Specter: I'll Get My Seniority "In Due Course"
Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) just appeared on CNN, and was asked about the loss of his seniority on his committees. He responded that Harry Reid made a commitment to him that he would keep the seniority, and he's confident he'll get it back "in due course," apparently after the 2010 elections:
"Sen. Reid said that I would maintain my committee assignments, and that my seniority would be established as if I had been elected in 1980 as a Democrat," said Specter. "Now that has to be ratified by the caucus, and I think in due course that will be done. It may not -- we did agree, but as to committee assignments, that would await until the new election, and the caucus action overall apparently is gonna wait until after the election. But I'm confident that Sen. Reid's assurances will be fulfilled."


















Respect is earned, not demanded.
May 6, 2009 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course you are, Arlen. I mean, when has Harry Reid ever failed to deliver on his promises?
Yes, it will be up to the Dem caucus to sort things out, but rest assured that if they don't come through on Harry's promise, he'll certainly (at least) send them the dreaded sternly worded letter. It'll leave the Dem caucus quaking in their collective boots.
May 6, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is one promise Harry Reid can't fulfill. There's no way that Tom Harkin, Barbara Mikulski, Dianne Feinstein, et. al. are going to be willing to relinquish a subcommittee chair for Arlen Specter. If Harry Reid keeps his promise on Arlen Specter's seniority, there's no way the caucus will vote Reid as Majority Leader in 2011.
May 6, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Arlen may be going a little senile if he placed his trust in the likes of Reid who has yet to show any real leadership. OTOH, Reid may be showing how crafty he actually is by keeping Specter dangling until his true stripes come out (e.g.: his Coleman statement to the NYT). I can't tell which is true, crafty leader or non-leader.
May 6, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Crafty jellyfish?
May 6, 2009 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I vote passive-agressive.
May 6, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Passive-passive?
May 6, 2009 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Arlen Specter needs to get out of the spotlight, and NOW. The more exposure he gets, the more he reminds people of the fact that he obviously feels that he's entitled to his seniority. His comments about Dawn Johnsen, Coleman, EFCA, health care, and Jeff Sessions also get raised, leaving people to wonder why Specter is getting preferential treatment from Reid. He should just STFU.
May 6, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't hold your breath. Like all the self-dramatizing "moderates", he's an attention whore.
May 6, 2009 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ugh. I'm one of those people who has been willing to give Specter the benefit of the doubt. When I read the story about his support for Norm Coleman and then read the actual quote, I thought for sure that he was joking and argued so here. Now it's become clear that he wasn't joking (or at least the reporter didn't think so) and it seems to me now that losing seniority is the least that he deserves. Give him a few more months to drive his foot further into his mouth and Sestak could roll him over.
May 6, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Arlen,
If you have any hope at all of getting your seniority back, you must become a loyal Democrat on every big issue.
Of course, that will require some major flipflopping, but you have already proven that you're great at that.
All the best,
Rich
May 6, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wait a second ... Harry Reid did something right? On purpose?
May 6, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doubtful!
May 6, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
He'll get them back, and here's why (I think, anyway).
The administration has a very real reason to treat Arlen Specter nicely and with respect.
(I posted this at Eunomia, regarding Specter and Moderates in the the Republican party):
Larison said: ... perhaps forcing Specter to jump ship before the primary is all part of a cunning grand strategy to make the Democrats run a badly flawed candidate in a race they would otherwise almost be sure to win.
I personally thing there is a long term “grand strategy” but it’s not the Republicans, it's from the Democrats.
I think the real play is for the ladies of the north, Collins and Snowe.
I think that grabbing Specter was a precursor to those two doing the same thing, and jumping ship, and saying they are forced out as the party turns harder right, and purges the moderates (which will have more than a grain of truth to it). Remember, they have TREMENDOUS popularity in their state, and don’t need to switch in the face of primary challenges.
So getting them to switch (and I think they’d go as a pair) would give a huge boost to the administration. It’ll take awhile, but look for it.
The Democrats took this bet (bringing him aboard) and now have the chance to portray Specter as the irascible old uncle, and prove to everyone out there that see, the Democratic party can handle internal dissent, and accept it, while the Republicans simply purges moderates and call them traitors.
That gives the super majority and then some to the Democrats, reinforces the irrelevance of Republicans, and in 2010 they go up a seat or more.
Then the arguments are between moderate Dems and the progressive wing of the Democratic party… with the Republicans waving their hands and going to tea-parties, and shouting socialism, or fascism, or communism or whatever.
So Specter could be a huge game changer, IMHO.
And cherchez les femmes.
To that I would add:
Snowe and Collins both have voting records in the 40's.
No way is that acceptable to the base.
While they don't have primary challengers at this point, they just might feel that to get something done and to look into getting positions of power after the next presidential election cycle (assuming we don't blow it by then) I see them moving over.
Think of it: A large wing of very conservative democrats arguing with the progressive wing, but all caucusing together.
They, and Ben Nelson, Specter, Casey, Liberman, along with the blue dog's in the house could wield some very considerable power, particularly if Obama stays 8 years.
This makes the party look and be more robust and appealing to independents, mollifies fiscally conservative social liberals, and may very well be the force that makes the president really try to tackle the huge debt we're taking on after we get out of the mess we are in right now.
Attacking the debt alone takes away one of the only qualms that many independents and moderates have with him and could put the Democratic party in solid shape for a generation.
Dare to dream!
So keep the long game in sight.
May 6, 2009 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink