Katie Connolly
Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter announced this morning that he will be switching party affiliations. He will now caucus with Democrats in the Senate, meaning that if and when Al Franken is seated, Democrats will have a filibuster proof majority. This is huge news for Democrats, removing roadblocks to the President's agenda in a year where he's vowed to tackle thorny issues like the environment and healthcare. But perhaps the more important story here is what Specter's defection says about the state of the Republican Party. Specter's statement, released on Politics PA earlier today, amounts to a critique of a shriveling party which has deserted Specter, rather than Specter deserting it. Specter refuses to allow his political fate to lie in the hands of the conservative wing of his party. He writes:
Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.....Since [voting for the stimulus] I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
Although he's voted with Democrats on significant items like the stimulus this year, Specter's switch won't necessarily make his vote an easy get for Democrats. He was clear in his statement that he won't be the automatic 60th vote that Democrats need in the Senate, and he won't be changing his mind on the controversial Employee Free Choice Act (card check) bill again. As Daniel Stone and I wrote in our recent profile of Specter, the Pennsylvanian is guided as much by politics as ideology, and this decision easily fits his pattern. Specter is facing a tough primary against the same conservative challenger he barely beat in 2004. Since then, as Specter himself notes in his statement, a significant number of moderate Republicans (i.e. those most like to support Specter) have switched parties, leaving Specter to fish for votes in a pool that is far less sympathetic to his propensity to cross party lines, as well as his moderate positions on stem cells, abortions and judges. Specter would likely have lost that primary, and his challenger Pat Toomey, would be far too conservative for Pennsylvanians. Specter's Senate seat would likely become Democratic, which works out well for Specter as a newly-minted Democrat.
Advertisement
One source told Holly Baily that Majority Leader Harry Reid found out that Specter would switch for sure yesterday. NBC's Kelly O'Donnell is reporting that Specter has been in discussions with Democrat leaders about the switch for around three weeks. They reached an agreement that the DNC would not field a candidate to challenge Specter, but no deals have been made with regard to committees. But we'd be surprised if Specter, once chair of the powerful Judiciary Committee, didn't seek a chairmanship in the next Congress.
So how startling is this news? I spoke to the man himself a couple of weeks ago, and while I think the decision fits entirely with his political calculus, he waved off the notion in our conversation. Here's what he said:
Newsweek: Would you consider running as an independent.
Specter: No.
N: No? Definitely not?
S: I'm a Republican and I'm going to run in the Republican primary and on the Republican ticket.
N: We talked to Governor Rendell who said that the running joke is that you could easily become a Democrat and if you did, the framework in the state would make things very easy for you.
S: I'm not considering it. Rendell said he would help me raise money. He said that publicly a few weeks ago and I responded publicly that if I became a Democrat I wouldn't need to raise money.
N: We heard from your sister who told us that you were once a Democrat and you came to her at one point at said 'What will Dad think if I become a Republican?'
S: She talks too much. Hilda's the matriarch of the family. It was a big decision to run on the Republican ticket. I did that without changing my registration when I ran for DA in 1965. I was still a registered Democrat. It was a big decision. My father was a devotee to Franklin Roosevelt and I was JFK Democrat.
N: So your dad was a Democrat, you were a Democrat, you became a Republican to win an election and now you're steadfast in that party. What's your political philosophy?
S: My voice is very important I think to the Republican party. There has been a dwindling term. There are only a few of us there now. When I came to the senate, the Wednesday Club was overflowing. If you were a fly on the wall, you'd say 'you need Arlen Specter in the Republican caucus, you need him for the country.'
N: When you look at the dynamics of the primary, a lot of former party members registered as Democrats in 2008, so now you have a more conservative group. What's your strategy to win those people over.
S: We're trying to win those people back. We know who they are, they're identifiable, but it's a very difficult job. It's daunting, there's no easy answer.
N: You could lose. Have you given thought to life after the senate?
S: No, none at all. I'll jump off that bridge if and when I come to it.
Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter announced this morning that he will be switching party affiliations. He will now caucus with Democrats in the Senate, meaning that if and when Al Franken is seated, Democrats will have a filibuster proof majority. This is huge news for Democrats, removing roadblocks to the President's agenda in a year where he's vowed to tackle thorny issues like the environment and healthcare. But perhaps the more important story here is what Specter's defection says about the state of the Republican Party. Specter's statement, released on Politics PA earlier today, amounts to a critique of a shriveling party which has deserted Specter, rather than Specter deserting it. Specter refuses to allow his political fate to lie in the hands of the conservative wing of his party. He writes:
Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.....Since [voting for the stimulus] I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
Although he's voted with Democrats on significant items like the stimulus this year, Specter's switch won't necessarily make his vote an easy get for Democrats. He was clear in his statement that he won't be the automatic 60th vote that Democrats need in the Senate, and he won't be changing his mind on the controversial Employee Free Choice Act (card check) bill again. As Daniel Stone and I wrote in our recent profile of Specter, the Pennsylvanian is guided as much by politics as ideology, and this decision easily fits his pattern. Specter is facing a tough primary against the same conservative challenger he barely beat in 2004. Since then, as Specter himself notes in his statement, a significant number of moderate Republicans (i.e. those most like to support Specter) have switched parties, leaving Specter to fish for votes in a pool that is far less sympathetic to his propensity to cross party lines, as well as his moderate positions on stem cells, abortions and judges. Specter would likely have lost that primary, and his challenger Pat Toomey, would be far too conservative for Pennsylvanians. Specter's Senate seat would likely become Democratic, which works out well for Specter as a newly-minted Democrat.
Advertisement
One source told Holly Baily that Majority Leader Harry Reid found out that Specter would switch for sure yesterday. NBC's Kelly O'Donnell is reporting that Specter has been in discussions with Democrat leaders about the switch for around three weeks. They reached an agreement that the DNC would not field a candidate to challenge Specter, but no deals have been made with regard to committees. But we'd be surprised if Specter, once chair of the powerful Judiciary Committee, didn't seek a chairmanship in the next Congress.
So how startling is this news? I spoke to the man himself a couple of weeks ago, and while I think the decision fits entirely with his political calculus, he waved off the notion in our conversation. Here's what he said:
Newsweek: Would you consider running as an independent.
Specter: No.
N: No? Definitely not?
S: I'm a Republican and I'm going to run in the Republican primary and on the Republican ticket.
N: We talked to Governor Rendell who said that the running joke is that you could easily become a Democrat and if you did, the framework in the state would make things very easy for you.
S: I'm not considering it. Rendell said he would help me raise money. He said that publicly a few weeks ago and I responded publicly that if I became a Democrat I wouldn't need to raise money.
N: We heard from your sister who told us that you were once a Democrat and you came to her at one point at said 'What will Dad think if I become a Republican?'
S: She talks too much. Hilda's the matriarch of the family. It was a big decision to run on the Republican ticket. I did that without changing my registration when I ran for DA in 1965. I was still a registered Democrat. It was a big decision. My father was a devotee to Franklin Roosevelt and I was JFK Democrat.
N: So your dad was a Democrat, you were a Democrat, you became a Republican to win an election and now you're steadfast in that party. What's your political philosophy?
S: My voice is very important I think to the Republican party. There has been a dwindling term. There are only a few of us there now. When I came to the senate, the Wednesday Club was overflowing. If you were a fly on the wall, you'd say 'you need Arlen Specter in the Republican caucus, you need him for the country.'
N: When you look at the dynamics of the primary, a lot of former party members registered as Democrats in 2008, so now you have a more conservative group. What's your strategy to win those people over.
S: We're trying to win those people back. We know who they are, they're identifiable, but it's a very difficult job. It's daunting, there's no easy answer.
N: You could lose. Have you given thought to life after the senate?
S: No, none at all. I'll jump off that bridge if and when I come to it.
