"There's little honor in betrayal."Republicans have warned Pennsylvania senator Arlen Specter, who defected today to the Democratic party, that he'll discover the truth of that saying soon enough.
But is Specter, a five-term Republican senator, really to blame for his defection? Or was he drummed out of a party that's crawling increasingly towards extremism?
Specter has long been derided by the GOP as a 'RINO' - 'Republican In Name Only.' He's voted with the Democratic party on several key issues - most recently Obama's controversial economic stimulus package. However, his moderate views made him a popular representative who's well liked in his Pennsylvania constituency.
What inspired his decision to defect wasn't an important national issue or political expediency - it was pressure from the GOP. Despite winning five terms in the senate - and being hugely popular amongst voters - Arlen Specter's moderate politics marked him as a maverick within the Republican party itself.
At the end of his current term, they planned to oust Specter from the Republican ticket - running another candidate in the 2010 election.
Most people agree that such a move would be political suicide for Pennsylvania Republicans - but the conservative element within that local party clearly cares more for their own political proclivities than sticking by a successful senator - one who guided them to victory five times over.
In short: The Pa. GOP would rather back a loser that towed the party line, than support a winner they weren't sure they could control.
Arlen's Future
Whatever his motivation for making this decision, Arlen Specter's defection was a very clever chess-move.
In sacrificing his uncertain future with the Republicans, Specter stepped into the welcoming arms of the Obama administration; who've promised him their full support when he runs for the senate in 2010 - as a Democrat.
For Obama, it's a boon. In addition to winning the champion of moderate Pennsylvanian voters, he's also managed to get one step closer to that all important filibuster-proof Democratic majority in the senate - effectively making his presidency politically unstoppable.
And as for Arlen - he's regained the backing of a major political party and gets to be on the side of the 'good guys' (as, thanks to Obama's continued popularity, the Democrats are viewed as.)
Of course, in an ideal world, Arlen would have stayed exactly where he was. The Republican party desperately needs men (and women) like him - people who understand that the future of the party doesn't rest with conservative Christians and blowhards like Gingrich and Limbaugh.
But it was the Republican party who manufactured this debacle - and, as the party continues to tailspin into oblivion, it's the GOP who'll ultimately pay the price for their short sightedness.
Good luck, Specter - the GOP will miss you (even if they don't realize it yet.)
12 comments:
It was pretty much inevitable, all things considered. I've been wondering when signs of schism were going to emerge since before the election. The fact that the GOP was simultaneously counting under its aegis (and party leadership with a rather self-evident track record of enforcing block voting) the likes of, say, a Colin Powell, an old school Enlightment thinker with an wary eye of spending who just so happened to work for Reagan as a kid, and the fundiebat, antiscience, soundbite-for-brains like of Michelle Bachmann. When it comes down to it, there was a wing of the Party that looked like partners in good governance with a different, valuable perspective, and a portion that, when one gets down to dictionary definitions, looked most like fascists in their belief structures. They could hardly be expected to dance hand in hand much longer.
As always, I appreciate your sharing your views.
It is interesting how different people see things...
I think Arlen Spector's political career will soon be over. Of course, I know that I could be wrong. It's just that if I were a Democrat I would be leary of Spector. There's something to be said for someone being able to reassess there stand on things and being willing to make changes... in instances like this, however, it is hard to determine whether someone is doing something for honorable reasons or if they are calculating. I suppose it depends more on who will be running against him when he's up for re-election. Democrats that think have to wonder about his statement about checks and balances remaining in place... honor and integrity do still mean something... to a lot of people.
Great insight, CB! It's funny, when I started writing this, I entitled it 'Arlen Specter Plays Benedict Arnold' without the question mark, because I thought his decision was kind of cowardly.
You're absolutely right - it's not a great reflection on him that he'd make the switch. But I do see how infuriating it must be that he's an election winning candidate who's being run off the roster because the conservative element doesn't like the way he thinks.
But Roland... these elected officials are elected by the people, their constituents. These people are voted for because they believe that that person will best represent them and their interests in office. If an elected official stops representing those constituents then they have the right to vote for someone else who they believe will. Don't forget that we are a country that is supposed to be for the people, by the people.
