Since the Tea Party movement burst onto the national scene in 2009 in response to the passing of the economic stimulus package, it has evolved into a political force expected to play a major role in the 2010 mid-term elections. Recent estimates have as many as 33 Tea Party-backed candidates involved in tossup races or running in House districts that were solidly or leaning Republican, and eight standing a good or better chance of winning Senate seats.

Despite the existence of numerous Tea Party groups with varying principles, the most commonly held tenets appear to be lower taxes, smaller government and a strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution. The 18 percent of Americans who identify themselves as Tea Party supporters tend to be Republican, white, male, married and older than 45, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll released in April 2010.

Three UVM faculty members from political science, economics and sociology, and a Tea Party candidate running for the U.S. House from Vermont offer their perspective on the insurgent conservative movement.

The economics behind the movement

The single most galvanizing issue among Tea Party members is the growing federal deficit. Art Woolf, associate professor of economics, says that because the Tea Party is more of a "loose, decentralized confederation" than a standard political party with a national platform, it's difficult to generalize about their economic policies. There are two economic issues, however, that Woolf says they seem to agree on.

"The first is a concern over the rapid rise of the federal government's power and spending, reflected by the health care reform bill, the auto and bank bailouts, and the combined $1.5 trillion in TARP and stimulus spending during the Bush and Obama administrations," says Woolf. "Second, and related to the first, is the rapid increase, now and in the future, of the federal debt due to a combination of these policies, the budgetary impacts of entitlement programs, and what they see as failed Republican budget policies as well as failed Democratic policies."

Put those together, says Woolf, and the Republican House majority is likely to face a "significant amount of pressure to reverse these policies or at least ameliorate some of their impact." Woolf predicts that this will translate into a slowdown, but not a reversal, of the health care overhaul bill, but more importantly, it will push the House leadership to slow or stop the growth in the federal debt.

"In the short run, this means it is extremely unlikely that any new stimulus bill will be enacted," he says. "The Tea Partiers will have to realize that to reverse the debt growth they will be forced to confront the fiscal problems of Social Security and Medicare. Fighting earmarks and ending 'wasteful' government programs won't solve the problems they are trying to solve."

Woolf sees the net effect of the Tea Party influence within the context of a divided government, as three-fold. "First, future U.S. fiscal policy is likely to be closer to what England and Germany are doing today -- focusing on reducing deficits and debt growth -- than to the expansionary U.S. policies of the past 36 months," says Woolf. "Second, the Congress, or at least the House, will be more likely to tackle entitlement reform than it has been. Third, should another financial crisis arise -- due to foreclosures, sovereign debt crises, state fiscal or pension problems, or a European financial crisis -- it's not likely that the federal government will have the votes to come to the rescue of any of the affected parties, or of any financial firms caught in the blow-by."

Deaniacs and Tea Partiers

Tom Streeter, professor of sociology and co-author of Mousepads, Shoe Leather, and Hope: Lessons from the Howard Dean Campaign for the Future of Internet Politics, sees a number of similarities between the Tea Party movement and the Howard Dean campaign, despite representing very different ideals. Both movements, he says, had a strong desire to "take back America" and considered themselves disenfranchised political outsiders.

"The Tea Party folks, while adhering to radically different politics, share with the Deaniacs a sense of being ignored by the powers-that-be, and an enthusiasm and energy in the feeling that they are striking back, and finally making themselves heard," says Streeter. "They are people who, for a variety of reasons, feel deeply excluded from politics and power, and they feel deeply energized by the insurgent character of the movement."

Streeter says many people have made the mistake of thinking the success of the Dean campaign was due primarily to its use of the internet, when in fact the main tactic of the Dean campaign was to "reach out to, embrace, and empower people normally ignored by the political system." In 2003, he says, the internet happened to be an effective means to do that. "Part of what made it effective was the failure of the mainstream news media, so there was a large chunk of the U.S. population who saw in the media, not truth, but an abandonment of the sense of truth, and who had been watching helplessly while the Democratic party leadership seemed to believe the media rather than the people who voted for them. The Dean campaign gave them an entirely new way to connect to politics."

