The timing for the “Tea Party” in Vermont on Tax Day could not have been more appropriate. At the end of March, Forbes Magazine published an article in the form of a slide show entitled “In Depth: Most Taxed States”. Needless to say, Vermont ranked number one with the highest total tax burden per person. Our average tax burden per person was reported as a whopping $3,861. Of course our Legislature is not satisfied with this number one ranking as they just voted to raise taxes even higher. It seems that even the highest tax burden in the country is not capable of keeping up with their voracious appetite for spending.
When you couple this with the record level of federal spending now being proposed, it is small wonder that people are showing up for “Tea Parties” all over the country to protest the nonsense. The backlash against an ever-expanding federal government has prompted a report by the Department of Homeland Security labeling such protestors as right wing extremists and lumping them together with other protestors against big government as potential domestic terrorists. See the article: JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Six Things You Should Know About the Homeland Security Report on ‘Rightwing Extremism’ in our “Elsewhere” section. This report has caused some liberty activists to envision civil rights violations of and the locking up of those who are resisting the move towards bigger government. Personally, I see a different end game in this labeling of liberty activists as extremists.
This all has a precedent. I do not think that the objective here is to round up a bunch of "extremists", but to discredit a pro-liberty movement that is critical of big government before it can gain any steam. In the early 1990's after Bill Clinton got elected, there erupted a similar movement as a response to the proposed take over of health care, pushing for gun control, Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc. The Republican Class of 1994 road this wave into a majority with the Contract With America. They actually proposed shutting down whole government agencies. When Bill Clinton stood up to them they shut down the federal government. There was a plan to pass continuing resolutions to fund only necessary programs and hold hearings on the rest. The talk at the time was whether the President was even relevant as his influence seemed to have been eclipsed by Newt Gingrich and his merry band of revolutionaries. Clinton was seen as a one term President.
Then we had the Oklahoma City bombing. In its wake, almost everyone who had been critical of the federal government was branded as a potential Timothy McVeigh.
This had the effect of publicly discrediting the pro-liberty movement as a bunch of reactionary extremists. Of course the targeting of high profile targets like Newt Gingrich was part of the effort as well. The result was that a significant part of the GOP split with the "young turks" and Clinton won the face off, while the GOP "extremists" were attacked for shutting down the government simply because they had a personal beef with Clinton. Clinton got re-elected and the GOP has been neutered ever since as a reliable force for limited government.
I think that what is happening now is a replay of the successful 1990's attempt to strangle a limited government movement before it gets too powerful. (It is far more important to crucify the movement in the arena of public opinion than it is to actually lock people up and make martyrs out of them) This movement has to be stopped before 2010 becomes another 1994. That is the end game and we should not get distracted by speculation over being locked up.
Robert Maynard is the Editor of the True North website
