I'm late to the news of the day: Arlen Specter says he's a Democrat now, and is going to run as a Democrat in 2010. Woohoo! Right? Well, maybe. Specter claims he's making his switch based on principle -- that the Republican party moved to the right, and also, by extension, so did the Democrats. He says he's not going to change his positions, so he won't be a reliable 60th vote on many issues. Matt Yglesias summarizes some Wonk Room posts on Specter's positions:
On labor rights, as you know, he’s flip-flopped and now stands firm against employee free choice. On climate, Specter has tended to join forces with moderate Democrats in undermining effective action to tackle the climate crisis.On health care, Specter’s record looks quite a bit better on a number of specific issues. Still, there’s a bloc of senators out there who sound generally supportive of health care reform, but seem opposed to every possible way of paying for comprehensive reform. To me, Specter’s “no” vote on the 2010 budget gives me some worries on that score as well.
Long story short, while Specter’s clearly not the most conservative guy in the senate, he’s not much of a progressive either. The extent to which the right is glad to be rid of the guy is a sign of how far-right mainstream conservatism has gone.
The question today really isn't whether Specter is conservative or progressive. The question should be, "Is Arlen Specter a Democrat?" The answer is no.
It's impossible to come up with a universally accepted, exhaustive definition of what it means to be a member of either party, though if we worked together, we could come up with a general list of issues that tend to be advanced by Democrats. Currently, that would include national health care, support for labor, stimulative spending during recessions, action on climate change, and a general lean toward being pro-choice. Take any one of these issues and interview Arlen Specter, and you might find his position to be closer to the traditional, mean Democrat position than the mean Republican stance right now. I'm not saying look at his votes -- I'm saying, look at how Arlen Specter defines himself, and you will probably find a guy that's a little closer to the D than the R at this moment.
Is self-identification enough to make you part of the party? If I say I'm a Democrat while I vote against EFCA and work pretty hard to block the president's budget, in my mind I'm still a Democrat, but my actions... my actions are not.
Arlen Specter is, at this point in his career, an Indepedent. He doesn't belong in the current Republican party -- Pennsylvania's Republican voters could tell you that. But he doesn't belong in the Democratic Caucus, either. If Arlen Specter gets a leadership position -- a committee chairmanship, say, or a sub-committee -- will he, as chairman, represent the interests of the Democratic party en total? Or will he represent his own, Independent interests?
This isn't idle speculation: The agreement Senate Majority Leader Reid and Specter have worked out would give Specter rank equivalent to having been a Democrat all along. To give you an idea of how crazy that is, it means that Arlen Specter now outranks John Kerry in the Democratic Caucus. There are seven Democratic Senators (Byrd, Kennedy, Inouye, Leahy, Baucus, Levin, and Dodd)1 that have more seniority than Arlen Specter. One of them has already stepped down from the leadership (Byrd); two others seem unlikely to still be holding leadership positions after 2010 (Kennedy, Dodd). Specter currently sits on the Judiciary Committee, where he'll still be second to Patrick Leahy, and Appropriations, where Daniel Inouye has him beat. But one guesses he might fight for leadership of a sub-committee -- Tom Harkin's Labor, Health, and Education Subcommittee might be a tasty plum, and Specter has him beat, as Mike Lillis at the Washington Indepedent noted today.
Who doesn't want Democrat Arlen Specter making decisions about which labor bills get to the floor?
I'm happy to welcome a new Democrat to the fold. But if he's joining the party, he'd better be a part of the party -- the national party. Otherwise, this deal Reid worked out to maintain Specter's leadership position is going to come back and haunt us all.
1 Doesn't everyone have a Senate seniority Excel spreadsheet handy?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Catherine Forsythe
Writer to the Stars
Emily Holleman
Iron Skillet
Leslie Harpole
old new lefty
Salon.com
Comments
I just hope this isn't the Dems trading a PR victory (even Republicans want to be Democrats right now!) for a big loss down the road. We are not, as a party, known for taking the long view, sadly.
(On a whole different issue, you're right! The Unusuals rocks.)
Isn't it a fun show? And kind of smart, too. Me gusta.
It's always something.
Fat effing chance. By adding Specter to their ranks in such a high position of seniority, the Democrats just took a big step to the right. It won't be worth it.
I've read a lot of blog posts today and this evening about Specter's change in registration, and some of them mentioned in passing the deal with seniority, but none of them discussed it as substantively as you did here.
OMG!!!
