LOCAL VOICES: Fight for your right to Tea Party

Sandusky High School graduate attending Ashland University To be a faction a group must be actua
Sandusky Register Staff
May 13, 2010

Sandusky High School graduate attending Ashland University

To be a faction a group must be actuated by an impulse that is contrary "to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community"

James Madison, Federalist 10

This column is in direct response to a comment about my last column.

The topic was about the Tea Party movement being a faction of the kind James Madison warned about in Federalist 10 of the Federalist Papers.

First we have to remember the context which this was written. Madison was arguing for the creation of a centralized government, over a small, more direct, democracy. Obviously history shows us that Madison and the Federalist Party won this debate, and the creation of the government as we know it was the result. Federalist 10 tells us that factions in a democracy are much more dangerous than in a republic, because they have more power to impose their will on the minority.

Now we have to address the issue of whether the Tea Party movement is even a faction to begin with.

As Madison said, a faction has to work against the rights of other citizens. From what I can tell, this is not the Tea Party movement at all. They are making a call for government to return to what they believe are constitutional principles: More representation from elected officials, a smaller more principled government, better management of tax money. These principles seem far from contrary "to the rights of other citizens."

So, if what the Tea Party movement stands for is perfectly acceptable, and if America governed by a republican form of government, then it is laughable to consider the Tea Party as a dangerous faction able to impose its will on the minority. What seems even more interesting is how much resistance there is to this movement from the Democratic Party. It seems to me that what the Tea Party has been preaching is applicable to both parties.

Both parties need to take a look at their heritage and realize that these messages are not so crazy after all. With a government that is spending an unprecedented amount, maybe a message asking for fiscal responsibility is not so bad. With elected officials making decisions on how much money they can get for voting for a bill, maybe a message asking for elected officials to listen to their constituents more is not so bad. With the government looking to control more and more of our lives in ways that have previously been used by Marxist societies, maybe a message asking for a limited principled government is not so bad.

Years ago, people had a vision of a nation where citizens did not have to be concerned with the government interfering with their lives. They fought and died for the liberties we have today. Great men like James Madison fought for the creation of a government where groups could come together in like interest and voice their opinions.

Men like Madison, Hamilton and Washington all believed a republic would allow for groups to voice their concerns about government, but not allow for overwhelming strength in numbers.

Whether you agree with what the Tea Party movement says or not, does not matter. The fact is our Founders set up our government so that they might voice their opinions. The next time you hear about this movement on the news, or read about it in the paper, just be thankful our government was created the way it was, and be thankful that we have the rights we do.


Dr Fill

This movement is really interesting but agreeably sad. It reminds me of the Christian religion where if you have a different opinion than that of the church that you are attending, you simply break away and start your own, as in the Pentecostal branch of Christianity.

Politics and religion seem to go hand in hand anyway. You might observe how the christian right melted into the Republican Party and basically supplied enough votes to sway past elections. It seems that now, the Republican Party is doing it's best to shed the religious right and I believe that this is what is the force behind the Tea Party.

Something I intend to spend some time on is to look at the roots of the Tea Party and see where it is grounded. My guess it will be back with the religious right movement that is showing so much displeasure with the Republicans. Ralph Reed, the former intern for Jack Abramoff with ties to Tom Delay and leader of the Christian Coalition, and his gang have to be involved somewhere in this. Ralph Reed is a bad dude!


It's so sad how this movement is being hijacked by a bunch of neo-cons, who can ignore the constitution when ever it goes against their interests. What started out as a campaign for liberty, small government, transparency in the fed, change in foreign policy etc., is now the vehicle for the republican party to seek reelection. They're basically riding on the coat tails of this popular movement, claiming it as their own. Sadly they're turning this movement into a joke, ultimately alienating the true independent, fiscal conservative, non-party base who helped create it.

They want to be a part of a movement against the establishment, when in fact they are the establishment. They want to get in position to drag this country down even further, after the democrats finish screwing everything up. Now that they've infiltrated this movement it's slowly going to turn more and more right wing partisan. Its funny how scared and threatened they are now by Ron Paul, or a third political party splitting the conservative vote.


Libertarian, "Paper or plastic?"
Jimbo, "I brought my own bags, thank you."

brutus smith

libertarian, so people who don't buy into your half baked BS is a collectivist thug????