Whether conscious of it or not, Streeter says Tea Party candidates use Dean campaign tactics to raise money and generate enthusiasm. He points to a seemingly disastrous appearance by Dean on "Meet the Press" in the summer of 2003, prompting beltway insiders to declare Dean all but finished. The Dean campaign set a new standard by asking its email lists to prove the insiders wrong, resulting in record-breaking fundraising efforts. Tea Party Candidate Christine O'Donnell of Delaware has used the tactic in her U.S. Senate race by spurring Tea Partiers to send money every time Democrats and the media mock her for her background and statements.

"I'm quite troubled by the Tea Party's principles, because I think they are fundamentally wrong about a number of things," says Streeter. "But I also think dismissing them as simply nuts or as puppets of rich masterminds is too simple."

Not all protest movements are created equal

Alec Ewald, assistant professor of political science, sees three primary differences between the Tea Party and past liberal protest movements. For starters, the Tea Party is well funded and aligned with some of America's wealthiest individuals and corporations, despite starting as a grassroots movement. Secondly, it has the full support of a major party and is aligned with a number of Republican candidates. Thirdly, unlike other past movements, the Tea Party has the full endorsement of a large faction of the mainstream media including Fox News, the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal, The Weekly Standard, and a host of talk radio shows that have emerged relatively recently, says Ewald.

Although these differences suggest that the Tea Party might have more staying power than other non-mainstream movements, Ewald says it's unlikely that the result will be any significant changes to federal public policy. The reason for that, according to Ewald, is that the Tea Party's domestic policy agenda includes the abolition of the minimum wage, Medicare, social security, and the direct election of senators -- reforms that are impossible to imagine in American politics today.

"There's every chance that Republicans will try to reduce the size of some of these programs, but there's no chance they will be abolished," says Ewald. "The real question is whether Republicans running the House will play ball with Obama to pass basic legislation that he will sign. If not, a government shutdown similar to 1994 isn't out of the question."

Ewald, who credits the Tea Party with setting the national agenda and shaping public opinion, has a few predictions following the mid-term elections. "I think the Tea Parry will eventually be viewed as a group of conservatively engaged Republicans. It's hard to see it as truly distinct from, and hostile to, the Republican Party. If there's a Republican controlled House I also think you can expect to see a lot of investigations into the Obama administration."

Running a Tea Party campaign in liberal Vermont

Paul Beaudry of Swanton may face the toughest odds of any of the of nation's Tea Party candidates in his bid to unseat Peter Welch, Vermont's lone Congressman in the U.S. House of Representatives. He's running in one of the most liberal states in America on a platform that emphasizes major spending cuts, tax cuts, property rights, a strict adherence to the Constitution, gun rights and opposition to abortion.

Despite the odds, Beaudry, who trails Welch by more than 30 points in most polls, is encouraged by a recent Rasmussen poll with 40 percent of its 500 respondents not giving an answer. "A lot of people have yet to make a decision," he says. "If just half of them vote for me then it's going to be very close. There are a lot more Tea Party supporters in Vermont than the media portrays."

The former radio talk show host says the Tea Party is incorrectly portrayed by the media as hateful and racist when in fact it believes strongly in the diversity of America. "It's unfortunate that we've been misrepresented in the media," says Beaudry, who retired in 2000 from the military after 21 years of service. "It tells me that they don't have the facts and just don't know how to counter the Tea Party movement."

Beaudry says Tea Party groups like the Green Mountain Patriots of Chittenden County are sprouting up across the state in cities and towns including Barre, Springfield, Montpelier, Rutland and in the northwest part of the state. The original Vermont Tea Party event, held in Vermont on tax day in Montpelier, drew more than 500 people and is indicative of the kind of enthusiasm and turnout these events generate, he says. "It was amazing because the rally was to protest any tax increases, and they went ahead and completely ignored the majority and raised taxes anyway. I see the movement as only getting bigger over time."