Now, I am much more alarmed... after all, I live in PA. No way do I want a Toomey, but neither do I want an newly-minted DINO-Specter as chairman on important committees.
That kind of trust must be earned, not purchased.
Last year during the election cycle, one of my co-workers changed parties so he could vote for Obama in the primary. He was upset, though, because I did not consider him a real Democrat. So, I asked him what he would do if Hillary ended up being the candidate in November, rather than Obama.
He got what I meant, but we had a few days of difficulty in getting through it. Eventually, he did say that he would vote for Hillary if it came to that. If he hadn't, I would not have considered him a real Democrat... not for a single primary vote for a charismatic candidate. That's not enough.
If you recall the great FDR coalition, you'd find a whole host of southern senators who make Arlen Spector look like a flaming old new lefty. Same thing with the LBJ coalition.
To be an apologist for Sen. Spector, I would say that a good percentage of his past votes have been "party line." That's when the whip and majority/minority leader say, "Youse can vote wid de udder side, but then youse sleep wid the fishes, unnerstand?" So, one would hope that with this or that party vote, one could predict that Sen. Spector's ADA rating will begin to improve.
Meanwhile we can bask in the ideological purity of the GOP. Rush Limbaugh for President! Joe the Plumber for Vice President!
Also, I know you've read my post from last year The “Two Unprincipled Parties” System but I feel a need to cross-reference it as related for others reading along. The Democrat and Republican party are just names. What makes them what they are is how the shift happens at the middle, the so-called swing vote. A little shift and suddenly more changes than just the power, but the actual nature of the party itself.
I don't think you've gone quite Machiavellian enough with this. Don't know if Rahm or others came up with this plan, but no matter what the eventual outcome of all this, the Dems have eliminated the possibility of having to run against Specter in 2010.
Yes, the Dems promised Specter everything with nothing in return. But so far those are only promises. Specter knows what those are worth. In fact, in response to Specter's claims, Harry Reid's office sent out an email that stated flatly “no Chairmen or Subcommittee Chairmen will lose their Chairmanships in the 111th Congress.”
Whatever else you think of him, Specter is a cagey political animal. He knows damned good and well he's going to have to move left in order to get full-throated Democratic support in 2010. If he doesn't, regardless of political promises, it'll be Dem Rep Joe Sestak vs Pat Toomey, and Arlen Specter will be enjoying a long overdue retirement.
As for the Republicans, they are becoming so fringe that it's giving the Dems anything from mid-conservative to the far left. And their angry reactions today: Good riddance you RINO traitor!
As a Democrat, I say welcome aboard Senator.
I've bit my toenails, pinkie, knuckles bare.
My feet shuffle until a holes in the floor.
Who lost a toupee in the gentle breeze?
There's a piece of fake-hair in a pine tree.
Ay, I will shake a oak tree for a acorn nut.
Maybe a nut will drop to satiate my hunger.
I can Not even pay a few farmers a fair salary.
heehaw. I Am in a magazine too. Honest tho.
I am getting tired of Silent? No giggle times?
It's not so funny.
It's too bizarre.
Totally.
Insane.
politico.
VERILY!
Yesterday, I giggled in my tummy all dang day.
This wealth management magazine is local tho.
A interesting mag did a issue on organic market.
It really is called:`Smart.
I wish it was called:`Stoop.
O my o day. What a feeling.
Zippy. Uncle Remus, helps?
O, listen to the blue bird too.
Eat ice cream before it melts.
Respect. Great informations.
I Am glad we wear the clothes.
No scratch hole in numbskulls.
Wear a LLama wool hat. tipsy?
I best walk as a sober goof ball!
It's beyond words, fiddleheads.
huh? a curled green shade fern.
O, 'now there' ... behave. Why?
They are haunting nightmares!
Who lost a fake toupee? O shush.
I eat SUSHI Ginger on ice cream?
Well, Jimmymac, that is the $64000 question, isn't it. Reid continues to baffle me, too and if I had any say, he would not be the leader. He's got some dirty business deals and he is no where near progressive. So what is the deal?
Specter could not have won in PA by running as an Independent, and structurally this state makes it more difficult.
Also, he could not have run again after losing a primary, like Lieberman did in CT. PA election laws do not allow that.
Looking at it objectively, Specter made the best choice he could for himself. How it will play out for the state as a whole is still a very open question. I am skeptical, but willing to keep an open mind.
He certainly gave Toomey something to think about: "Now who am I going to run against?"