Erie Countian

Gosh, "libertarian"'s phrase of the week must be "collectivist thug"!


Said like a childish collectivist thug.

brutus smith

libertarian, woo woo, chugga chugga, woo woo, watch out.


The heath care market has been progressively (pun intended) decimated through collectivization for the last 100 years to the fascist system we have now. The collectivist thugs at the AMA, unions and AARP and their government thug political allies have created a cartel the limits competition and choices while creating unlimited demand further drives up costs. Now the regressive socialist political thugs come up with a plan that they claim will solve the problems they have caused by doing more of what caused the problem to begin with.

I'm glad that the right is resisting the further collectivization of health care and trying to reverse the bastardized system-it's about time. But they are unwilling to go all the way and return to a free market. In addition they want to tax income that is not taxed instead of making all health care spending tax free.

Apparently, their are a number of collectivist thugs here perfectly will to hire government thugs and further dictate to me whether I buy health insurance, what's in the plan I'm forced to buy, whether I subsidize the health insurance of others and impose all kinds of others restriction on me and those providing the insurance and health care to me.

No person in the existence has the right to dictate these things to me. It is my natural right to make these decisions and choices on my own (or with the voluntary cooperation of others if I choose). These people are collectivist thugs and should be ashamed of themselves. All moral people should shame and ostracize collectivist/government thug.

brutus smith

wetzu, my plan is HR 676 single payer, but the public option will suffice for now. Woo woo chugga chugga woo woo.

brutus smith

wetzu, now that you found factcheck.org, you can factcheck the rest of your BS before you post it.


Based on your comments, brutus, it is clear that you still did not read the reviews. How can you have such disregard for fellow citizens as to deny them coverage in the name of politics? How failingly FDR of you. If you had a shred of comprehension or honesty you would see the obvious.

We'll see what form the initiative takes. Besides, this is just a diversionary tactic to cover up the fact that the administration has no answers in any other area effecting our country.


Have you ever used an HSA? It’s your money out of your pocket. You can’t get it back unless it’s for a medical reason. You determine how much to put in there each month. Now, I was recently put on a high deductable plan. After paying $400+ a month for my $3000 out of pocket (per person) insurance, I can’t afford to put any money (tax free or not) into the stupid HSA! Let’s say I max out the $6,000 to cover my (an my wife’s) yearly deductibles. It’s really not going to affect my taxes that much. I think HSAs are a red herring.

digger nick

Brutis, there will be no health care with public option. Make any wager you want, I am all in on this one. After the next 2 elections, you well may see the record 54 seats the Republican party took broken.

Richard Bebb

duhast -

"I’m not sure people are getting the whole mandate thing. If they pass a law to stop people being denied for pre-exiting conditions (which both sides seem to support) then everyone will wait and get insurance after they get sick. It’s like buying homeowners insurance after your house burns down"

Yes exactly.

The only problem is the mandate is unconstitutional so what do you do now ??


Richard Bebb

We will absolutely have to agree to disagree. The republican members of congress laid out conservative ideals yesterday at the health summit that directly contradict the democratic plan.

The right believes that individuals should be in charge of their own health care by setting up health savings accounts and being able to purchase across state lines, which would allow for the left's favorite talking points, "choice and competition."

The left on the other hand believe that the only way to reform health care is to involve the government and replace the individual with a series of government bureaucrats.

This is the ideological difference that has been on display for the past year or so, the right wants the choice to be up to the individual, while the left demands that the government make the choice for you, be it through a public option or insurance mandate.

Its all moot anyway as Barry has indicated that he supports congress ramming this down the American peoples throats through reconciliation. Even though the process of reconciliation has never been used for major legislation, only for budget issues. Barry has decided to change the rules, which will lead to democratic demise in November.



I thought this was about teaparties...

Sam, your argument is a bit skewed there. Just because you don’t like or agree with it doesn’t mean the motive behind it isn’t genuine. The Dem plan will cover many more people than the GOP plan. That has been cited by the CBO. Now, if you get sick and have huge medical bills, you won’t be able to pay your mortgage either will you?

