I was listening to Jim Roddey, Republican leader and Chief Executive of Allegheny County from 2000-2004 yesterday, reacting to the news that Arlen Specter was changing party affiliation. It struck me that the one aspect of the story that the national media was ignoring was how Arlen Specter had let down many of his friends and supporters. There are many moderate Republicans in Pennsylvania, probably not enough for Specter to have won his primary next year against fire-eater Pat Toomey of the Club for Growth, but certainly enough to have had a chance of victory and to have made a decent showing.
More important than the political calculation, however, is the fact that Specter really is a moderate Republican. He is not really a Democrat. This is the man who gave us Justice Thomas, after all. And his opposition to parts of the Employee Free Choice Act was probably genuine, even if also politically motivated.
As a moderate Republican, Specter had something to say. His fight against Toomey was worth fighting. As a turncoat Democrat, he is just another vote.
Specter's position could have been like that of our late-Governor, Bob Casey, an ardently pro-life Democrat. He did not leave the Democratic Party, but stayed because he shared so much of the Party's other commitments. And in staying, he helped change the Democratic Party's approaches to, and thinking about, abortion.
Differences such as Casey's from other Democrats and Specter's from other Republicans help democracy flourish because the opposing political parties do not become monolithic and intractable. Specter, in playing his dishonorable role for mere political survival, has lost his chance of playing a worthy and important role in our nation's history.
"I dunno... It doesn't fit quite right..."
Benedict Arnold types can never be trusted or relied upon for consistency.
SURE BEATS UNEMPLOYMENT!
President of the United After twenty seven years in the Senate, Arlen Spector
Has proven something most of have known for a long time. The sole objective of
A U.S. Congressman is to get reelected. No pretense of public service, patriotism
Or serving the people, just getting reelected. Our Founding Fathers provided for many human weaknesses but overlooked this one, “once they’ve seen D.C.You can’t get them to leave”!.
How could Arlen Spector or any Congressmen, who has spent 27 years in the Washington bubble, relate to the real world of his constituents? Compare the number of Washington lunches, dinners, and cocktail parties, golf outings with lobbyists and special interests with the number of barbecues and Fourth of July picnics with his constituents back home. Arlen Specter is no different than his Senate colleagues, no better, no worse, just more obvious.
We can end this revolving door of “professional” politicians by passing term limits. This will insure a constant flow of fresh viewpoint and better relate to the needs of the people’s interests. It doesn’t take much experience to know what is in the best interest of the American people. It would be nice to have that principle be the major criteria for the Congress. No elected government office holder could serve a term longer than that of the President of the United States, which is eight years.
Populous
He claimed Americans had rejected big-government busybodies. He then went on to say that it remained to be seen whether the new Republican rulers would be true to their small-government stated philosophy, or whether they would simply become right-wing busybodies.
Well, one foolish impeachment trial, 8 years of budget busting, an indefensible Terry Schiavo intervention, and a disastrous and ill-considered foreign war later, we have the answer. This is not our grandparents' GOP. Specter is right.
Coming over to the Democratic Party is a "two-fer" for Specter... he avoids a bruising and expensive primary against Toomey, and he all but nullifies whatever Democrat challenger he would have been crushed by in the general election. I does seem from the registration numbers that that prospect was in the offing.
The "big guns" will most likely keep their powder dry, as it were, for this cycle... and if Sestak were interested in moving to the Senate, he's probably relieved that he doesn't have to make his move for the seat so early on in his political career. Arlen is neither a young nor a healthy man, and whomever was seriously considering a run will not have long to wait... and likely will be in a stronger position for the next cycle.
And the icing is that he gets big-gun institutional support from the Democratic Party in the general election, too (more reason for the 'big guns' to stay on the sidelines).
There may yet be a primary challenger from the Progressive wing... but as it looks today, they'd have a steep uphill slog.
He was promptly defeated in the next Dem primary by Carol Moseley Braun who won the senate seat with the help of downstate men.
Specter shouldn't be forgiven for the Thomas vote but he was a Republican after all. It was Democratic Sen. Dixon who should be remembered as an object lesson of center-line roadkill.
The fact is that you choose to ignore Specter's persuasive critique of the current sorry state of the GOP. People who remember a heyday of reasonable Republicans, who fondly recall John Heinz, who think EIsenhower was the last century's best Republican standard bearer, and who are appalled at the anti-libertarian and stridently evangelical-Christian nature of the current party are being frozen out, not turning coat.
Specter might be engaging in self-preservation, but his criticism of the party is correct at the same time. Your own criticism should properly be directed at the Club for Growth.
Thank you for speaking out! A 60th vote that thje Democrats can not count on is not a 60th vote at all, ... but simply a refugee from a lunatic Republican Party who feels he is entitled to remain in the Senate at any cost.
But your biggest mistake is your belief that political party principles and ideals are grounded in something permanent and unchanging. What constitutes a "Democrat" or a "Republican" is not set in stone. When a Democrat or Republican stands up and says "I disagree with my colleagues on __" they are not failing to adhere to core party principles, but rather are participating in the small readjustment of what the defines the party. You acknowledge the case of Mr. Casey, who helped to reshape the Democratic party's thinking on an issue, thinking that would have been unchanged if Mr. Casey had been expressing his voice from the other side.
A final mistake you make is the view that a Senator's voting and behavior on most bills is symptomatic of the Senator's core beliefs rather than the result of the Senator's obligations to his or her party. Legislation is a dirty business that requires one to compromise on principles, sell out, and vote against one's personal beliefs at times. you cannot predict how Specter will behave going forward because you cannot distinguish in his behavior up to now how much was sincere personal commitment and how much was duty to party.