Specter Backs Himself into the Corner Again -- This Time with Democrats

Like most Democrats, I was pretty tickled to watch Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) defect from the Republican Party and join our team last week. Aside from that sometimes important 60-seat thingee, it was again a brutal reminder of the spiral death trap that has consumed the GOP since the 2004 election (beginning with the 2005 special election between Jean Schmidt and Paul Hackett, which we narrowly lost but where we started to believe again), giving me some real hope that we will get to witness the first formal disintegration of a major political party in 150 years.

Clearly, Specter realized that the ever-shrinking GOP has caused moderates to float away, leaving its fanatical right-wing base as its unrestrained center of gravity. Be mindful that Pennsylvania has a closed primary, meaning those hundreds of thousands of moderate Republicans-turned Democrats last year can't help him in the GOP primary. And, unlike Connecticut, it also has a "sore loser" law preventing Specter from losing the primary and then running in the general like Joe Lieberman did.

As such, Specter had no choice but to either lurch right to win the primary, likely ensuring he'd have no chance of winning the general election (as John McCain did), or simply defecting now and cutting a deal with Democrats to be their candidate, likely allowing him to by-pass a brutal primary and go straight to a general election where he'd trounce former Rep. Pat Toomey (R-PA), or any other GOP comer they'd offer up. That seemed the most likely outcome last week, if Specter would simply play ball just enough to ensure that appreciative Democrats would support him as their general election nominee.

Instead, and in stunning rapid-fire succession over just a few days, Specter has quickly backed himself in the very corner with the partisans in his own (newly-adopted) party who he must count on to get him into the general election.

First, Specter immediately voted against President Obama's budget. Then over the weekend, Specter incomprehensibly insisted that he never told Obama he would be a "loyal Democrat." Now, he's apparently still rooting for former Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) to miraculously win the Minnesota Senate race and deprive Democrats of that expected 60-seat majority. He's also since stated his opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act and a public option on health care reform.

Until this weekend, I was generally supportive of Specter as the Democratic nominee next year. Now, after twice giving Democrats the finger in 48 hours, my feelings are rapidly evolving. While I have no love for the pompous and seemingly self-righteous Blue Dog Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) who continues to make noise about challenging Specter -- despite promises from Obama, Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA), and the DSCC to fully support Specter -- I might be able to live with the know-it-all Sestak after all.

Ultimately, it seems to me that Specter (like Lieberman) is a little too enamored with his independence of political parties and ideology. No doubt, he's an infinitely better general election candidate than a primary candidate (for either party). But the obvious problem with that position is that those very hardcore partisans -- which Specter seems to have ample contempt for -- have disproportionate weight in those things called primaries. Unless you run as an independent, you must get your party's imprimatur before heading into the general election. Specter seems to resent that. The problem for Specter is that Democrats have no love for him. We only like him now because he dumped the other guy who we loathe. Yet, he acts as if he's become our new savior.

Finally, there is every reason to believe that Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) was, in fact, correct about one thing: namely that Democrats are likely to gain an additional net of four Senate seats in 2010. Translation: We don't need Specter next year. We need him now.

Democrats are now well past the point where we need to kiss the asses of Lieberman-type candidates to propel us into the majority. We're there (and need to keep working hard to stay there). In 2006, Democrats were in sole need of more elected Democrats and we willingly embraced Blue Dogs to win the majority. In 2008, we wanted more Democrats but finally began to focus on better Democrats. In 2010, our focus is likely to be overwhelmingly about quality Democrats. We don't need to coddle Specter because he's likely to be no more than one seat in a 63+ member caucus. At best, he'll be another Joe Lieberman. At worst, he'll be Lieberman without the solid progressive philosophy on domestic issues (Lieberman mainly sucks on foreign policy and defense issues, not social/domestic issues.).

So, keep a close eye on Specter. If the guy doesn't shape-up very quickly and start acting like a reasonably loyal member of his political party, he should not be surprised if loyal members of that political party opt for someone else next year.

But even more importantly, Obama should be very concerned about expending political energy to help elect someone who doesn't care about the party whose nomination he seeks. We all largely bit our tongues when Obama magnanimously chose to allow Lieberman to retain his committee chairmanship after the November elections. But we're not very likely to do so if he tries to force feed us a candidate opposed to some many of our priorities because it seems quite likely we can win the race without him (especially if Toomey is the GOP nominee).

Sadly, Specter has backed himself into the very same corner once again. The only difference is that this corner is painted blue, not red. Hopefully, Obama is paying attention...

Update (11:03 pm ET): Not sure if this is a clear rebuke by Senate Democrats for Specter's actions of the past few days or if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) made some promises to Specter that he simply couldn't deliver on with his caucus, but Specter's bid to keep his committee senority was denied this evening, as he clearly expected last week during his press conference. Big news.

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story was from his original post, "Specter Backs Himself Into The Corner Again, This Time With Democrats. Is Obama Paying Attention?"

Comments

[Mintcondition]

The DEMS are such wimps, Check out this link.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/durbin-gives-subcommittee-gavel-to-specter-2009-05-07.html

[stell]

Once again O has jumped the gun again, as he did sticking his nose in the Burris matter. He's picked the wrong horse, and this will embarrass O, because now he's stuck with him. LOL.

[wordvarc]

He'd be in far better shape if he'd watched and waited a bit after leaping across the line.

