Specter Switch: Great News, But He Now Needs a Dem Primary

Just off the wires -- Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter is switching to the Democratic Party and running for reelection in the Democratic primary in 2010.

Obviously, this is good news for Democrats nationally, and on two fronts: In the short term, it gives them one more Senate vote (more on that in a second) for major priorities. In the long term, it makes the Pennsylvania senate seat more likely to stay in Democratic hands after 2010 because fringe conservative Pat Toomey will be the likely Republican nominee, and he's a potentially unelectable nominee.

There's just one thing to note: Specter is making clear he's not going to be a reliable Democratic vote on some of the key issues. Here's an excerpt of his statement:

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords' switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

So, this is great news, but there are still going to be real obstacles to a progressive agenda.

Let me just conclude on a personal note: I think I speak for myself and anyone who ever lived/grew up in Pennsylvania that it's really hard to believe this. Arlen Specter has been an awful Republican senator for as long as I can remember. Since I was a kid growing up outside of Philadelphia, he was a guy who always seemed to be on the political stage at all times, and most often seemed to be doing bad things. The best you could say about him was that he wasn't as bad as his heinously awful Republican colleagues - but that's not saying much.

The idea of Specter running in a Democratic primary is really crazy - and I'm hopeful it will be a contested primary. State/local Democrats shouldn't simply defer to this guy, who Pennsylvania's rank-and-file Democratic voters/activists have been trying to dislodge for years (and rightly so). Even as we applaud Specter for switching parties, we shouldn't simply concede the primary. Indeed, there needs to be a contested and vigorous primary, especially since Specter's EFCA announcement means he will need pressure on his left, and especially since the primary winner in the increasingly blue state of Pennsylvania has a great shot of defeating someone like Toomey.

UPDATE: I should also note some simple, self-evident electoral truths: I know Rendell, the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, the DSCC and President Obama will all back Specter in the Democratic primary - that's what Establishments do: they cut deals with insiders and try to run over voters. However, even with Specter having that institutional support, it's hard for me to believe that a vigorous - and potentially successful - primary challenge couldn't be mounted. 2010 will likely be a low-turnout mid-term primary, meaning the harder core of the Democratic base vote will be pivotal in that primary. Those are voters who have been voting against Arlen Specter their whole lives - and who are just about the least likely of voters to suddenly vote for him because a bunch of big-name Democratic politicians in Washington say they should.

Comments

[edfree]

with the voting of the spendulas poverty spreading plan,I thought he was a Democrat already...­Good riddance.

[Sig31]

Just one question: Will Specter refer to himself as a member of the "Democrat Party" or the "Democratic Party"? It's always the little things that say so much.

[mjc]

I have seen the label "Blue Dog" given to others who don't always toe any particular party line and it is always used derisively, especially on this thread. Two Democrats who are supposed to be Blue Dogs, Kirsten Guillibrand and Mike Arcuri---NY Representatives, quite frequently do NOT go the fiscally conservative route in their votes. Yes, they represent(ed) their districts but also the nation. It isn't a sin to be a Blue Dog. Now, Guillibrand is the junior Senator from NY but I don't expect a rash of spending to break out in the Senate....­.

[goodneighbor420]

Why can't we have some new faces in congress? Why does this guy think that changing parties is the thing to do? I personally am really tired of all the old, rich, white, men throwing a coat of paint on it and expecting us to think it is brand new. does the saying ssdd mean anything to you? We need to elect younger, new people into our govt. (and I'm not talking about the current congress' kids either--we need new blood) Obviously the old guys haven't been doing so hot lately or our country wouldn't be in so much turmoil huh?

[SCG]

Agreed. There should be a primary, if for no other reason but to give Democratic Pennsylvania voters a voice in policy choices. If primary voters want a hawk and conservative as their senator, they'll be free to vote for Specter. If they want to be represented by a progressive, that option should also be available. Let the debate begin.

Any attempt to preclude a primary, reeks of back room dealing to deny voters a choice.

[lmthp]

SCG & Good Neighbor420: Agree w/your comments. Democratic Pennsylvania voters deserve a say in choosing their Senator and new fresh faces. Wake up Pennsylvania! and toss this anachronistic fossil (Mr. Magic Bullet Theory himself) out on his wrinkkeled butt. All he represents to me is a sitting filibuster for the Republican faction of the Corporatist Party.

[freelyb]

Exactly. This also looks to me like another situation in which a bipartisan "solution' benefits Specter and Republican ideology more than progressive principles. The good news is that I don't think Pennsylvanians are that easily snowed.

