R ecent news of FreedomWorks shutting its doors has prompted several observers, including at National Review, to declare the Tea Party “dead.” These voices are wrong. The Tea Party movement has, of course, always been larger than any one organization and even any one ideology — like “libertarian” — or one moniker, like “Tea Party” itself. The movement is simply in the process of evolving from a cause born of the issues of 2008 and 2009 into one focused on the challenges of today.
The idea that the Republican grassroots has abandoned the limited-government and free-enterprise principles at the heart of the movement — a popular belief among wannabe populists who seek to grow government and people who rarely, if ever, leave the Washington Beltway to spend time with actual grassroots activists — is nonsense.
Republican voters, even highly engaged Tea Party activists, are not ideologues — libertarian or otherwise. They are everyday Americans who generally believe in the country’s Founding principles and have, at times, been seriously concerned about its direction. More often than not, they’ve correctly diagnosed that the source of the problem is the federal government in Washington, and specifically politicians — including some Republicans who call themselves conservatives — who seek to make the federal government larger, costlier, and more intrusive. Nothing about that sentiment has changed.
One need only look at the reaction to the $6 trillion in additional spending from Bidenomics and the inflation crisis it has wrought to see that reckless federal spending still animates Republican voters. As do Biden’s crony giveaways to the green-energy industry, which hearken back to Solyndra and the bank bailouts. And while health care is not dominating headlines, voters — especially Republicans — continue to rightfully fear a government takeover and the associated costs.
But two key factors have changed. First, the scope of issues that potentially represent serious threats to our way of life has expanded since 2009. That Republicans are worried about an inflation crisis created by overspending at the same time they are enraged about a porous southern border that increases drug trafficking and myriad other problems — or an unaccountable administrative state that uses regulation to ram unpopular social-progressive ideologies, which Congress has rejected, down Americans’ throats — does not indicate the death of the Tea Party. Rather, it indicates an expanded application of the principle that the federal government should do a small number of things properly instead of trying to be all things for all people.
Second, elements of other key institutions of society are more proactively working with the government to promulgate these threats today than they did in 2009. Major corporations that receive billions in taxpayer subsidies and carveouts may not be able to employ the same threat of government force when they engage in progressive activism that undermines basic common-sense values and is wholly unrelated to their core business. But those efforts can feel just as ubiquitous and problematic. Similarly, much of higher education, which also receives billions from taxpayers and has long been a breeding ground for radical progressivism, seems more intent than ever on aggressively combatting the nation’s foundational principles.
Skeptics will point out that many Republican voters seem all too comfortable with employing government power to address these or other issues or turn a blind eye when Republican politicians support policies that they would oppose from Democrats, especially in the case of former president Donald Trump. These points are not unfounded, and no one should be surprised that highly engaged voters have partisan tendencies. But issues where Trump or other Republicans split from historic Tea Party limited-government orthodoxy are the exception, not the rule. Whereas his most notable successes — tax cuts, deregulation, and originalist Supreme Court justices — fit firmly in line with the movement.
Moreover, to declare the Tea Party dead because some politicians rhetorically or stylistically seek to strike a populist tone is wrong. That someone might “sound like” they are from one era or another has no bearing on the policies they support. The vast majority of Republicans elected to federal or statewide office still largely support Tea Party ideals — a sign of the movement’s success. One need look no further than the highest office in the country currently held by a Republican. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.), who also happens to be the most popular national Republican official in the country, is very clearly cut from Tea Party cloth based on the policies he supports and his vision of what it means to be a conservative. The fact that he was elected in 2016 instead of 2020 and sounds like a polite constitutional attorney instead of a bombastic populist does not change that.
That said, the fact that some Republicans do support overspending and trade protectionism — stances they share with President Biden and the Democrats — underscores an important lesson for the movement’s future: It is woefully insufficient for a cause to exist solely online or over the airwaves.
Genuine, successful grassroots movements take hard, sustained, localized work on the ground day after day and year after year, in election cycles and out of them. They do so not only to build and grow but also so that when a threat to their values appears — from either side — their leaders have built the necessary trust with activists to help guide them in the right direction and show how timeless principles can solve the problems voters are concerned about most at that moment. Otherwise, those activists may only hear proposed solutions that necessitate abandoning those principles.
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) has excelled at exactly that for 20 years: building and growing a permanent grassroots infrastructure that is now active in all 50 states with hundreds of employees in the field and millions of volunteer activists who convene regularly, year-round, to learn, recruit, and educate in their community. This month, AFP launched a nationwide bus tour focused on Bidenomics to hold the president and those who voted for his failed agenda accountable. Like the Tea Party tours of the previous era, the 500-plus stops on this tour will attract thousands of Americans who believe in the message. Similarly, more than a thousand activists passionate about limited government will gather in Atlanta again in August for the Erick Erickson Gathering to hear from more than a dozen lawmakers, the vast majority of whom are products of the Tea Party. Both of these will be physical manifestations of the evidence that the movement that came of age a decade and a half ago is far from over.
No one wishes the Tea Party dead more than those who wish death on its limited-government ideals. Their ranks include the mainstream media, their progressive allies in government, and a few faux-populist Republicans who have misread the party’s base and want the party to embrace big government. But a movement that started to fight back against big government can also fight for a secure border and traditional values at the same time, and that’s what the Tea Party has become. There are undoubtedly pain points and lessons that come with change. The Right is experiencing many of them today while grappling with important questions, but — much to the chagrin of many in Washington — reports of the Tea Party’s death have been greatly exaggerated.
Erick Erickson is a nationally syndicated conservative talk radio host and a member of the Americans for Prosperity Advisory Council. Akash Chougule is Vice President of Americans for Prosperity.