This article was downloaded by: [Indiana University Libraries]On: 25 September 2014, At: 10:46Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Politics, Religion & IdeologyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ftmp21

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again:A Comparative Textual Analysis of theTea Party Movement's Contract fromAmerica and the Republican PartyPlatformLandon Schnabelaa Indiana University, USAPublished online: 22 Sep 2014.

To cite this article: Landon Schnabel (2014): When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again: A ComparativeTextual Analysis of the Tea Party Movement's Contract from America and the Republican PartyPlatform, Politics, Religion & Ideology, DOI: 10.1080/21567689.2014.959503

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2014.959503

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again: A ComparativeTextual Analysis of the Tea Party Movement’s Contract fromAmerica and the Republican Party Platform

LANDON SCHNABEL∗

Indiana University, USA

ABSTRACT Successful social movements gain an inside voice and reshape the larger systemfrom within. Knowing the extent to which the Tea Party movement has gained a voicewithin the Republican Party is vital to understanding the current state of party politics inAmerica. This study analyzes the presence of the goals contained within the Tea Party move-ment’s Contract from America in the Republican platform, finding that each plank of the con-tract was represented in the 2012 Republican national platform. Increased emphasis on theconstitution and fiscal responsibility did not come at the expense of the inclusion of social con-servatism or religion. Placing fiscal conservatism within a context of morality and responsibilityto God, the 2012 platform reveals a move toward the fusionism popularized by Reagan. Theincorporation of Contract from America goals indicates assimilation of Tea Party ideologywithin the GOP, potentially precipitating the movement’s decline. By adopting Tea Party move-ment compatible ideology, the Republican Party shifted further right, possibly alienating mod-erate voters in the 2012 election.

The influence of fringe ideologies on American politics has been and continues to be animportant topic worthy of further investigation.1 This project builds upon and extendsmy previous research on the Christian Coalition and Republican Party,2 considering the

∗Email: lpschnab@indiana.edu1Kathleen M. Blee, ‘Does Gender Matter in the United States Far-Right?’, Politics, Religion & Ideology, 13:2 (2012),pp. 253–265. This is particularly the case in light of the internet and other forms of mass media now being availableto further disseminate fringe ideas into the mainstream. See Andrew Selepak and John Sutherland, ‘The Ku KluxKlan, Conservative Politics and Religion: Taking Extremism to the Political Mainstream’, Politics, Religion & Ideol-ogy, 13:1 (2012), pp. 75–98.2Landon Schnabel, ‘When Fringe GoesMainstream: A Sociohistorical Content Analysis of the Christian Coalition’sContract with the American Family and the Republican Party Platform’, Politics, Religion & Ideology, 14:1 (2013),pp. 94–113. In contrast to the Christian Coalition – a movement organization – the Tea Party movement is morespecifically focused on economic issues, more loosely organized, and involves a more disparate support baseincluding both conservative Christians and libertarians. Another important difference for the present case is thenew context for political activity. New communication technologies led to a rapid rise of the Tea Party movement.The internet was used to disseminate ideas, connect activists, and even develop a semi-democratic set of movementgoals. Whereas the 10 goals of the Christian Coalition’s Contract with the American Family were a completely top-down agenda, Tea Party supporters were able to provide input and vote on what would be the 10 planks of theirContract from America.

Politics, Religion & Ideology, 2014http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2014.959503

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

extent to which the Republican Party platform incorporated the 10 points from the TeaParty movement’s Contract from America. Incorporation would indicate that the main-stream Republican Party agenda has institutionalized Tea Party movement ideology.This project uses agenda-setting documents, namely the Republican Party platform and

the Tea Party movement’s Contract from America, as the best available proxies for actualgroup goals. I recognize that these are signaling rather than governing documents anddo not make any causal arguments based upon them. I do, however, suggest that if therewere significant changes between the Republican 2008 and 2012 documents, and if thesechanges were sufficiently similar to the intervening 2009 Tea Party movement’s Contractfrom America, then this would signal that the Republican Party and Tea Party movementhave come to largely overlap one other. If the Republican Party has adopted Tea Partymovement ideology, then Tea Partiers can put their support behind a mainstream partyand be less motivated to form alternative political structures or support third-party candi-dates.3 Finding that Tea Party movement ideas have been incorporated, this article arguesthat – although there are surely other factors involved in this and any movement dissipation– this incorporation of the Tea Party ideology by the Republican Party may have contrib-uted to the movement’s decline.

The Rise and Fall of Oppositional Movements

Although organizational rifts, lack of political opportunity to mobilize, failure to mobilizeresources, state repression, and co-optation can be disastrous for social movements, insur-gent oppositional movements rise and fall based upon their ability to continually mobilize asupport base.4 Rapid mobilization occurs when autobiography, broader moral narratives,and technology converge.5

Social movements can find it hard to garner initial support and gain traction. It is easier,however, when people are primed for oppositional mobilization by personal experiences,moral narratives, and the feeling that their perspective is underrepresented.6 Onceformed, oppositional groups may seek only to make themselves heard from outside themainstream, but are more effective when they are able to infiltrate the system and gainan inside voice.7

Social movements do not continue indefinitely; they must eventually reshape the systemto make a lasting impact. Engagement within partisan politics enables an oppositionalmovement to capitalize on the porous nature of party organizations to leverage their influ-ence at all levels of the political system.8 Success in this, however, can lead to

3For prior work making a similar argument, see ibid.4Ibid.5Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism (New York:Oxford University Press, 2012).6Ibid.; Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.7Marshall Ganz, ‘“Left Behind”: Social Movements, Parties, and the Politics of Reform’ in Elisabeth Clemens andDebra Minkoff (eds) Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association (Montreal: P.Q., 2006); MichaelT. Heaney and Fabio Rojas, ‘Partisans, Nonpartisans, and the Antiwar Movement in the United States’, AmericanPolitics Research, 35:4 (2007), pp. 431–464.8S. Moscovici, G. Mugny, and E. Avermaet, Perspectives on Minority Influence (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1985); Elisabeth Stephanie Clemens and Doug Guthrie, Politics and Partnerships: The Role of VoluntaryAssociations in America’s Political Past and Present, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2010); JuliaAdams, Elisabeth Stephanie Clemens, and Ann Shola Orloff, Remaking Modernity: Politics, History, and Sociology(Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005); Elisabeth Stephanie Clemens, The People’s Lobby: OrganizationalInnovation and the Rise of Interest Group Politics in the United States, 1890–1925 (Chicago, IL: University ofChicago Press, 1997); Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Rethinking Social Movements: Structure, Meaning, and

2 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

demobilization. Heaney and Rojas showed that shifts in ‘perceived threats by activists, par-tisan identification, and coalition brokerage’ account for demobilization of contentiousmovements when candidates of the party more closely aligned with the movement areelected.9 This is particularly true if that party has brought key movement ideas under itsideological umbrella.10 My past research has similarly argued that when current eventsshift and the immediacy of perceived threat lessens, the initial fervor that motivatedpeople to invest time and resources in a movement declines.11

Previous examples of success and subsequent decline are available at both ends of thepolitical spectrum. On the Right, the Christian Coalition declined shortly after contributingto the election of a born-again Christian on a platform that incorporated the primaryagenda items from their Contract with the American Family.12 Likewise, on the Left, thevitality of the American anti-war movement declined following the election of BarackObama.13

The Conservative Legitimating Myth

Successful groups seek to bring about change by making claims, mobilizing participation,and developing leaders in connection with a broader narrative.14 While the Tea Party’sexplicit agenda was primarily economic in nature, many Tea Partiers saw the movementas about more than the economy.15 The lackluster economy was contextualized within abroader narrative of decline and the need for restoration consistent with the conservativelegitimating myth – which has also motivated the Christian Right.16

The liberal legitimating myth has been one of human progress characterized by move-ment toward ideals of equality and justice, and American cooperative participation withthe global community of nations. In contrast, the conservative legitimating myth hasbeen one of decline and the need for restoration. It is based upon a particular notion ofAmerican exceptionalism – which is the idea that the US is a decidedly Christian nation

Emotion (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2004); Jeff Goodwin and James M. Jasper, Contention inContext: Political Opportunities and the Emergence of Protest (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2011); JamesM. Jasper,Getting YourWay: Strategic Dilemmas in the Real World (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2006);Ganz, ‘“Left Behind”: Social Movements, Parties, and the Politics of Reform’; Schnabel, ‘When Fringe GoesMainstream’.9Michael T. Heaney and Fabio Rojas, ‘The Partisan Dynamics of Contention: Demobilization of the AntiwarMovement in the United States, 2007–2009’, Mobilization, 16:1 (2011), pp. 45–64. Also see Michael T. Heaneyand Fabio Rojas, Party in the Street: The Antiwar Movement and the Democratic Party after 9/11 (New York: Cam-bridge University Press, Forthcoming); Michael T. Heaney and Fabio Rojas, ‘Hybrid Activism: Social MovementMobilization in a Multimovement Environment’, American Journal of Sociology, 119:4 (2014), pp. 1–57; MichaelT. Heaney and Fabio Rojas, ‘Partisans, Nonpartisans, and the Antiwar Movement in the United States’.10Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’; Heaney and Rojas, ‘The Partisan Dynamics of Contention’.11Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.12Ibid.13Heaney and Rojas, ‘The Partisan Dynamics of Contention’, 45.14Marshall Ganz, ‘Leading Change: Leadership, Organization, and Social Movements’ in ed. Nitin Nohria andRakesh Khurana (eds) Handbook of Leadership Theory and Practice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business SchoolPress, 2010); Ganz, ‘“Left Behind”: Social Movements, Parties, and the Politics of Reform’.15Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.16Angelia R. Wilson and Cynthia Burack, ‘“Where Liberty Reigns and God Is Supreme”: The Christian Right andthe Tea Party Movement’, New Political Science, 34:2 (2012), pp. 172–190; Lawrence Rosenthal and ChristineTrost, Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2012); ChipBerlet, ‘Christian Identity: The Apocalyptic Style, Political Religion, Palingenesis and Neo-Fascism’, TotalitarianMovements and Political Religions, 5:3 (2004), pp. 469–506; Martin Durham, ‘Christian Identity and the Politicsof Religion’, Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, 9:1 (2008), pp. 79–91.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

with a special purpose from God.17 Some conservatives have felt that America was initiallyblessed, but disregarded its ‘calling’ and has since fallen into cultural and economicdecline.18 They believe that if America were to legislate and enact morality, God wouldbless America and decline would be reversed.19

While some Tea Partiers were religiously unaffiliated libertarians who think the govern-ment should avoid involvement in such issues as abortion and marriage – similar to theirposter child, libertarian author Ayn Rand – Tea Party participants have been disproportion-ally older, white conservative Protestants who have conceptualized the recession as a sign ofthe rending of the American moral fabric.20 Therefore, while the Tea Party is framed pri-marily as an economic movement, it cannot be understood separately from the social andreligious values of its constituency.21

The Tea Party Movement

In the past, it could take years for a movement to gain momentum, but new media nowfacilitates rapid mobilization.22 Past American groups, such as the Christian Coalition,were more centralized and took longer to form, act, peak, and decline than the TeaParty movement.23 The Tea Party movement began in 2009 and by 2010 had made a sub-stantial impact on the midterm election.24 While previously well-known individuals such asRalph Reed became involved in the Tea Party movement, numerous previously little-known leaders such as Jenny Beth Martin emerged.25

Relatively unknown as of 2009, Jenny Beth Martin was a computer programmer turnedhomemaker. However, after her spouse’s small business failed, both of the Martins begancleaning homes for a living. Primed by personal experience during the recession, Martinwas one of about 20 people involved in the original conference call convened via Twitterfollowing Rick Santelli’s rant.26 With passionate concern for the economy, she began orga-nizing and eventually co-founded the Tea Party Patriots, considered to be one of the top

17Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’; Robert Wuthnow, The Restructuring of American Religion (Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988); Durham, ‘Christian Identity and the Politics of Religion’.18For example, Ralph Reed, Awakening: How America Can Turn from Economic and Moral Destruction Back toGreatness (Brentwood, TN: Worthy Publishing, 2014).19Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’; Durham, ‘Christian Identity and the Politics of Religion’.20Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.21Rosenthal and Trost, Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party; Robert P. Jones, Daniel Cox, and JuhemNavarro-Rivera, The 2013 American Values Survey: In Search of Libertarians in America (Washington, DC:Public Religion Research Institute, 2013); Kevin Arceneaux and Stephen P Nicholson, ‘Who Wants to Have aTea Party? The Who, What, and Why of the Tea Party Movement’, PS: Political Science & Politics, 45:4 (2012),pp. 700–710.22Avishay Livne et al., ‘The Party Is over Here: Structure and Content in the 2010 Election’ (Paper presented at theProceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 2011); Essam Mansour,‘The Role of Social Networking Sites (SNSs) in the January 25th Revolution in Egypt’, Library Review, 61:2(2012), pp. 128–159.23Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.24Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Christopher F. Karpowitzet al., ‘Tea Time in America? The Impact of the Tea Party Movement on the 2010 Midterm Elections’, PS: PoliticalScience & Politics, 44:2 (2011), pp. 303–309.25Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.26Santelli – a commentator for CNBC and former vice-president of a financial firm – went on an on-air rantagainst Obama and a bailout plan meant to help homeowners refinance and avoid foreclosure during the peakof the financial crisis. In the video, broadcast from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Santelli proposedstarting a ‘Chicago Tea Party’. The video soon went viral and is credited by some as the start of the Tea Partymovement.

4 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Tea Party movement organizations. She burst onto the national, and even global, scene. In2010, Martin was named one of Time’s 100 most influential world leaders.27 Were it not forpersonal experiences, rooted in larger social and economic phenomena and particularinterpretations of said phenomena, Martin would have been less passionate about hercause and found it harder to mobilize others.28

The Great Recession and the 2008 election results, as well as apocalyptic interpretationsof said events (e.g. Fox News, talk radio, and right-wing websites), provided the perfectstorm of actual and perceived personal financial decline and a narrative of Americandecline.29 People felt threatened by current events and anticipated a future in which theyand their children would be less affluent in a society that would not share their values(or sociodemographic characteristics).30 The Santelli rant provided the catalyst for arapid mobilization of ideologically primed, older, white conservative Protestants.31 Over-whelmingly Republican in their partisan leanings – one study put Tea Party supportersat 89 per cent Republican or Republican leaning32 – this reactionary support base was gal-vanized into action by their shared distrust of a newly elected black president and opposi-tion to his administration’s policies.33

If people feel threatened, they can be mobilized.34 However, if they feel that the threat hasbeen reduced, they tend to demobilize.35 The Tea Party movement’s quick rise is attribu-table to the conservative legitimating myth, actual or perceived waning of income andwealth, social media networking, and widespread news coverage.36 Wildly prominent inthe minds of Americans and at the ballot box in the 2010 midterm election, Tea Partygrass-root activities have dwindled. Pundits on both ends of the political spectrum nowpoint out that the movement is less prominent.37