Arlen Spector is free to think and act how he chooses, just as his constituents are.
Politics is very much a big game. There are rules.
That's exactly it, CB! Arlen represented the people of Pa. - that's why he got elected 4 times. They KNEW he was a moderate and they voted for him because of that.
The Republican party didn't care that he was popular or well-represented the majority of voters. They wanted somebody more conservative.
If they'd have dumped Arlen for somebody else, they'd have lost the election. The people clearly wanted a moderate candidate - that's why they voted for him. It seems totally illogical for the Republicans to lose a 'safe seat' and alienate voters merely to get somebody more in line with their (limited) way of thinking.
I don't understand what you are saying... I've been a bit out of the loop politically that last several weeks.
Yes, Arlen Spector was elected by the people of PA... What do you mean??? Other Republicans have been upset with him, yes. They do not have the power to unseat him.
Word is things weren't looking good for him in regard to re-election in 2010, and that is why he has turned Democrat. It wasn't that long ago that he had the following to say:
"I am staying a Republican because I think I have an important role, a more important role, to play there. The United States very desperately needs a two-party system. That’s the basis of politics in America. I’m afraid we are becoming a one-party system, with Republicans becoming just a regional party with so little representation of the northeast or in the middle atlantic. I think as a governmental matter, it is very important to have a check and balance. That’s a very important principle in the operation of our government. In the constitution on Separation of powers."
Conservative Republicans did not force Spector out. His drop in the polls has to do with the choices he's made this term. The people of PA have every right to change their opinion of him and either choose to give their support or withdraw it.
Maybe you know something I don't???
I might have been writing things in my typical convoluted manner!
I was talking about how Arlen was likely not to be picked by the local Republican party as their candidate for the 2010 election - they'd run somebody else as the Republican candidate, even though Arlen had won the last four elections, forcing Arlen to quit or run as an Independent.
Also... his turn is very advantageous for the Democrats in terms of being able to filibuster. You'd be a fool not to have that consideration in the back of your mind... no matter what party you are from. Who knows what kind of backroom deals go on in Washington...
One thing is certain. Arlen Spector is not a man of his word. Pure and simple.
The people still vote! You cannot fault the Republican party for having a problem with him. What if someone who was a Democrat and ran on a pro-choice platform but changed to pro-life once in office and started voting that way? You can bet the Democratic party would have something to say!
In Specter's defence, he's been accused of being a RINO for ages now. The Republicans always knew how he voted. It's only after Obama got elected that the conservative movement in the GOP started to get more vocal and extreme.
You mentioned that politics is a game with rules - and you're right. The No.1 rule is to win! I'm not sure that replacing Specter as their candidate was in the Republicans best interests - but I don't think the conservative elements within the party have stopped to think about what's in their best interests.
I agree, though, that defecting reflects pretty badly on Specter, no matter how much I try and dress up the reasons why he did it.
I just realized I've been spelling Specter wrong. Ugh!
Of course, the Republicans got more vocal about Specter after Obama was elected! That seems to be a normal course of events to me! Maybe his stance on things before was not as critical to the party as a whole. Everyone is not going to agree all the time. Specter became much more important when Obama became president... I can see why!
The Republicans are scrambling. We'll see what comes of all this through the next several cycles of elections. If the American people are unhappy then they will make changes. We saw that in this last elections. However, not everyone understands what those changes actually mean. When everything has been shaken down we'll see where people stand and who they decide to elect and on what grounds. One of the great things about being an American is that we don't have to agree with who is in office. Yes, Obama won. That doesn't mean those of us who didn't vote for him now have to shut our mouths a quietly go along for the next 4 years. Now is the time to educate and regroup. It is how the game is played.
I think the problem with the Republicans at the moment is that the conservatives within the party are excluding people: "You're not a true Republican."
They need to be doing the opposite - appealing to moderates to lure them away from supporting the Democrats.
They needed a man like Specter. He was practically a democrat, but he got Pa. residents to vote 'Republican' four times in a row. Now he's gone, I don't think they'll find somebody who can do that.
Post a Comment