The numbers, in black and white, cannot be ignored. Republicans rode a wave of discontent with the current administration to pick up historic gains in Congress. However, the message the electorate sent Washington was a divided one: when you dissect the results, the night was a disquieting one for true believers in the Tea Party mantra of the need for a return to limited government.
Tea Party candidates won Senate races in Florida, Kentucky, and Wisconsin, but these were charismatic nominees who managed to slough off accusations they represented an "extremist" agenda. In Nevada, Alaska, and Colorado, Tea Party office-seekers who should have won failed to convince voters that the party can conduct business responsibly in America’s highest legislative body. Tea Party aspirant Christine O’Donnell was wiped out in Delaware, and in California, where the result should have been close, Democrat Barbara Boxer won handily over Carly Fiorina.
When the next Senate convenes in January, the Tea Party representation will consist of a small number of conservatives who are committed to change, but have no mandate from the people to use Senate procedural rules to force the government into gridlock. Voters indicated clearly that they want a Senate that steps back from the message of “no compromise” and works to get things done.
In short, the electorate did not trust the Tea Party to govern wisely in the chamber characterized as the most deliberative legislative body in the world.
In the British electoral procedure every year voters get a chance to protest against the national government by choosing politicians for offices at the local and European parliament level. Traditionally, the party in power suffers losses, with huge increases in support for fringe parties like the Greens and the British National Party. But when it comes to a general election, those groups suffer as voters return to casting their ballot for the established parties.
This is the sense I am getting of what happened in the US mid-terms. Conservatives won heavily and impressively in the House of Representatives and in the state legislatures. These were the biggest gains in the lower house of Congress since 1948, and the Republicans won control of some state legislatures for the first time a century.
The importance of those gains should not be downplayed. When the redistricting process begins next year, Republicans have significant influence in 12 of the 18 states that will be reapportioned. And in the House of Representatives, the Tea Party caucus will have the mandate to challenge the big government mentality at every opportunity.
However, the Tea Party failed to convince voters they were anything more than a protest movement at the highest level. And if that opinion persists, the party is finished when it comes to playing a major role in the 2012 elections, especially in the contest to determine the next President of the United States.
The electorate clearly showed the limits of their support for the Tea Party, in an economic climate when everything was in their favor. That ceiling will only lower over the next two years as the reality of wielding power in the House tarnishes their anti-establishment core appeal. We have had three elections now in a row where there has been a wave of protest votes against Washington; in two years, that protest may be one of rejection of a record of “no compromise.”
So can the Tea Party avoid rise and fall? The St. Louis Tea Party is an excellent example of a grassroots citizens’ movement committed to principled change. Whether or not you agree with their politics or not, in St. Louis the Tea Party has conducted itself with the civility that is a credit to American democracy. But despite Tea Party gains within the Missouri, I get the feeling activists there know that they have reached their limit as an agent of change in American politics. Bill Hennessy, a co-founder of the St. Louis tea party, wrote on Tuesday:
I wish I’d done a lot more. I was completely unprepared for the amount of time a campaign can consume. I was also surprised by the difficulty of getting people to take long-term action. The September 12 Tea Party in St. Louis, I believe, wore out much of the base. For two weeks before the event, our most vibrant and committed folks worked to the wee hours. The weather was brutal. We were opening our victory headquarters at the same time. And there were behind-the-scenes problems that consumed massive time, energy, and emotions from the small brain trust that steers strategy. I’m not hedging—just admitting there are limits to what a grassroots organization of mostly newcomers can do.
In some ways, this has been a disastrous election for the conservative cause and a huge opportunity for President Obama to secure a second term. An invariable part of human nature is that we define ourselves by what we are not. In 2012, Democrats in two years time will point to the frustrations caused for moderates –-- Republican, Democrat, and Independent --- by an obstructionist Congress and say "This we are not.”
Because make no mistake, the new Tea Party members of Congress will come to Washington to pursue their agenda. Tea Party Patriots released a statement on Wednesday:
We have no intention of letting up now. On the weekend of November 12 – 14, local coordinators from around the country will meet with the incoming Congressional freshmen for an orientation. We will have legislative experts who will guide the freshmen on how to first defund and ultimately repeal government controlled health care. We will have economic experts to help them understand the things they will need to do to reduce the federal deficit and restore fiscal sanity to the country. We will have experts who can provide guidance on how to restore Constitutional governance to the country. We will help them to bond together to restore the Constitution in the upcoming legislative session.
But, without the mandate that the Tea Party needed in the Senate, this “no compromise” appeal has been defanged. The people don’t want it, however the results were spun. House gains were a protest at the economic mess and a call for limited change, not the ideological revolution the Tea Party insisted upon.
In a telling interview on Wednesday morning, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a clever politician however much you may dislike him, immediately asked that Republicans come to Washington and compromise to find a solution to the nation’s problems. President Obama gave that message an even higher profile in his press conference later in the day.
The Presidential campaign for 2012 began yesterday, and these appeals was only the first in what will become a constant refrain for the next two years: "We tried to compromise to break the gridlock in Congress and failed. And whose fault was that?"