Both a reduction of perceived threat and incorporation of Tea Party movement ideasinto the Republican agenda could help explain apparent movement decline because main-stream assimilation of dissident groups often precipitate their demobilization.38 If fiscalconservatives felt that a major party sufficiently represented their beliefs, they would feelless need for a dissident movement. Although the successful incorporation of a fringemovement’s ideas into the mainstream can be hard to measure, the formulation of

27David Brody, The Teavangelicals: The Insider Story of How the Evangelicals and the Tea Party Are Taking BackAmerica (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012).28Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.29Karpowitz et al., ‘Tea Time in America?’; Richard Meagher, ‘The “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy”: Media andConservative Networks’, New Political Science, 34:4 (2012), pp. 469–484.30Christopher S. Parker andMatt A. Barreto, Change They Can’t Believe In: The Tea Party and Reactionary Politics inAmerica (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013).31Skocpol andWilliamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Arceneaux and Nicholson,‘Who Wants to Have a Tea Party?’32Arceneaux and Nicholson, ‘Who Wants to Have a Tea Party?’33Parker and Barreto, Change They Can’t Believe In.34Donald K. Gates and Peter Steane, ‘Political Religion – the Influence of Ideological and Identity Orientation’,Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, 10:3–4 (2009), pp. 303–325; Berlet, ‘Christian Identity’.35Sidney G. Tarrow, Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics (New York: Cambridge Uni-versity Press, 2011).36Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Rosenthal and Trost,Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party.37See, for example, Mark Murray, ‘The Tea Party, Four Years Later’, NBC News First Read, 16 April 2013; AndrewO’Reilly, ‘With Tea Party Decline, Immigration Battle Shifts Focus’, Fox News Latino, 20 February 2013; ConorFriedersdorf, ‘The Decline and Fall of the Tea Party’, The Atlantic, 9 January 2013; Dana Milbank, ‘With TeaParty Fading, It’s Business as Usual in Congress’, Post Bulletin, 22 January 2014; Alan Cring, ‘The Decline andFall of the Tea Party’, Examiner, 21 October 2013.38See Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’; Heaney and Rojas, ‘The Partisan Dynamics of Contention’.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

major party platforms represents a political process that oppositional movements aremotivated to control to increase their influence.39

Framing itself as an across-the-board movement, the Tea Party has only been able to gaintraction within the Republican Party.40 Therefore, gaining a voice within said party to enactconservative economic policy changes has been an underlying goal of the Tea Party as anoppositional movement.41 If Tea Party goals have been incorporated into the Republicanmainstream, an inside voice has been gained. This would thus reduce the perceived needfor an external dissent movement, and therefore presage decline.42 Highlighting theimportance of this question, institutionalization of Tea Party ideology would also suggestthat the Republican Party has moved further right, altering its image in an attempt tobring a segment of the population mobilized by an insurgent movement back under itsumbrella.43

The Contract from America

The Tea Party movement cannot be understood solely as a grass-roots explosion or a top-down creation.44 While promoted by established right-wing organizations at the grass-topswith ties to the Republican Party establishment, the Tea Party movement was framed as agrass-roots movement from its beginning.45 The movement has lacked – and desired tolack – a well-defined organizational infrastructure, meaning that there has been nosingle ‘Tea Party’, but only a hard-to-control collection of groups generated by individuallyambitious political entrepreneurs.46 Nevertheless, an agenda-setting document was formedthat provided a 10-point overview of Tea Party ideology, acting as a proxy for the sharedgoals of a diverse movement existing across a continuum from fiscal libertarians tosocial conservatives.47

What became the Tea Party movement’s agenda-setting document was developed fromthe bottom up with elite guidance. Prior to the 15 April 2009 Tax Day Tea Party rallies,attorney Ryan Hecker launched ContractFromAmerica.com where Tea Partiers coulddetermine their game plan. American Tea Party participants and supporters offered sugges-tions and voted on planks for possible inclusion in the Contract from America.48 Thousandsof submissions were made and pared down to a manageable number to vote upon byHecker and Dick Armey, former House Republican Majority Leader, one of the authorsof the 1994 Contract from America, and then chairperson of FreedomWorks. With aname purposefully reminiscent of Gingrich’s Contract with America, the new contractwas the product of more than 450,000 votes. Support for the top 10 agenda itemsranged from 82 per cent for the first item to 54 per cent for the tenth.49

39Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.40Arceneaux and Nicholson, ‘Who Wants to Have a Tea Party?’41Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.42Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.43See ibid.44Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Rosenthal and Trost,Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party.45Jules Boykoff and Eulalie Laschever, ‘The Tea Party Movement, Framing, and the US Media’, Social MovementStudies, 10:4 (2011), pp. 341–366; Ronald P. Formisano, The Tea Party: A Brief History (Baltimore, MD: JohnsHopkins University Press, 2012).46Rosenthal and Trost, Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party.47Karpowitz et al., ‘Tea Time in America?’48Dick Armey and Matt Kibbe, Give Us Liberty: A Tea Party Manifesto (New York: HarperCollins, 2010).49Ibid.; Bernie Becker, ‘A Revised Contract for America, Minus “with” and Newt’, New York Times, 15 April 2010.

6 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Fusionism

The explicit Tea Party agenda – including all 10 Contract from America goals – was econ-omic in nature. Many Tea Partiers, however, saw the movement as about more than just theeconomy, and some even thought that moral renewal was necessary for economic restor-ation. The early fusion of social and fiscal conservatism was articulated and brokered byFrank Meyer and William F. Buckley Jr in the National Review – a publication launchedin 1955 that brought together traditionalism and libertarianism for what would becomethe modern Right50 – synthesized in Meyer’s In Defense of Freedom,51 and later explicitlyadopted by Ronald Reagan.52 Although church attendance and party preference were notstrongly related historically, religion-based partisanship is now an integral part of theAmerican political system with gender, sexuality, and family issues currently alignedwith the two major American parties.53 As the salience of abortion and same-sex relation-ships grew, religious voters came to side increasingly with the Republican Party, whichseems to have had an impact upon the relationship between religiosity, social conservatism,and economic conservatism, giving rise to economic populism.54

Since the Great Recession of 2008, opportunists have fused social and fiscal conservatismby capitalizing on perceived betrayals of small-government principles in the Bush era55 andfear of newly elected Democratic politicians to appeal to a wider base.56 For example, RalphReed, formerly of the Christian Coalition that had focused primarily on social issues,formed the Faith and Freedom Coalition in 2009.57 He used this new coalition to reacha larger base, combining social and fiscal conservatism in a new voter mobilization effortthat – in addition to socially conservative Protestants – has targeted Catholics, libertarians,and members of the middle and upper classes.58 Reed explicitly linked morality and theeconomy in his 2014 book, Awakening: How America Can Turn from Economic andMoral Destruction Back to Greatness, declaring that moral renewal would return Americato greatness and that the economy would improve if Americans would follow the Bible.59

Other opportunists have also seized the chance in the Tea Party movement to propagatefusionism. While there is tension between Christian conservatives and libertariansat the ground level in the Tea Party,60 right-wing elites, and their advocacy groups