[JamesOctopus]

Mr. Nickolas, you seem to have a real problem with Sestak's personality, calling him a know-it-all and whatnot, but you can't argue that his voting record in the House isn't more progressive than Arlen Specter's in the Senate.

According to http://www.ontheissues.org/PA/Joe_Sestak.htm
On Jobs:
# Voted YES on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Mar 2007)
# Voted YES on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007)
On Taxes:
* Bush tax policies shift burden to middle class & future. (Nov 2006)
* Voted YES on extending AMT exemptions to avoid hitting middle-income. (Jun 2008)
* Voted YES on paying for AMT relief by closing offshore business loopholes. (Dec 2007)
On foreign policy:
# We’ve achieved our goals; withdraw from Iraq by end of 2007. (Nov 2006)
# Voted YES on investigating Bush impeachment for lying about Iraq. (Jun 2008)
# Voted YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)

To name a few. OpenSecrets.org also shows that his biggest campaign contributors are Progressive PACs and Labor Unions.
Can Specter say that?

[Mark Nickolas - Huffpost Blogger]

James - I admit that my issue with Sestak is mostly style, and do agree that he's much more progressive than Specter. Maybe I'm being petty, but there's something about him I don't like, but would prefer his substance to Specter's no doubt about it.

[ProudLiberalDan]

I'll take substance over style any day.

[WASanford]

So Arlen went from being a RINO (Republican in name only) to being a DINO. What is this guy anyway? Is he voting for the interest of his constituents? If not, then maybe he shouldn't be in the Senate. We have a program Arlen, get with it, or get out.

[BluePrideStephen]

In the primary Spector could edge out a real democrat. In the general election the choice would then be between two republicans. Spector's shift was self-serving and loathsome in its implications for the democratic primary runner-up.

Of course he should not be senior to ANY democrat elected as a dem. He's only been a dem for moments. If he didn't negotiate well, it's 'cause the deal he thought he made could not be enforced.

Buyer's remorse Senator?

[Horus45]

Specter needed a slap to the face and I am happy to see he got it!
I was AGAINST him keeping his seniority, he's got to prove he's a Democrat first!

[oregonbird]

Specter demonstrates the biggest failing of the Republican party -- he does not take the voters into consideration. He can stand for the Democratic ticket; but if President Obama backs him, it will be a major loss of both integrity and power. The democratic voters will not accept Specter; he has proven himself, in less than a week, to be against either a liberal or moderate democratic agenda.

Why should we give him six more years to water down necessary initiiatives? Bring on a second candidate -- democratic or independent -- we'll take that one.

[rizvisa1]

Specter NO vote in places where it does not matter is not critical. Where it really counts is when we need 60 votes. If democrat on other places are unable to get the 50 votes without Specter, then blaming Specter is wrong. I think since Specter have supported union bill before, he can be convinced to support again, though he may need some face saving cover.

[oregonbird]

So... which vote isn't critical? Health care? Protection for unions? Schooling? Tell me what Congress votes on that ISN'T critical.

[rizvisa1]

If there is not a need for 60 votes and we have at least 50 votes, it will not matter. Union i think he can be made agreeable too. I dont know what is the difference in the bills that he used to co sponsor and the current bill. My point was that if a bill is on fast track via reconciliation that democrat should be able to find at least 50 votes and if they cannot, the it is unfair to only single out Specter. If he is the deciding vote, then I think he should throw is vote for party

[wizardluffy]

Correction: I meant what if Arlen decides skip the primary to run as an independent in the general election

[Horus45]

I don't think he can in PA.

[ProudLiberalDan]

He can. Independents ARE allowed to run in the general election in Pennsylvania.

What he cannot do is run in a party's primary, lose, and then decide he wants to run as an independent.

If Specter decides to run as an independent and gets enough signatures to get on the ballot (which he will), there would still be a Republican and Democratic primary.

Therefore, in November there would probably be a three-cornered contest between a Republican, a Democrat and Specter, with some minor party candidates on the ballot too.

[wizardluffy]

Nobodys's mentioning what will happen if Arlen decides to run as an independant in the primary.
That is: Toomey/Ridge vs Sestak/Sch­wartz/Murp­hy vs Specter. That CAN happen, can't it?
And if so, when is D-Day, the DEADLINE for Arlen to declare that he will run as a Dem in the primary, and therebye lose his chance to run as an independent in the general election?

[ProudLiberalDan]

As an "independent" he would not run in a primary. He would collect enough signatures to appear on the general election ballot.

Unlike Connecticut where Lieberman lost the primary and then decided to run as an independent, Pennsylvania does not give him that option. If Specter runs in the Democratic primary (unlike in Connecticut), he will not be able to run as an independent in the general election if he lose the primary.

There is always the possibility Specter could skip the primary and run as an independent, then he'd face both a Republican AND a Democrat and the minor party candidates that make the ballot.

[angiemomma]

Specter got spanked! He deserved to be stripped of his committee seniority for his arrogant and disrespectful actions.

[rizvisa1]

Arrogant, Stupid,bone headed etc actions I would agree. But how his actions were "disrespectful" ?

[oregonbird]

Education is a butifull thing.

[regellner]

Why did he even switch parties? If it was only so he has a chance in the 2010 senatorial election, then he is on a path to losing that; Pennsylvania democrats are not going to support him if he continues as he has.

[kappa08]

Why do I feel for bacon?....it must be that Wright's ad on every page. I love me some bacon....

[levee]

wow. what a well articulated post. that's the nut shell, right there.