WEIGH YOUR DAILY DECISIONS after watching John Browne’s short video briefing on the most important current issues.

John uses his 40 years of experience on Wall Street,  in London, including the Euro markets and as a former Member of Parliament to bring you informed opinion in a 3 to 5 minute video.

Current Message

VICTORY BY REJECTION

Sunday, January 31, 2010

On January 19, 2010, Republican U.S. Senatorial candidate Scott Brown delivered a shocking blow to the Massachusetts Democratic Kennedy stronghold in what is described as massive political rejection. It could represent the first shots in a revolution in American and even democratic politics heard around the world. In Lexington, on April 19, 1775, the antecedents of some of these very Massachusetts citizens fired the first shots of a revolution against an arrogant and abusive English government that heralded the American Revolution—a political earthquake that reverberated around the world.

In 1773, the English government imposed a deceitful import tax on tea to help recoup the cost of victory in the French and Indian War. The British colonists were not fooled and at the ‘Boston Tea Party’ destroyed three shiploads of tea rather than pay the abusive tax. Over two centuries later, many believe that Scott Brown rode to his stunning victory on the back of the current Tea Party Movement—a popular reaction opposing big government’s arrogant and abusive treatment of ordinary Americans by their government.

Commentators quickly attributed Brown’s victory to deep disapproval of President Obama’s Health Plan and that it may herald a major support switch to Republican candidates at the coming mid-term elections. Apparently, it has caused near panic among Congressional Democrats. The Health Plan has been shattered. In a drive to find scapegoats, banks have been threatened with massive, knee-jerk regulations. Support for Fed Chairman Bernanke has eroded, threatening his re-nomination.

Meanwhile, Republicans are exhilarated by the prospects of landslide electoral victories. However, this confidence may be premature, ignoring certain key factors.

First, this was a ‘special’ election. Democrats and even Independent Democrats had the rare chance of expressing frustration, anger and disapproval of Obama’s strategy without threatening their President or their party’s Congressional majority. It was like a schoolboy being presented with an opportunity, under cover of darkness, to kick an unpopular master in the backside and get away unrecognized.

Second, both Republicans and Democrats should ask themselves whether the Massachusetts upset arose from a general disapproval of the Democratic ideal or from factors possibly even more powerful.

A prestigious poll undertaken by Harvard, The Washington Post and the H. J. Kaiser Foundation has determined that there was significant voter anger against Democrats in Washington with some two thirds of voters in the special election feeling that America has been taken seriously off track.

While many Democrats and Independent Democrats are disillusioned or even angry, Brown captured only three quarters of the vote achieved by Obama in 1999. Furthermore, seventy-five percent of Democrats interviewed felt that Brown should work with Democrats to improve their policies with Republican input, especially on health care.

In short, it appears that the majority of voters who crossed over did so to send a message to their own party bosses, not because they liked the Republicans.

Third, Brown is a Republican with considerable local legislative experience. He was elected as the representative of many who want him to work with Democrats. When he takes his seat in Congress, he will feel very powerful pressures seeking to make him become a delegate of the Republican Party. Very few, of those ‘groomed’ by the Party, survive politically by resisting the Party.

Fourth, Brown eclipsed his opposition largely with the support, especially on the Internet, of the Tea Party Movement—a group which believes passionately and energetically in small government, lower taxes and enhanced individual freedoms. But the Republican Party has shown clearly that, since President Reagan, it has rejoined the Democrat party as a party of big government, high taxes and diminishing individual freedom. There is a risk of serious voter disillusion unless Brown proves to be an astute statesman—in short, an exceptional man.

Being popular, the Tea Party is potentially extremely powerful. But who will control it? Will it be Republicans, Libertarians, or people more representative of ordinary voters’ deep-seated wishes to be left alone with less government and less taxation? Already, the Republicans have moved in. But the rift remains; will Republicans understand the underlying message that most Americans want small government. If so, Brown’s Massachusetts’s victory could have both national and worldwide implications.