Tea Party

Oklahoma has come in third in a recent hypocrisy report that measures how much money states get from the federal government compared with how many of their residents identify as Tea Party supporters.

The Daily Beast, using polling data, recently reported that 34 percent of Oklahomans support the Tea Party, a movement based on anti-federal government ideology. The state received $7.8 billion in federal funds in 2009, the report states. That’s $2,123.13 per person. This makes the state the third “Most Hypocritical State,” according to the report. (Thanks to Alternative Tulsa for first reporting the information locally.)

Wyoming was ranked the number one most hypocritical state. Louisiana was second. New Mexico, Mississippi, Kentucky, West Virginia, South Dakota, North Dakota and Utah round out the top ten.

According to The Daily Beast:

. . . for all the braying about the government’s overspending, many states where Tea Party support is strongest coincide with states that suck up the greatest number of federal dollars per capita.

This survey is similar to the 2006 Tax Foundation report that showed Oklahoma receives an average of $1.48 back from the federal government for every dollar it gives it. According to the Tax Foundation, “ . . . many states that get the ‘best deal’ are lower-income states in the mid-west and south with expansive rural areas that tend to vote Republican.” Those states that pay more to the federal government than they get back more often support Democratic candidates, according to the report.

The contradiction here is evident. As Oklahoma Tea Party supporters and those politicians who want their votes decry federal spending, they omit crucial information. Without the extra financial help of the federal government and donor states, Oklahoma would be like an impoverished Third-World country or not a viable government entity at all.

Meanwhile, as the midterm election approaches, the state and country seems poised to give control of the government to people who want to reward wealthy people and corporations with tax cuts even as they pose as populists to manipulate voters.

The New York Times columnist Frank Rich put it this way:

Even as the G.O.P. benefits from unlimited corporate campaign money, it’s pulling off the remarkable feat of persuading a large swath of anxious voters that it will lead a populist charge against the rulers of our economic pyramid — the banks, energy companies, insurance giants and other special interests underwriting its own candidates. Should those forces prevail, an America that still hasn’t remotely recovered from the worst hard times in 70 years will end up handing over even more power to those who greased the skids.

I wonder what type of signs the local Tea Partiers will come up with for their next rally at the state Capitol now that this news is out:

From USA TODAY:

Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman's presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.

Some conservative political movements such as the "Tea Party" have criticized federal spending as being out of control. While spending is up, taxes have fallen to exceptionally low levels.

This doesn’t necessarily mean taxes will stay this low, but it’s important to note the Tea Party rhetoric ignores the fact that some of the stimulus funds paid for tax cuts. Why wouldn’t Tea Party members now want to pay that money back to the government? Isn’t it tainted with the stench of socialism? Wouldn’t that be consistent with their argument?

Sure, people can make an argument about the growing deficit, one started under former President George W. Bush, but this recent information, again, shows the Tea Party movement is really not a movement based on much of anything, except fear mongering, slippery slope arguments and, yes, racism. (This is not to imply every Tea Partier is a racist.)

The information also brings up this question again: Why are the Tea Partiers so angry? They’re paying the lowest taxes in 60 years. How could that possibly drive people to fits of anger as they label President Barack Obama a socialist?

I opposed the Wall Street bank bailouts, but they worked. Financial experts are predicting the U.S. will actually make a profit on its loans to the banking industry. Now General Motors, which also received a government bailout, is reporting profits and paying back government loans.

So, let’s see, the bailouts for private industry worked, the stimulus funds paid for tax cuts, the economy continues to improve and Americans are paying the lowest in taxes in decades, but for Tea Partiers this means the country is on the dark slide to socialism.

How long can the Tea Party movement get away with ignoring the basic reality on the ground and still attract new followers?

Maybe Democrats aren’t going to do as bad in the November elections as everyone is predicting right now.