Patriot Act Extension Fails, Splitting Tea Party Republicans

February 9, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (20)

The Patriot Act took a temporary hit Tuesday night when the House failed to muster a two-thirds majority to extend three provisions of the law under special fast-track rules. It’s a temporary setback for the bill, which is expected to easily pass in a few days under regular rules. And it’s a kick in the teeth to the newly-minted GOP leadership, which missed what should have been a lay-up.

Most Democrats voted against the extension (which the White House supports) and were joined by 26 Republicans. What I find interesting is the fault line this vote reveals among Tea Party GOPers.

Slate’s Dave Weigel breaks out the list of GOP defectors, which includes eight freshmen elected under the Tea Party banner and three more veteran lawmakers who were inaugural members of the Tea Party caucus last year. But, he notes, high profile Tea Partyers like Michele Bachmann (who founded the Tea Party caucus after all), Kristi Noem, and Allen West all voted for the extension. “I break this out because there'll be a temptation to say ‘the Tea Party and its isolationist elements beat the reauthorization,’ and that's not quite it,” he writes. [See editorial cartoons about the Tea Party.]

He’s right--it's not that simple. But it does illustrate both an intellectual blind spot among the sometimes-limited government advocates and a fissure among them. Hot Air’s Allahpundit notes that “if there’s any tea party angle to all this, it’s that there wasn’t more opposition among the GOP freshmen: After months of rhetoric about government intrusion and hand-wringing on both sides about Obama’s expansion of Bush’s counterterror powers … they had some political cover to draw the line on extending parts of the Patriot Act further if they wanted to. … Nope.” Indeed—their antigovernment rhetoric has its limits. [See editorial cartoons about the GOP.]

The New Republic's Jon Chait and the Washington Monthly's Steve Benen have written persuasively about the limitations in the Tea Partyers’ view of limited government. As Benen noted in the wake of the Patriot Act vote:

The Tea Party message is often incoherent and contradictory--deficits are bad, but tax cuts that make deficits worse are good; health care reform is bad, but socialized medicine through Medicare is good--but it's also extremely limited. When they talk about their fears of "government," what they're generally afraid of is benefits for those who aren't like them.

When civil liberties come up at all, it's only part of a hysterical, paranoid vision in which federal officials will put them in internment camps for not filling out Census forms.

There’s a lot of truth there. But as with the “Tea Party takes down the Patriot Act” narrative, that’s not quite it either. The extent to which the Tea Party is (or is not) able to reconcile this split bears watching.

Tags:
Tea Party,
Congress,
Kristi Noem,
2010 Congressional elections,
Michele Bachmann,
politics,
House of Representatives,
Republican Party,
national security terrorism and the military,
Allen West,
Democratic Party,
Barack Obama,
White House

Reader Comments Read all comments (20)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Yes - the TEA Party advocates limited government and assails rising federal deficits.

Yes - the TEA Party sees tax cuts and incentives as a good (and well proven) and a way to stimulate the economy.

Tax Cuts and Incentives DO NOT CAUSE the deficits - the out of control SPENDING by nimrods in Congress cause DEFICITS.

If Congress were to apply the Constitution to all it does, and most specifically, Article 1, Section 8 (the 17 enumerated powers) - our federal budget would be 25% of the current one in place. Elimination of taxation, direct and indirect, of PERSONAL income could be eliminated, and taxes on imports and corporations would be more than adequate to fund our nation's operations.

If Congress would restore much of the powers and duties it has usurped from the States and the People to them, we would have more money in our States and in our pockets, and we would have a chance to see prosperity again in this country.

Our founders understood it best - local control and government serves the people best, the federal government was only meant to handle a few things that were beyond the scope of the individual and State, not be the all encompassing authority of all things.

Michael Frisbee of GA 1:48PM March 17, 2011

Rev G Trask, freedoms have responsibilities and are regulated to preserve freedoms for everyone. Anarchy is the libertarian's dream, liberals are only looking to control anarchy in as much as that every man's liberties don't infringe on the liberties of any other man's liberties. Stoplights and speed limits serve the community to control the chaos roads would be without them.

If we followed Rev G Trask recommendations we'd be hanging witches cuz we don't meet some community religious standard. We put freedoms of religion in place to limit religious controls some would have making everyone abide by some narrow religious standards. Our freedoms of religion helped us shed the state religion owned by the King and run as his feudal estate. The Anglican church was outlawed immediately after the American revolution and most the founding fathers shed their life long religion to get out from under the tyranny of religious domination.

"Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should be not highly rated." - Thomas Paine

Dettrick of VA 8:32PM February 11, 2011

... is what you get when follow liberarianism to its logical conclusion. For example, we should deregulate traffic control (eliminate stoplights, speed limits and the like) and just accept the inevitable carnage that would result as a fact of life. Eliminate food safety laws (and trust that food companies will always do the right thing) and accept that some folks will become part of the collateral damage sure to follow.

May GOD have mercy on us!

Rev G Trask (ret) of ME 9:11PM February 10, 2011

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger is managing editor for opinion at U.S. News and World Report, overseeing all opinion editorial content. He is the author of "White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters." E-mail him at rschlesinger@usnews.com. Follow him on Twitter: @rschles.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

JFK's Virtuoso Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Kennedy presented a radical idea: Peaceful coexistence.

Mary Kate Cary

A Democracy in Crisis

Can the country long survive an ever-growing government?

Latest Videos

advertisement