50George H. Nash, The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America since 1945 (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books,2006).51Frank S. Meyer, In Defense of Freedom: A Conservative Credo (Chicago: H. Regnery Co., 1962).52Ronald Reagan, ‘Address to the Conservative Political Action Conference’ (1981).53Clem Brooks and Jeff Manza, ‘A Great Divide?’ Sociological Quarterly, 45:3 (2004), pp. 421–450; Schnabel, ‘WhenFringe Goes Mainstream’; Landon Schnabel, Socially Constructing God: Evangelical Discourse on Gender and theDivine (Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute, 2013).54Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us (New York:Simon & Schuster, 2010), pp. 387–388; Thomas Frank, What’s the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Wonthe Heart of America (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2004); Landon Schnabel, ‘The Question of Subjectivityin Three Emerging Feminist Science Studies Frameworks: Feminist Postcolonial Science Studies, New FeministMaterialisms, and Queer Ecologies’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 44:3 (2014), pp. 10–16. ThomasFrank’s argument, which suggests that Republicans can suppress class division by means of cultural issues, hasits critics. For example, Stonecash argues that there is a growing class division in American politics. JeffreyM. Stonecash, ‘Scaring the Democrats: What’s the Matter with Thomas Frank’s Argument?’ The Forum, 3:3 (2005).55Stephen Vertigans, ‘Beyond the Fringe? Radicalisation within the American Far-Right’, Totalitarian Movementsand Political Religions, 8:3–4 (2007), pp. 641–659.56Karpowitz et al., ‘Tea Time in America?’; Parker and Barreto, Change They Can’t Believe In.57Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.58Jo Becker, ‘An Evangelical Is Back from Exile, Lifting Romney’, New York Times, 23 September 2012.59Reed, Awakening.60On past tension, see Ryan Sager, The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians, and the Battle to Control theRepublican Party (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006).

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

(i.e. FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity), think tanks (i.e. the CATO Institute),and news outlets (i.e. Fox News), have seized the opportunity to frame tax cuts for thewealthy and deep budget cuts on such programs as Social Security and Medicare as populistideas.61

The Tea Party movement deftly mobilized both libertarians and social conservatives forthe cause of a morally framed economic restoration. Americans were concerned about per-sonal and national solvency as a result of the recession and deficits reaching back to theBush administration and beyond. Furthermore, some feared Obama and his plan fornational health care.62 Many Americans were primed to get involved and try to ‘restore’America. Countless individuals worked at the ground level for the cause, and the TeaParty movement seemed to be quite successful in the 2010 midterm election in which alarge number candidates who signed on to the Contract from America were elected topublic office.63 But since its apparent success in 2010, what happened to the Tea Party?

Data and Methods

Documents analyzed

In this study, I examine whether Tea Party movement ideas have been incorporated into theRepublican Party platform. I use the Contract from America to represent Tea Party ideology.Although the Tea Party movement is diverse and it may be misleading to speak of themovement in the singular, the Contract from America represents a useful proxy for themovement’s main ideas because of the populist manner of its formulation.64 As discussedearlier, the Contract from America emerged as a quasi-bottom-up agenda-setting document.Tea Party movement supporters were invited to submit potential goals and two Tea Partyleaders – one of which, Dick Armey, has ties to the Republican Party – narrowed the listdown to a reasonable number for a vote. The vote resulted in the top-10 goals on whichthe most Tea Partiers agree. That signatories of the contract become identified as TeaParty candidates further emphasizes that it is the Tea Party’s most central document.I use the Republican national platform to measure whether the Republican Party incor-

porated Tea Party ideas. In the US, party platforms are symbolic – assembling a platform isin many ways a coalition-building exercise – and may have more to do with appealing topotential voters than actual intentions.65 Nevertheless, the national platforms of US partiesprovide the clearest single compilation of party agenda, reflecting the results of a politicalprocess that dissenting groups are motivated to control to increase their influence.66

61Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Darren Dochuk, ‘TeaParty America and the Born-Again Politics of the Populist Right’, New Labor Forum, 21:1 (2012), pp. 14–21.62Karpowitz et al., ‘Tea Time in America?’; Parker and Barreto, Change They Can’t Believe In.63Karpowitz et al., ‘Tea Time in America?’64Ritchie Savage, ‘From Mccarthyism to the Tea Party: Interpreting Anti-Leftist Forms of U.S. Populism in Com-parative Perspective’, New Political Science, 34:4 (2012), pp. 564–584; Sandor Czegledi, ‘Beyond “Teabonics”: TheTea Party and Language Policy’ (Paper presented at the HUSSE10 Conference Proceedings, Debrecen, Hungary,2011).65US parties operate differently than many European parties for which platforms are binding election manifestoes.When platforms operate as binding manifestoes, individual party representatives have little personal power and areelected based upon their position on a party list. In the US, presidential hopefuls sometimes distance themselvesfrom points within party platforms.66Kimberly H. Conger, ‘Party Platforms and Party Coalitions’, Party Politics, 16:5 (2010), pp. 651–668; ClydeWilcox and Carin Robinson, Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics, 4th ed.(Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2011); Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’; Mark J. Rozell, ClydeWilcox, and Michael M. Franz, Interest Groups in American Campaigns: The New Face of Electioneering, 3rd ed.

8 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Analytic method

Textual analysis is a research method used to describe and interpret texts – such as tran-scripts, newspapers, and government documents – focusing on the content, structure,and function of messages within the text.67 Comparative textual analysis examines andcompares multiple texts for similarities and differences in both content and meaning. Com-parative textual analysis and similar methods have been used to analyze constitutions, partyplatforms, and other political texts.68

I conduct a focused comparative textual analysis, coding for the presence of each of the10 Contract from America planks – as well as measures of religion and social conservatism –

in the 2012 Republican national platform in comparison with the 2008 Republican nationalplatform. Religion and social conservatism were included in order to determine whethereconomics may have been emphasized at the expense of the inclusion of religion, orwhether both economics and religion were emphasized, which would indicate increasedfusionism. As measures of social conservatism, I compare counts of mentions of abortionand same-sex relationships. As measures of religion, I compare counts of mentions ofpublic displays of religion (religious symbols or activity on public property), faith-basedorganizations, and God between the 2008 and 2012 platforms.

Limitations, alternatives, and justifications

Influence between movement goals and party platforms can be bi-directional.69 It is poss-ible that particular Tea Party movement goals were existing Republican Party goals thatwere either re-stated or perhaps intensified. Therefore, I also coded the 2008 platformfor the presence of Contract from America planks to determine whether the Tea Party move-ment adopted already existing Republican goals, and to ensure that ideas in the 2012 plat-form were not simply extensions of Republican thought prior to the Tea Party movement.

The political context of 2012 was different from that of 2008. The 2008 GOP70 platformwas drafted in an uncomfortable political context characterized by major grass-roots dis-satisfaction with the Republican’s own two-time president; the 2012 GOP Platform wasdrafted in opposition to a Democratic president. The Republican Party would certainlyhave changed its platform even if the Tea Party movement had not emerged. The influenceof other economically conservative interest groups upon the party platform further com-plicates tracing direct movement impact. Nevertheless, focusing on the 10 planks of theContract from America and whether they were included to a greater degree in the later plat-form addresses this limitation because exactly why changes came about is not this project’sprimary focus. Instead, the analysis is primarily focused on whether Tea Party movementparticipants and sympathizers can now find their ideology contained within a major partyplatform, lessening the felt need to develop dissident political structures or vote for

(New York: Oxford University Press, 2012); Gary King et al., ‘Party Platforms, Mandates, and Government Spend-ing’, American Political Science Review, 87:3 (1993), pp. 744–750.67Norman Fairclough, Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research (London: Routledge, 2003).68Tad Stahnke and Robert Blitt, ‘The Religion-State Relationship and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: AComparative Textual Analysis of the Constitutions of Predominantly Muslim Countries’, Georgetown Journal ofInternational Law, 36 (2005), pp. 947–1078; Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’; John A. Rohr, ‘FrenchConstitutionalism and the Administrative State: A Comparative Textual Study’, Administration & Society, 24:2(1992), pp. 224–258; King et al., ‘Party Platforms, Mandates, and Government Spending’; Richard C. Elling,‘State Party Platforms and State Legislative Performance: A Comparative Analysis’, American Journal of PoliticalScience, 23:2 (1979), pp. 383–405.69Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.70GOP (‘Grand Old Party’) is a commonly used short-hand for the Republican Party.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

third-party candidates.71 Whether it was the Tea Party movement alone or, more likely, acombined effort of similar groups that prompted change does not negate the extent towhich Tea Party goals are represented in the Republican agenda.72

Examining changes within Republican committees and nominations where the Tea Partymovement has achieved gains provides an alternative methodology for considering TeaParty influence in the GOP. However, trying to evaluate fluid changes in a committee –

and multifarious nominations – provides less clarity than analyzing platforms.73 Althoughit is impossible to identify what changes may have come as a direct consequence of TeaParty influence, direct quotation or terminological correspondence are indicators thatthe platform directly incorporated ideas from the contract and are noted if present. Suchdirect terminological and phraseological similarities suggest an increased likelihood thatother changes with ideological similarity, absent linguistic parallel, were also strategicallyadopted from the contract to appeal to Tea Partiers.74 For further justification of the meth-odology, please see my similar article on the Christian Coalition’s Contract with the Amer-ican Family and the Republican Party platform.75

Results

Contract from America planks in the 2012 Republican national platform

For the sake of a systematic analysis, I coded for each Contract from America plank separ-ately in the 2012 outcome platform and in the 2008 reference platform and report thempoint by point. For the sake of brevity, I focus on what is most noteworthy and presentthe findings dynamically. In further service to concision, I do not restate the Contractfrom America goals and ask that the reader refer to Table 1.

Protect the constitutionProtecting the constitution and ensuring that new legislation is deemed constitutional wasthe most popular goal among Tea Party movement supporters. This popularity was recog-nized by the Republican Party. The 2012 platform included a new section – one of a total ofsix – entitled ‘We the People: A Restoration of Constitutional Government’. The consti-tution had figured importantly in the 2008 platform, appearing 31 times. However, thatnumber almost doubled to 60 in the 2012 platform. Within the new section on the consti-tution, the 2012 platform discussed the constitution and the first, second, fourth, fifth,ninth, and tenth amendments in a manner reminiscent of a textual study. Finally, the plat-form saluted the fact that in late 2010 ‘Republican Members of the House of Representa-tives enshrine[ed] in the Rules of the House the requirement that every bill must cite theprovision of the Constitution which permits its introduction.’76

Placing a high value on the constitution was not new in the Tea Party movement or in thecontemporary Republican Party, but the new constitutionalism reminiscent of literalist

71See Conger, ‘Party Platforms and Party Coalitions’.72See Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.73John Clifford Green, Mark J. Rozell, and Clyde Wilcox, The Christian Right in American Politics: Marching to theMillennium (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2003), p. 3; Rozell, Wilcox, and Franz, InterestGroups in American Campaigns.74Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.75Ibid. This article provides further support for the use of interest group agendas and party platforms to considerthe extent to which an oppositional group’s ideology is represented within mainstream politics, employing a com-parable research methodology to consider similar questions.76Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform (Washington, DC: 2012), p. 9.

10 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Table 1. The Contract from America.a

Agenda itemVote% Description

1. Protect the constitution 82 ‘Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the powerto do what the bill does.’

2. Reject cap & trade 72 ‘Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumer prices, and weakenthe nation’s global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures.’

3. Demand a balanced budget 70 ‘Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirdsmajority needed for any tax hike.’

4. Enact fundamental tax reform 65 ‘Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing itwith one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution.’

5. Restore fiscal responsibility & constitutionallylimited government in Washington

63 ‘Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs,assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agenciesand programs better left for the states or local authorities, or ripe for wholesale reform orelimination due to our efforts to restore limited government consistent with the US Constitution’smeaning.’

6. End runaway government spending 57 ‘Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of theinflation rate plus the percentage of population growth.’

7. Defund, repeal, & replace government-run healthcare

56 ‘Defund, repeal and replace the recently passed government-run health care with a system thatactually makes health care and insurance more affordable by enabling a competitive, open, andtransparent free-market health care and health insurance system that isn’t restricted by stateboundaries.’

8. Pass an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy 56 ‘Authorize the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energysources from unstable countries and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energycreation, lowering prices and creating competition and jobs.’

9. Stop the pork 55 ‘Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority topass any earmark.’

10. Stop the tax hikes 53 ‘Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains and death taxes,currently scheduled to begin in 2011.’

Notes: aSupport percentages and quotes taken from the ‘Contract from America’ website: contractfromamerica.org/.

When

FringeGoes

Mainstream

Again

11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

biblical hermeneutics has been driven by a desire to limit government and restore theAmerica of yesteryear.77 Spurred on by signers of the Contract from America, the firstplank was swiftly enacted and continued to be extolled by the Republican Party, figuringprominently in the 2012 GOP national platform. The GOP seemed to recognize that TeaPartiers nearly universally support the constitution, and that nobody can argue with theconstitution. By emphasizing the constitution, the Republican Party is able to bring TeaParty supporters under its umbrella without angering its other constituents.

Reject cap and tradeA peaking political topic, cap and trade is an environmental protection scheme by whichpollution is ‘capped’, or limited. Emission permits are then allocated that allow for a setamount of pollutants. A firm must hold sufficient allowances for the volume of pollutionthey produce, but may trade with other firms in order to get the desired amount. The Con-tract from America called for a rejection of cap and trade, saying it would be costly, raiseunemployment and inflation, and weaken American competitiveness in the globaleconomy, with no impact on global temperatures. Although the phrase cap and tradewas not in the 2008 platform – likely because it has only more recently become apeaking political topic – Republicans state in the 2012 platform that ‘we oppose any andall cap and trade legislation’.78 This was in the context of a defense of coal, which wouldbe less competitive under cap and trade legislation.

Demand a balanced budgetWhile the desire for a balanced budget is not new, it received a different treatment in the 2012platform than in that of 2008. The 2008 platform did proclaim that ‘we favor adoption of theBalanced Budget Amendment to require a balanced federal budget except in times of war’.79

The 2012 platform, however, twice discussed the Balanced Budget Amendment in a mannersuspiciously similar to the Contract from America. The contract advocated to ‘begin the Con-stitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majorityneeded for any tax hikes’.80 In 2008, the Balanced Budget Amendment got one sentence –quoted earlier in the paragraph – but this idea received a lengthier treatment in 2012.The 2008 platform discussed a general super-majority requirement for the House and

Senate, but the 2012 platform called for it solely in the case of proposed tax increases,stating the following twice: ‘We call for a Constitutional amendment requiring a super-majority for any tax increase, with exceptions for only war and national emergencies, andimposing a cap limiting spending to the historical average percentage of GDP so thatfuture Congresses cannot balance the budget by raising taxes.’81 The idea for an amendmentwas not new, but calling for a super-majority – which is a two-thirds majority – on any taxincrease seems to be a direct incorporation of the third Contract from America plank.

Enact fundamental tax reformIt appears that the Contract from America may have adopted its wording to ‘enact funda-mental tax reform’ from the 2008 Republican platform subsection entitled ‘Fundamental

77Formisano, The Tea Party.78Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, p. 16.79Republican National Committee, 2008 National Republican Platform (Washington, DC, 2008), p. 16.80Contract from America, http://www.thecontract.org/.812012 National Republican Platform, 4 and 9. The first instance appears in the first section of the 2012 platform onthe economy, and second in the second section of the platform on constitutional government.

12 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Tax Reform’.82 Although the platform did not explicitly call for the abolishment of theIRS,83 it did declare that the IRS tax code should be replaced. The platform proposed atwo-rate flat tax and stated that ‘any value added tax or national sales tax must be tiedto a simultaneous repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, which established the federalincome tax’.84 The 2012 platform continued in a similar vein, not explicitly stating thatthe IRS should be abolished, but calling for ‘a tax system that is simple, transparent,flatter, and fair’ in contrast to the IRS code.85 Furthermore, the quote listed above aboutrepealing the Sixteenth Amendment was repeated word-for-word.86 The ideas includedin this plank were not new to the 2012 platform, but they were reiterated.

Restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in WashingtonBecause of all that is entailed in the goal to restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionallylimited government in Washington, there is not one place where all the ideas in this plankwere covered in either the 2008 or 2012 platform. Instead, they permeate the documents.The key points here are the audit of federal agencies, testing programs by constitutionality,returning programs to the states, and an overall smaller government in line with the con-stitution. Transparency in government spending was already important in 2008, but the2012 platform called for an audit of the Federal Reserve, an idea championed by Ron Paul:

A free society demands that the sun shine on all elements of government. There-fore, the Republican Party will work to advance substantive legislation that bringstransparency and accountability to the Federal Reserve, the Federal Open MarketCommittee, and the Fed’s dealings with foreign central banks. The first step toincreasing transparency and accountability is through an annual audit of theFederal Reserve’s activities.87

Although the Blue Ribbon taskforce proposed in the contract was not mentioned byeither the 2008 or 2012 platforms, both advocated state empowerment. In the context ofempowering the states, the 2008 platform proposed ‘a National Sunset Commission toreview all federal programs and recommend which of them should be terminated due toredundancy, waste, or intrusion into the American family’.88 The 2012 platform proposed‘a tripartite test for every federal activity. First, is it within the constitutional scope of thefederal government? Second, is it effective and absolutely necessary? And third, is it suffi-ciently important to justify borrowing, especially foreign borrowing, to fund it?’89

The 2008 platform set the stage for the review of federal programs, but the 2012 platformadded the constitutionality test. In this case, it would appear that a Republican idea wasappropriated by the Tea Party, constitutionality was added, and then the modifiedagenda item made it back to the Republican Party in the 2012 platform. This gave the con-stitution a more prominent place than it had in the 2008 platform.

As for the limitation of government in Washington and the return of power to the states,the 2012 platform was unequivocal. After quoting the Tenth Amendment, it discussed how

82Republican National Committee, 2008 National Republican Platform, p. 24.83IRS stands for Internal Revenue Service, the US government agency responsible for tax collection and tax lawenforcement.84Republican National Committee, 2008 National Republican Platform, p. 24.85Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, p. 2.86Ibid., p. 3.87Ibid., p. 4.88Republican National Committee, 2008 National Republican Platform, p. 17.89Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, p. 3.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Republicans would ‘restore the proper balance between the federal government and thegovernments closest to, and most reflective of, the American people’.90 Furthermore, theplatform stated that ‘it isn’t enough to merely downsize government, having a smallerversion of the same failed systems. We must do things in a dramatically different way byreversing the undermining of federalism and the centralizing of power in Washington.’91

End runaway government spendingInterestingly, the phrase ‘runaway spending’ in regard to the budget appeared in the 2008platform,92 but not in the 2012 platform. This is not unexpected, however, because theContract from America did not arise in a vacuum and did not formulate wholly novelideas. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Contract from America should include acatchy pre-existing phrase that aptly expressed Tea Party concerns. The direct wordingitself does not appear in the 2012 platform, but the principles behind it are a readily appar-ent theme as revealed by the discussions of related planks contained herein.

Defund, repeal, and replace government-run health careThe issue of health care, and opposition to a government-run version of it, was pronouncedthroughout the 2008 platform. In 2012, it was discussed less frequently. However, there wasa subsection specifically devoted to defunding, repealing, and replacing government runhealth care. In ‘Repealing Obamacare’, the 2012 platform stated:

Obamacare was never really about healthcare… From its start, it was aboutpower, the expansion of government control over one sixth of our economy,and resulted in an attack on our Constitution, by requiring that US citizens pur-chase health insurance… Republican victories in the November elections willguarantee that it is never implemented. Congressional Republicans are committedto its repeal; and a Republican President, on the first day in office, will use his legit-imate waiver authority under that law to halt its progress and then will sign itsrepeal. Then the American people, through the free market, can advance afford-able and responsible healthcare reform that meets the needs and concerns ofpatients and providers.93

The platform continued on to discuss alternatives that would be more affordable through atransparent free-market system based on individual responsibility.

Pass an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policyWith a subsection entitled ‘Domestic Energy Independence: An “All-of-the-Above” EnergyPolicy’, it is clear that the goal of passing an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy to reduceAmerican dependence on foreign sources made it directly into the 2012 platform. Whilethe 2008 platform discussed the utilization of different forms of energy, the 2012 platformused language reminiscent of the Contract from America to discuss energy. The 2012platform stated that, in order to advance energy independence, ‘Republicans advocate an

90Ibid., p. 11.91Ibid., p. 21.92Republican National Committee, 2008 National Republican Platform, p. 16.93Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, pp. 32–33.

14 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

all-of-the-above diversified approach, taking advantage of all our American God-givenresources.’94

Stop the porkPork – or benefits going to a specific group, often to lobbying organizations or a legis-lator’s constituents – was mentioned five times in the 2008 platform. Pork-barrel politicsare often tied to corruption, a salient concern to Tea Party movement supporters, amongothers. The description of the Contract with America’s ‘Stop the Pork’ plank – whichcalled for a moratorium on earmarks until the budget is balanced and the requirementof a supermajority for them to pass – showed similarities with the 2008 platform. Theplatform proclaimed:

Earmarking must stop. To eliminate wasteful projects and pay-offs to specialinterests, we will impose an immediate moratorium on the earmarking systemand reform the appropriations process through full transparency. Tax dollarsmust be distributed on the basis of clear national priorities, not a politician’sseniority or party position.95

The term ‘pork’ is not in the 2012 platform. The principles behind this plank are not absentfrom the 2012 platform, but it seems more likely that the Contract from America adoptedpre-existing GOP wording to express concern about corruption rather than the reverse.

Stop the tax hikesLike the previous plank, the call to stop tax hikes appeared with a similar wording in the2008 platform. The phrase ‘tax hikes’ was in the 2008 platform three times, but was notpresent in that of 2012. The 2008 platform said that, in regard to deficits, ‘the problemis too much spending, not too few taxes, [and that] we support a supermajority require-ment in both the House and Senate to guard against tax hikes’.96 The 2012 platform alsodiscussed the importance of not raising taxes and keeping previous tax cuts in place, couch-ing the issue in the context of constitutionality. The 2012 platform, however, included aproposition to extend the Bush tax cuts as discussed in the description of this plank ofthe Contract from America: ‘We propose to Extend the 2001 and 2003 tax relief packages– commonly known as the Bush tax cuts – pending reform of the tax code, to keep taxrates from rising on income, interest, dividends, and capital gains.’97 The name of thisplank appears to be derived from prior Republican thought, but the way it is discussedin the 2012 platform is distinctly in line with the Contract from America and its call forconstitutionalism.

Social conservatism and religion in the 2008 and 2012 Republican National Platform

Constitutionalism and fiscal conservatism were at the forefront of the 2012 Republicanplatform, but textual analysis reveals that social conservatism and religion did not fade.In fact, it would seem that they may have become more prominent in the 2012 platform

94Ibid., p. 15.95Republican National Committee, 2008 National Republican Platform, pp. 16.96Ibid., p. 17.97Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, p. 2.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

than in that of 2008. This suggests that while Tea Party economic goals were incorpor-ated into the Republican agenda, Randian libertarianism – that is, the type of libertarian-ism espoused in Ayn Rand’s fiscally libertarian, but certainly not religiously conservative,writings – was not. Of the five measures – each of which was selected before counts wereconducted to limit biasing the results – only public displays of religion was mentionedless in the 2012 platform than in the 2008 platform. Overall, measures of social conser-vatism appeared 10 more times and measures of religion eight more times.98 This

Table 2. Ten planks of the Contract from America briefly compared across 2008 and 2012Republican National Platforms.

Agenda item 2008 Platform 2012 Platform

1. Protect the constitution Constitution mentioned 31times, no section dedicatedto the constitution.

Constitution mentioned 60 times.New section on restoringconstitutional government.

2. Reject cap & trade Cap and trade not mentioned. ‘We oppose any and all cap andtrade legislation.’

3. Demand a balanced budget Called for a balanced budgetamendment.

Also mentioned balanced budgetamendment, added: ‘We call fora Constitutional amendmentrequiring a super-majority forany tax increase… andimposing a cap limitingspending.’

4. Enact fundamental taxreform

Had a section entitled‘Fundamental Tax Reform,’included key plank ideas.

Reiterated what had beenpreviously stated.

5. Restore fiscal responsibility& constitutionally limitedgovernment inWashington

Transparency alreadymentioned. National SunsetCommission proposed toreview federal programs forefficiency.

Transparency reiterated. Call foraudit of the Federal Reserve.Tripartite test for every federalactivity: Constitutional?Effective? Important? DiscussedTenth Amendment and need tolimit Washington government.

6. End runaway governmentspending

Phrase ‘runaway spending’already present.

Phrase not present, but principlesreiterated.

7. Defund, repeal, & replacegovernment-run healthcare

Health care mentioned moreoften than in 2012 platform.

Had a new subsection calling forthe repeal of Obamacare, withfollowing sections proposingalternatives.

8. Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above’energy policy

‘All-of-the-Above’ absent, butdid discuss using differentforms of energy.

‘All-of-the-Above’ terminologyadopted and resources couchedas God-given to Americans fortheir use.

9. Stop the pork ‘Pork’ and ‘earmarking’discussed.

Principles, though notterminology, reiterated.

10. Stop the tax hikes ‘Tax hikes’ discussed. Principles reiterated and specificcall to end taxes mentioned bythe Contract added.

98This is not due to the 2012 platform being longer than the 2008 platform. In fact, the 2012 platform was shorter(54 pages) than the 2008 platform (60 pages).

16 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

suggests that not only has the Republican Party platform as a symbolic project movedfurther right economically, but that it has also moved further right socially andreligiously.

The fusion of religion and economics in the 2012 platform is clearly illustrated by twochanges. First, and less noteworthy, is the increase in mentions of faith-based organizations.As in the 2008 platform, these mentions appear in the context of government funding toand through faith-based organizations, couched in the notion that they can be more effi-cient. Second, and more noteworthy, the entirety of the increase in mentions of Godwas in the context of God-given property rights and talents for hard work, reminiscentof dominionism – the notion that God has given his followers control over the worldand that they should use biblical law to govern it. This variant of Christianity, particularlyprominent in the US, has its roots in the King James Version of the Bible’s use of the term‘dominion’ in Genesis 1:28. In this biblical narrative, humans are told to have ‘dominion’over the entire earth. Some conservative Christians have taken this as a mandate to use theirGod-given dominion to manage the world according to the Bible until a Second Coming.99

This argument is clearly articulated in Ralph Reed’s recent book, which asserts that Amer-ica’s economy would be restored to greatness if only Americans would repent of theirimmorality and live according to the Bible and the constitution.100

The phrase ‘God-given’ did not appear in the 2008 platform, but appeared seven times in2012. The first mention spoke of ‘people using their God-given talents,101 combined withhard work, self-reliance, ethical conduct, and the pursuit of opportunity to achieve greatthings for themselves.’102 Speaking in the context of the constitution, the platformasserts that the right to bear arms is God-given. In the context of the environment, the plat-form says that Americans should take advantage of their God-given resources. Althoughreligiously unaffiliated libertarians and economically liberal evangelicals may be dissatisfied,economic and social conservatism appear to be fused in the contemporary Republicanagenda. The 2012 Republican Party platform clearly expresses a ‘return to the past’ tonethat is appealing to the largely older, white, and conservative Christian support base ofthe Tea Party movement.103

Table 3. Mentions of social conservatism and religion in 2008 and 2012 Republican NationalPlatforms compared.

Comparison measure 2008 Platform 2012 Platform Difference

Social ConservatismAbortion 12 20 +8Same-sex relationships 3 5 +2

ReligionPublic displays of religion 5 4 −1Faith-based organizations 4 6 +2God 3 10 +7

Total 27 45 18

99For more on dominionism, see Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.100Reed, Awakening.101Likely a reference to the biblical parable of the talents in which hard work and resourcefulness are rewarded.102Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, p. 1.103Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Discussion

Textual analysis revealed that while some of the points in the Contract from America wereexisting Republican ideas already present in the 2008 platform, every plank of the Contractfrom American now finds representation in the 2012 platform. Setting aside the question ofcausality and whether it was the Tea Party alone or, more likely, a combined effort ofsimilar groups that prompted change, it is clear that Tea Party goals are now representedin the Republican agenda.104

The 2012 Republican platform took seriously the Tea Party movement’s concerns aboutconstitutionality and fiscal responsibility. While some Tea Party agenda items seem to havebeen existing Republican ideas appropriated and re-contextualized, others appear to havebeen newly incorporated into Republican thought. The stronger emphasis on the libertar-ian ideas of constitutionality and fiscal responsibility in the 2012 platform does not appearto be at the cost of religion or social conservatism. In fact, the 2012 platform seemed to givegreater attention to those concerns as well.Although a truly Randian libertarian may not be satisfied with the changes in the Repub-

lican platform, Tea Party movement participants and supporters have been, on average,older, whiter, and more evangelical than the population as a whole.105 These peoplewere found by Skocpol and Williamson to hold ambivalent, and at times contradictory,views toward government spending. Many of the Tea Partiers Skocpol and Williamsoninteracted with and observed would have fought tooth and nail to maintain Social Securityand Medicare.106 For these people, government spending is framed around a moral dichot-omy with a clear dividing line between earned and unearned benefits, between the deser-ving and undeserving.107 Although the 2012 platform may not fit with a pure libertarianagenda, it would appear to speak directly to the older conservative white Protestantswho made up a significant portion of the Tea Party movement support base.108