[mjc]

Sometimes Specter talks like a Democrat and sometimes he talks like a moderate Republican. There really isn't that much ideology separating the two parties. Specter looked at his state and noted the conservati­sm.....rig­ht-wing ideology..­..within the GOP and decided that he would not stand much of a chance in a primary. He is a political animal. So.....he decided to switch parties. He has a lot of experience and understands Pennsylvania as well as any politician around. He should do well in a Democratic primary, and in a general election.

[Querent]

Sometimes Specter talks like a Democrat. Until recently, he has always voted like a Republican.

The following statement is ludicrous: "There isn't that much ideology separating the two parties." This statement needs no refutation, because it's absurd on its face.

There is no reason for Democrats to vote for Specter. His putting a D behind his name can't atone for the many, many, many times he has screwed us. If a real progressive runs against Specter, regardless of the possibility of President Obama campaigning for him, there is a very real possibility that he will lose the primary.

[mjc]

He began political life as a liberal Democrat and he has NOT always voted like a Republican. After Ronald Reagan's administration he usually took a Republican position, but not always: ask Bill Clinton. Looking through your posts below it seems you have a real axe to grind with Specter. It's clouding your objectivity.

[mjc]

Senator Specter started his political life as a liberal Democrat and then became a Reagan Republican, following the lead of his constituents in Penna. You have quite a big axe to grind with Specter but until the Republican Party became the party of never unless its war and/or attacking Democrats, Specter voted usually with the Repugs but sometimes with the Dems as it was politically expedient. He has a conscience but he also is touch with reality, something you may not appreciate.

[Golfer59]

This is good for now but Specter needs to go thorugh a democratic primary and DEBATES!!! The people need to hear the answers to some tough questions. We don't need more "Blue Dogs" in the party.

[rmm4402]

I found theis article kind of funny - the author is from suburban Philadelphia - as am I. The author is a Democrat and I am a Republican­.... and yet neither one of us likes Sen Spector. I always found him kind of embarrassi­ng.... he calls into WIP SportsRadio all the time and never makes a lot of sense.

While I try never to be disparaging - he is a guy who really should have retired by now - kind of like Joe Paterno, (although I like Joe a heck of lot more).

Sen Spector - to his credit - never walked the line as a Republican and I doubt he will as a Dem. While I am sure the Dem establishment is with him - the author makes a very good point - I am sure there are Dems in PA who wanted a shot at Sen Spector only to find that he is now on their side.... (say it ain't so !!!!....). I am sure that they are disappointed and like the author says - the higher ups will tell them to shut up, fall in line and wait their turn while a guy who should have retired years ago puts himself up for another 6 years.

I've never cared for career politicians, (from either party)....­. 60 votes or not - you guys can have him.

[cybermome1207]

I'm in Montgomery County...

Contested primaries are good. But the people here that pick candidates hate them. That includes the idiot that runs the Dem party here in Montgomery County.

I hope Sestak runs...

[rmm4402]

I am from Montgomery County as well......

The Republicans in the county can't decide who runs the party..... they spend so much time fighting with each other it is a wonder they get anything done. I wonder wht's better, an idiot or two guys fighting ?????

While I always viewed term limits as a lack of choice - the older I get and the more I see of these career types - the more I like the idea.

[EdCoughlin]

This whole post is a mistake. The ideal is not to have two "ideologically pure" parties with nothing in the middle. Saying he left the Republicans because he had too many conflicting priorities (such as being pro labor, pro environmental reform, pro stimulus ect) so we need to kick him out of the Democratic party because he has too much taint is short sighted at best.

The best way forward for the democrats is not to become the Republicans of the left, not to push out any moderates so we can replace them with crazy Kusinich hippies. The best possible scenario is expanding not contracting the tent. Instead of using effort and money to push out a moderate dem like Specter (who we all should be grateful to) spend it to push out vulnerable republicans that aren't moderates. I would much rather have a "partially tainted" party of 65 Senators then an ideologically pure one of 50 something.

With the 65 or so number (which only will result from bringing many moderates like Specter into the tent) various dems can vote against bills that violate regional priorities and the dems can still carry the day legislatively. 65 Dems would give room for cover on explosive need to do priorities like reducing farm subsidies (since dems from Ohio or Indiana could vote against it with passage still assured) or funding clean energy (which coal belt states oppose).

[capitalismisntamoral]

How is calling progressives "crazy Kusinich hippies" expanding the tent?

Did you consider that people like David, his readers, and many HuffPosters are Democratic voters, but our beliefs, values, and policy preferences are much more progressive than the Dem establishment?

