor constitutional restraints.”
The Times gives itself a way in the following paragraphs:
“The Tea Party movement burst onto the scene a year ago in protest of the economic stimulus package, and its supporters have vowed to purge the Republican Party of officials they consider not sufficiently conservative and to block the Democratic agenda on the economy, the environment and health care. But the demographics and attitudes of those in the movement have been known largely anecdotally.”
That is to say, The Times helped circulate myths that are not rooted in reality and finally came up with some hard numbers do not entirely square with disquieting image the newspaper is trying to sell.
Apparently, Tea Party activists are economically successfully, well educated and financially independent. They live within their means and they are asking the government to do the same.
This does not mean they are above criticism, but it does mean they deserve a fair shake from journalists who reflexively favor progressive policy prescriptions. Talk about elitism.
However, the article does raise legitimate questions about entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, which are unsustainable over the long-term. Activists are hypocritical in that they want to maintain entitlements, while calling for policymakers to downsize government, the reporter suggests in the following paragraph:
“…Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.” Some defended being on Social Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had paid into the system, they deserved the benefits.”
“Others could not explain the contradiction,” the report continues.
But there’s another angle that deserves attention. It can be argued that the creation of new entitlements such as government run healthcare will further exacerbate existing budgetary challenges. This is a point Tea Partiers have made repeatedly that deserves attention.
Popularity: 1% [?]