The 2012 platform has framed constitutionality and fiscal responsibility as moral issues,placing them within the conservative legitimating myth of the need for restoration, thusfusing fiscal responsibility and social conservatism. Both are discussed in a context ofGod-given rights and responsibility in an America with a special mission from God – amission that has been neglected, leading to decreased material blessings. While the 2008platform section titles speak of defending, protecting, and preserving America and itsvalues, in 2012 the focus shifted to restoring, reforming, and renewing America and itsvalues. The idea of America’s calling is nowhere clearer than in a new section of the2012 platform: ‘American Exceptionalism’. The crafters of the platform stated:

We are the party of peace through strength. Professing American exceptionalism –

the conviction that out country holds a unique place and role in human history –[we advocate] peace through strength – an enduring peace based on… American

104Conger, ‘Party Platforms and Party Coalitions’.105Jones, Cox, and Navarro-Rivera, ‘The 2013 American Values Survey’; Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Partyand the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Arceneaux and Nicholson, ‘Who Wants to Have a Tea Party?’106Skocpol and Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.107Brian Steensland, ‘Cultural Categories and the AmericanWelfare State: The Case of Guaranteed Income Policy’,American Journal of Sociology, 111:5 (2006), pp. 1273–1326; Brian Steensland, ‘Why Do Policy Frames Change?Actor-Idea Coevolution in Debates over Welfare Reform’, Social Forces, 86:3 (2008), pp. 1027–1054; Skocpoland Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.108Skocpol andWilliamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Jones, Cox, and Navarro-Rivera, ‘The 2013 American Values Survey’; Arceneaux and Nicholson, ‘Who Wants to Have a Tea Party?’

18 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

democratic values and the will to promote them… [through] a continued relianceon Divine Providence.109

The platform stated that America needs a strong economy and military to exert Americanpower and values worldwide so that this will be ‘an American century’. Relatedly, the plat-form decried ‘rising Chinese hegemony’, championed leadership through military strength,and asserted America’s need to maintain sovereign leadership in international organiz-ations and in world regions. Illustratively, the US is advised to reject United Nations(UN) agreements such as

the U.N. Convention on Women’s Rights, the Convention on the Rights of theChild, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the U.N.Arms Trade Treaty as well as the various declarations from the U.N. Conferenceson Environment and Development.110

The platform called for a role in the world incompatible with pure libertarian values, butcertainly in line with the conservative legitimating myth adhered to by many Tea Partymovement supporters.111

Three years before the rise of the Tea Party movement, Lowi identified a split betweensocial and economic conservatism dividing the Republican Party, which would have pro-vided an opening for a movement like the Tea Party to mold the language of the platformto its ends.112 By using language from the Contract from America in their platform, Repub-licans seemingly reconciled economic libertarianism and social conservatism. Whethersuch language will lead to actual legislative change is doubtful, however, due to the chal-lenge inherent to reconciling diametrically opposite libertarian and populist beliefs aboutthe legitimate use of authority in society.

A ‘return to the past’ tone characterized the 2012 Republican platform as the GOPsought to bring fringe elements under its umbrella. This, however, does not mean thatTea Party movement supporters will relax and toe the party line. They will likely continueto push candidates who support their ideology in primaries. By bringing the Tea Partymovement under its umbrella, the GOP may find themselves forced to continuallyacquiesce to extremist demands to retain Tea Partier votes.

Conclusion

Successful oppositional movements not only make themselves heard from the outside, butseek to gain an inside voice and therefore reshape the mainstream discourse. Their apparent‘success’, however, can quicken the almost inevitable decline of the movements. Speakingin the context of the Christian Coalition, Watson asserted that ‘success, even when fueledby idealism, breeds the decline of idealism’.113 As I showed in an earlier article, when fringegoes mainstream, supporters of a dissident movement can be brought under the umbrella

109Republican National Committee, 2012 National Republican Platform, p. 39.110Ibid., p. 45.111Skocpol andWilliamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism; Jones, Cox, and Navarro-Rivera, ‘The 2013 American Values Survey’.112Theodore J. Lowi, The End of the Republican Era, 2006 ed., The Julian J. Rothbaum Distinguished Lecture Series(Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2006).113Justin Watson, ‘The Christian Coalition: Dreams of Restoration, Demands for Recognition’ (PhD dissertation,Florida State University, 1997), p. 185.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

of a majority party whose agenda will appear to have shifted in the direction of the ‘success-ful’ oppositional movement, regardless of actual legislation outcomes.114

Although it is impossible to delineate exactly why every piece of platform material isincluded – the development process is complex and undertaken by people with time con-straints – it is clear that the 2012 Republican national platform is something that could bemore readily supported by an advocate of the Tea Party movement’s Contract from Americathan the 2008 platform. Causal claims cannot be made about exactly why ideas and termi-nology in line with the Contract from America were included, but it seems that the Repub-lican Party sought to bring Tea Party adherents under its umbrella.The Tea Party movement’s agenda can now be seen in the Republican platform, and

the movement appeared to be quite successful in the 2010 midterm election. Theseachievements, in addition to a recovering economy, are exactly the sort of factorsthat would facilitate the demobilization of a grass-roots movement composed of volun-teers who were willing to sacrifice time and resources for a cause – in this case consti-tutionality and fiscal responsibility – which they felt needed to gain traction in themainstream.The larger significance of this article is that social movements can change mainstream

discourses if an established mainstream group benefits from incorporating some fringedemands. This then can decrease the perceived need for an external dissident movementand make it more challenging to continue mobilizing, even if the mainstream responseaddresses only some demands or is only symbolic. Especially in a two-party system likethe US – in which any splintering of votes tends to lead to victory for the other party –

keeping fringe elements under the Republican or Democratic umbrella is an importantstrategy to retain votes. This strategy, however, will lead to a continual reshaping of themainstream.So, what happened to the Tea Party? It may be that the movement worked itself out of

a job and shifted the Republican Party’s image further right, alienating some moderateswing voters in the 2012 election – and causing the GOP to take a serious approvalrating hit following the 2013 partial government shutdown.115 Though the externalmovement may continue to demobilize, Tea Partiers are likely to remain a durableRepublican Party faction as the same party’s religious conservative faction did after thedecline of the Christian Coalition.116 Tea Party favorites like Ted Cruz and Rand Paulmay be among the competitors in 2016 for the Republican nomination, though theyare not particularly likely to succeed since they would alienate much of the changingAmerican electorate. Racial and ethnic minorities – and religious nones – continue tomake up a larger portion of the population.117 The very social changes that promptedTea Party reactionism will make Tea Party candidates increasingly difficult to elect atthe national level. Nevertheless, as long as Tea Partiers within the Republican Party areable to make threats – during primaries or otherwise – Tea Party ideology will continueto influence the mainstream.

114Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’.115Dan Balz and Scott Clement, ‘Poll: Major Damage to Gop after Shutdown, and Broad Dissatisfaction with Gov-ernment’, Washington Post Online, 22 October 2013.116Schnabel, ‘When Fringe Goes Mainstream’. There is considerable overlap between these two factions, the TeaPartiers and religious conservatives that is.117Phil Zuckerman, Faith No More: Why People Reject Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Parkerand Barreto, Change They Can’t Believe In; Kenneth M. Johnson and Daniel T. Lichter, ‘Growing Diversity amongAmerica’s Children and Youth: Spatial and Temporal Dimensions’, Population and Development Review, 36:1(2010), pp. 151–176.

20 L. Schnabel

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions.

Notes on Contributor

Landon Schnabel is a PhD student and associate instructor of sociology at Indiana Univer-sity, Bloomington, USA. His current research focuses primarily on gender, religion, publicopinion, and inequality.

When Fringe Goes Mainstream Again 21

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Indi

ana

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

10:

46 2

5 Se

ptem

ber

2014