If anyone would like to better understand what the real goals of the Tea Party are and the tactics that they are deploying to obtain these objectives you need to review an article written by Thomas B. Morgan in December of 1963. The title of this article is: "Seventeen States Vote to Destroy Democracy as We Know It" and was published in Look Magazine in that month. Morgan chronicles the fight that took place between July 1962 and August of 1963.
Look Magazine: Dec. 1963
This is a story of 13 months in the sixties - July, 1962 - August 1963 - 13 months of struggle over the substance of American democracy. In this period, a concerted effort was launched which, if successful, could destroy the power and authority of the Government of the United States. The immediate goal is a constitutional convention to propose three amendments to the Federal Constitution that would destroy democracy here as we know it. These are the critical revisions:
Amendment 1: State Legislatures would win the power to amend the Constitution undeterred by the Congress.
Ammendment 2: State courts could get full and final jurisdiction over the apportionment of state legislative districts.
Amendment 3: A court, composed of the 50 states chief justices, would get the authority to overrule certain decisions of the United States Supreme Court.
How did these radical amendments come to be the spearheads of a dead-serious political movement? How would they affect our way of life? Will they succeed? The answers to these questions are urgent because, surprisingly, the legislatures of 17 states of the Union now endorse one, two, or all three of the amendments.
The amendment movement begain in Biloxi, Mississippi, at a routine conference of Southern state officials and legislators organized by the Council of State Governments. The Council is a highly respected joint agency sponsored by the 50 states.
When the conference met, the talk ranged over the Kennedys, desegregation and Cuba, but the chief topic was Baker v. Carr, the historic case decided by the US Supreme Court four months earlier.
In a stunning leap beyond previous decisions, the Court held that apportionment of state legislative districts could be scrutinized by Federal courts. Clearly, many rural legislators, long dominate in state governments, would be reapportioned out of their seats. Even as the Southerns talked, courts in Florida, Oklahoma, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia pressed the Baker v. Carr point.
Thomas B. Morgan
An additional monthly chronicle of the events that staved off this effort will be published in an upcoming article along with the article from a Yale professor that helped shoot it down. We will include statements from the Warren Court.
In many ways you could say the current Tea Party are the evangelicals of this original movement. In their zeal to place all the power back to the states they forget that some of us do know where their most recent fude with America started. They forget that some of see through their efforts, and know their tactics. Below are excerpts from two articles that we previously released that define these points.
The Republican Small Government Conspiracy
T1Truth - 02.20.2012
First of all I will let everyone know that I have been the General Manager of more than one company in my career and I do believe that the private sector "can" be much more efficient than most government agencies. I also believe that many government agencies should be privatized so that the public may have services provided that must put customer service first and deliver these services at a competitive price for the tax payer. With that said, the Republican reasoning for doing this is just greed and has nothing to do with doing the right thing.
The Republican part or as I like to call it the "Tea-publican Party" espouses the virtues of reducing the federal government and turning control of everything back to the states and local government and not for the reasons you may think. Their argument goes that they wish every individual to have less government in their life and that local communities can do a better job than the federal government. Has anyone noticed that there is never an example given as to the success achieved by doing this for anything of great importance to the masses. Although this sounds like a good idea in some respects as many would believe their communities should chose how to spend their own money, why do we not speak about the reality of this?
In the 20's, Upton Sinclair felt the need to write about the appalling practices of the meat packaging industry. Why, because left uncontrolled companies were not worried about the workers or their consumers and only profits. In the 60's when I grew up in an industrial city where the river was so polluted the fish were dying off, the river contaminated the drinking water and caused illness, and the smell was horrible. Why, because the factories in this city were not controlled and did not care for the community, only their profits. In this decade the federal government and states have turned control of the mental health of our children to the local Community Mental Health departments which funnel the children that need the help the most into the criminal justice system to avoid their responsibility. Why, so they can take the Medicaid dollars allocated for these children and do as they wish with it and lesson their own burdens.
The fact is we cannot trust our states or local governments to protect our citizens as someone will always find a way around the intent of acts to protect our citizens to pocket the money for their own purposes without federal controls. As citizens, we decide what is important to our society and the Tea-publicans are trying to sell everyone a bill of goods that if given the ability to do this at the local level it will be done better. The facts of our past and the facts of our present do not show this to be true. The Real Argument for Small Government is being sold so the rich and powerful can and will get richer and more powerful at all of our expense.
Tea Party Goal of Parliamentary Government Realized
Why do we pretend that we still have the Congress and the Senate of a two party system, and why does not the Tea Party own up to the fact that their goal was to turn these two bodies into Upper and Lower Parliamentary bodies? It is clear why the Tea Party wishes to ignore the President and wants Congress to have all the power. The goal is and has always been to create a Parliamentary Government environment.
The real goal of the Tea Party was to create a voting block within the Congress and Senate that must be dealt with in order to advance their agenda by forming a coalition. This is why the Republican Party has had to shift so far right to accommodate this coalition. In the UK many political parties exist and once elections take place, the parties must form a governing coalition by obtaining support of enough groups in order to form a majority government. (This is done by promising their agenda items will be included in their agenda or granting favors.) Tell me how this is different from what the Tea Party has done to our political system. By standing their ground under the guise of being Tea Party members and still being registered as Republicans, they could hold their ground and still obtain funds from the RNC. (Cake and eat it too.)
If you take a look at the government in the UK, the supreme legislative power is vested in the Queen-in-Parliament; although in practice in modern times, real power is vested in the House of Commons. The house of commons in the UK (equal to our Congress) wields the most power even over the House of Lords (equal to our senate).
The truth of the matter is that the Tea Party acknowledges that they are a party and have a set of core beliefs. They have members, meetings, agenda items, and solicit donors for their members to get them elected. They have members in both the house and in the senate and have taken specific stances to not vote for specific issues. (Raising taxes under any circumstances, increasing the size of government, and reducing the power of government.)
Our fathers and grandfathers fought this fight once before. We are now forced to fight it again because we have forgotten. Make no mistake about it, the reasoning for smaller government is to increase the power of special interests and not to protect us from them. This is a plain and simple fact.
You have been warned, again!