I’m not sure people are getting the whole mandate thing. If they pass a law to stop people being denied for pre-exiting conditions (which both sides seem to support) then everyone will wait and get insurance after they get sick. It’s like buying homeowners insurance after your house burns down.

brutus smith

Wetzu, Oh it will be a little cheaper for healthy people, how wonderful. The GOP "bills" add taxes to the middle class, how wonderful. You get to claim, if you can afford it, a tax deduction for the extra taxes you pay, how wonderful. And when you look at the comparison column, the GOP is a bunch of no's, how wonderful. So` there you go wingnut, troll and a faithful follower of Glenn Beck.

brutus smith

Wetzu, Richard, goofus, nick, sam, you better get off the tracks, that Healthcare Reform train is coming, with a Public option too. Woo woo, chugachuggachugga woo woo.


Didn't read FcatCheck either, 'eh troll? Pitiful...

And you claim to be moral? The D's plans are immoral if for no other reason the horrific percentage of uncovered people.

"Wing-nuts, Wing-nuts,

brutus smith

Breaking News: The GOP has a Healthcare Plan, its called "Status Quo".



I'm no fan of ANYbody's plans (though I certainly more strongly oppose the liberal version), but the GOP did have several proposals that were presented and summarily dismissed by Pelosi and Reid quite a long time ago.

Meanwhile, if the Dems care so much about "helping" me, why would their plan cost me so much that I'm not sure I'll be able to continue to pay my mortgage if it passes? If the Dems care, why would their plan effectively result in nationalized healthcare, including all of the inherent government inefficiencies (rationing included)?

Does healthcare as a whole need some reform? Yes. But doing NOTHING is better than doing the something the Dems want to shove down my throat! I'll tell you where I'd personally like to shove their plan, but the Register doesn't let those words past its filter.

As far as I'm concerned, the single best option for reform is to leave the industry alone. And by "leave the industry alone," I mean TRULY leave it alone. Let insurance sales be made across state lines. Get lawyers out of the mix. And let the rest of us make the choices that WE believe best, not the ones some government hack thinks we should pick!


Since the whole issue entered congress a year ago, the republicans have had a plan. There have been a few republican ammendments added to the bill, but as a whole the democrats have shut the republicans out.


You apparently didn't look at the FactCheck reviews.

BTW, if your goal is covering as many people as possible then your obvious option is S. 391 Wyden/Bennett.


Richard, the GOP plan is like a passive mother saying, “Now you kids play nice!”. There is no substance. It’s like a “me too” proposal. Why didn’t they have a plan BEFORE? Why did it take Obama and a Dem. Congress to get them to produce one? They just didn’t care until it was a political issue for them. Now they claim to have a plan.

I don’t pretend that the Dem’s plan is perfect, but it appears they are interested in helping the American people whereas the GOP is only interested in helping business and insurance companies (who heavily line their election pockets). This is just my personal opinion based on observation. We can agree to disagree.


I propose a simple question here and that is, "If you were a shoe maker and had the ability to keep other shoe makers out of your sales area and thus be able to charge whatever you wanted....would you call that "fair play? If as the years went on you also esclated your price because of this "monoply of sorts"...would that be fair play? If you also made your shoes cheaper by leaving out quality materials....would that be fair play? If this process continued where many people couldn't afford shoes....would that be fair play?" I'm sure you have answered all these hypothetical questions with a "no". It would not be fair play or in the interest of the publc at large for anyone to set up monopolies. That, however, is only one ploy health insurance companies have used for many, many years. The big differance is...it's our health and lives they are toying with. The "shoes" have gotten extremely expensive and made extremely cheaply. Now...it's affecting more and more people. "IF" they didn't need regulating....then why are we in this position today? Everybody out there better watch out because "the other shoe is about to drop!" (and it could be yours!)

digger nick

People, fact is the tide is turning. Watch the Dimocrats get flushed over the next year. It's already happening.


FactCheck.org gives an overview of democratic,republican and bipartisan plans.


Richard Bebb

duhast, its silly to continue to come on here and stick to talking points about "how republicans have no plan" That is not true, go to gop.gov...


I will let it slide this time due to the fact that you did not watch the summit. I encourage you to watch the highlights, the republicans were the ones who offered ideas and facts.


Richard, I think the republicans would be in a better position if they actually had a plan to bring to the table. They don’t seem to be able to have a consensus amongst themselves. They seem more interested in blocking ANY health care reform than coming up with something they can get on board with.

I’m sure the clips of the meeting will be interesting and I look forward to seeing them when I get home tonight.