We have every right and every intention of pushing for progressive policies to be implemented. Putting more true progressives in Congress is one part of this. You should read some of David's other stuff about "making him (Obama) do it (enact progressive policies)".

[Querent]

Specter isn't pro-labor or pro-environmental reform. That's just a complete misrepresentation of his record. He can be a Democrat if he wants to, but he has the right to represent us only if we elect him. Saying he is a moderate is simple equivocation. As a Republican he was a moderate. As a Democrat, he is a hard right-wing Blue Dog.

Specter will get his chance to make his case to the Democrats of Pennsylvania. If he wants to be a credible candidate, he had better start voting with the Democrats now. Just painting a D on his chest is not enough. Labor will not support him if he votes against EFCA. Period. Nor should they.

Democrats owe Specter nothing at this moment in time. If he wants to represent us, he had better start earning it.

[larry278]

Sen Specter has gone from being a RINO to becoming a DINO. It now means that I won't need to change my registration to vote for Arlen Specter in Pa's primary. It's obvious that I'm a DINO. Before Reagan I was a Republican. Specter was my kind of Republican. Now Sen Specter is my kind of Democrat. It amounts to a wash or SS/DD. If Obama blows it, I'm going socialist. Since I'm 72-I may not be around for 2012. That is somewhat reassuring to me. The USA is bound to go through the mother of all restructerings as it works to recover from what is turning into the mother of all depressions. I doubt if I can make any contribution to the USA's recovery. Why stick around if you are part of the problem? You younger people are in for difficult years. Have fun &, yes, you will work hard.

[NewsCorpse]

Toomey may not end up the Repub nominee.

Other Repubs might have been reluctant to run against a Repub incumbent. But now that Specter has switched, another Repub might step up to oppose Toomey.

Ya think?

[JustSayMaybe]

I have to disagree. One, I'm sure there were discussions between Specter and state (and probably national) level Democratic operatives. He wasn't going to roll the dice on switching sides without some assurance of security. I'm willing to bet the conversation included "we won't throw in a (real) challenger, quid pro quo". He won't flip on things like EFCA, partly because he's already on record on his position, and partly to avoid looking like a party-line Dem-butt-kissing token Senator. But you can bet that Dems expect him to drift left. He was always moderate by GOP standards, and was a registered Democrat prior to entering politics. He has played to the right because he had to, and now he doesn't. He won't be a sure thing, but he gives us leverage (however, his switch now gives Lieberman more leverage to keep caucusing Dem, he'll get increased pressure from the right). Two, he is worth keeping around. Being an insider, while indisputably problematic, provides him with a lot of clout. We want that clout from as many people as possible. We don't want to insert another junior senator with no favors to call in, no workable networked relationships, and no credibility with colleagues. I think we leave Specter alone (we can throw in a weak candidate to drive campaign positions that lean further left) to welcome him back to the party and give him a significant margin of victory to prove his standing with the voters.

[Catothemuchyounger]

Ah! A thoroughly rational post.

[USA1776]

Yes, I agree, Specter can be defeated in PA. Senior Senators may be in for the fight of their lives in 2010 and 2012, regardless of party. In CA, Boxer and Feinstein need to seriously get their acts together. Antonio V., the mayor of LA, could beat either one of them in a primary. Voters under 40 don't care about these people, they are dated and dramatic and becoming obsolete.

[Marcospinelli]

Short version: We just got another blue dog.

Object lesson is, "Be careful what you wish for".

Just as the fall of the Soviet Union didn't bring the peace dividend that had been promised, or rid the world of nuclear weapons (at least we knew where the nukes were when there was a Soviet Union), the fall of the Republican Party wouldn't necessarily bring with it a flood of people-friendly legislation, regulations and populist programs.

With Specter now in the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party has now just become more conservative. Specter's move lessens the rightwing's grip on government, but it also marginalizes the left. It makes the Democratic Party more corporate.

What the Democratic Party needs is more *real* Democrats running and winning offices. Not more DINOs.

[Liberal2]

Precisely.

Reid, and Pelosi, are more concerned with atmospherics than real governance.

[sunny123]

He is definitely not a progressive democrat. I hope we can find someone to run in the primary against him. Interestingly enough, he appears to vote his conscience and that will make for an interesting bedfollow.

It will be fun watching what happens next.

[2Dank2Hit]

He's a progressive Republican, or was, now he's going to be a liberal-ish Democrat.

[Liberal2]

Hardly. He's a Liebermannian democrat.