|
The Pennsylvania State Store System has existed since the end of prohibition (The State Monopoly to sell hard liquor in bottles, you can buy a drinks made up of hard liquor in a privately owned Bar/Saloon/Restaurant in Pennsylvania, but if you want a bottle, you have to go to the State Owned Liquor stores). I have heard GOP member push for selling the Liquor stores off since the 1970s (and have read reports dated since the 1950s saying to sell those stores).
The problem is Rural Pennsylvania (Which is overwhelmingly GOP) SUPPORTS the state owning the Stores, as does the Unions for any sale would end the jobs held by unionized employees of the State. Now, most Teens get their liquor from privately owned, but state regulated, beer distributors, the desire to keep the hard liquor from such teens is strong, even in Urban Pennsylvania.
Think about it, who is more likely to sell teens hard liquor, a Civil Service protected State Bureaucrat, or someone in his or her early 20s working a minimum wage job? Remember the Civil Service Bureaucrat can NOT profit from the sale (Unless he or she pockets the money, but that is thrift) nor can he or she find a similar protected job of the same pay. A minimum wage earner, know they are criminal charges for selling to underage customers, but also know most such laws are unenforced AND he or she can get another minimum wage job almost anywhere BUT also wants to keep his or her job for finding a new one is a pain (Thus will do want the management wants, that what management wants may be different to what management says it wants i.e. Management wants to maximize sales, but also NOT be busted by the Police for underage selling. Some employers emphasis the first over the later and the employees quickly realized want is wanted is sales to such underage buyers, if you do NOT get caught. Thus Bureaucrats are better are making sure such liquor stays out of the hands of teens better then private liquor stores (and do NOT tell me, that teens can get hard liquor in Pennsylvania, yes, I understand that, but that it is HARDER to get with Civil Service Protected Bureaucrats then at-will employees.
Given the above, Rural GOPers in Pennsylvania OPPOSE privatizing the Liquor Control Board sale of hard Liquor. The GOP economic leadership have pushed it for 40 years, but the proposal has gone no where. I expect the same this time, all talk no action. Furthermore it will further divide the Religious Right from the Economic Right. Under Bush jr, the Religious Right felt it had been used and then thrown away when a GOP controlled House, Senate and President failed to pass ANYTHING the Religious Right wanted (Abortion and other priority items of the Religious Right). The Religious Right sat out the 2006 and 2008 elections (Pat Falwell and other Evangelist tried to get them out, but could NOT). Thus after 2006 and 2008 the Economic Right knew it had to find a substitute for the religious right, thus the funding and start of the "Tea party", an attempt to win back those people who use to be controlled by the Religious Right but who are now turned off by the economic right and the economic right's control of the Republican party. The Tea party is a poor substitute for the Religious Right, but it is more loyal on the subject of tax cuts and other things the Economic Right wants. The problem is the Religious Right had a full set view of policy, we may dislike it but it was a full sets of view of how the US should go. The Tea party has no such center view. it wants "Reform" but does NOT say what reform. The Tea party says it wants a balanced budget, but does not say what it would cut to get a balanced budget.
The Religious Right accepted the fact that the devil is in the details of a policy and where you want the US to go, the Tea Party sets goals but ignores the details. In many way this is like the Raise of the KKK in the 1920s. The KKK had a racist agenda, but in the 1920s identified itself as a "American" movement. The KKK of the 1920s lasted about five years then the inherent different directions the KKK was advocated came to a head and broke it wide apart, killing the second KKK (The Third KKK, arouse out of the most racists parts of the Second KKK, and became the KKK of the post WWII era, the three KKKs, the post-war KKK, the Second KKK, 1905 till about 1927, and the third KKK were all racist organizations, but the Second KKK was the most successful at hiding its racism under a cover of pro-USA).
Another movement was the extreme right wing Anti-Communist movement of the late 1940s till mid 1950s. That scare lasted a little longer then the KKK movement, but suffered from the same problem, saw the problem, demanded a solution, but self destructed when it came time to actually implementing a solution.
The Religious Right has existed since the 1970s and thus have had to see how its plans work or do not work. The Religious Right have demanded their plans as to the Federal Government be implemented, but found the GOP NOT implementing their plans, but instead implementing what the economic right wants (The big name tele-Evangelists tend to be more economic right wing then religious right wing, thus some of the confusion over how the religious right wing stands on tea party demands. In many ways the drop in political participation of the religious right in the last three elections, forced the Economic Right Wing to look for new allies, and when they found none, they created the Tea Party movement. The Tea party contains various elements of the Religious right and the 1990 Militia Movement but unlike the Religious right (And like the Militia Movement) it has to center. The Tea party has a vague policy of "Support for America" but no actual plan on HOW to help American. The Tea party has a plan to cut economic spending in Washington, but no details on what it wants to cut. The Religious right had plans as to abortion (plans we disagree with but at least a plan) and plans in regards to various other items, including details that can be divisive. That is a sign of a long term movement, a well thought out plan. We can disagree with the plan, and argue about the plan, but it is a plan. The Tea Party, like the Militia Movement of the 1990s, the Second KKK of the 1920s, the John Birch society and general anti-communist movement of the 1950s have no such plans, they give statement that we may all agree with (i.e. cut taxes, cut spending), but no details that would show any disagreement (No mention of WHAT is to be cut and how, no mention of what taxes are to be cut and how).
As such the Tea Party is a dead horse, but we have to watch it run its course. By 2012 the Tea Party may be dead, especially if Obama plays his cards right (Give the GOP a Budget the GOP says it wants and watch the GOP fight among themselves to increase the spending). Then hit the GOP over and over again as the party that wants to increase spending. What the Tea Party wants and what the GOP can deliver are incompatible and all Obama has to do is show how incompatible it is for the Tea Party to die a quick death.
has forced Pat Falwell et al to give greater support to things like the Bush tax cuts then they ever gave to end abortion. Yes, they often talk, but it is to the choir and thus ineffective as to new converts, but then turn they full preaching as to the Bush Tax Cuts for that is what the Economic Right wants.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
