Specter's Slow Move To The Left Begins?
When Arlen Specter became a Democrat nearly three weeks ago, everyone in Washington was extremely "surprised," but nobody was really all that surprised. Specter had been taking a beating from the right for, among other things, supporting the stimulus bill. He had lost the confidence of many in his party and, to ward off attackers, he was tacking steadily to the right to protect himself from a primary challenge he nonetheless seemed poised to lose.
So he became a Democrat. The move made sense as a matter of both Senate and electoral politics. Specter fits in just as well among the significant ranks of conservative Senate Democrats as he does among the ever-shrinking ranks of moderate Republicans, and his move into the majority renews what had been his dwindling hopes of re-election.
But then, unthinkably, he doubled down on all of the positions he'd taken as a threatened Republican. He bucked his new party on health care, reiterated his freshly minted objection to the Employee Free Choice Act (a bill he once wholly endorsed), and he flatly opposed the nomination of Dawn Johnsen, who President Obama has nominated to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel.
Now, though, he's showing some signs of easing up on the Republicanisms.
Yesterday he announced that he and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) are nearing a compromise on EFCA. And yesterday, his staff confirmed to me that he is no longer dead set against Johnsen.
Of course, that doesn't mean he's become a poster child for Born Again Liberalism. There are only a few ways of amending EFCA that don't involve heaving labor off the train, and we don't yet know what Harkin will have to sacrifice to bring Specter on board. Likewise, even if Specter decides not to support a Johnsen filibuster, he could still vote against her confirmation.
But his new rhetoric is telling.
When he first defected from the GOP establishment Democrats--from Obama to Vice President Joe Biden to Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell--seemed like they were trying to outbid each other in their attempts to be solicitous of the party's newest member. "I like Arlen best." "No I like Arlen best." Etcetera.
But for whatever reason, Specter embraced all of that uncritical support and then embarked on a robust campaign of squandering it. First he voted against the budget. Then he voted against cramdown--a progressive measure that would have allowed courts to force home lenders to accept new debtor-friendly mortgage terms.
This elaborate political symphony wasn't exactly music to the ears of the Democratic base. What they heard instead was typical, ear piercing cacophony. The establishment protecting one of their own without any upside for voters. On their side (but not necessarily of them) was Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA)--a politically savvy moderate with grand ambitions who found his once promising road to the Senate suddenly blocked.
Practically without skipping a beat, Sestak set out on a very public campaign, criticizing Specter, and pressuring him to move to the left.
Specter's own colleagues, too, were less than thrilled with things, and, ultimately declined to let him carry his nearly 30 years of seniority over from the other side of the aisle. That is, at least for the rest of this Congress.
It's hard to know for sure whether he saw the writing on the wall, or knew all along that his conservative positions were untenable in the long term and is now beginning the slow, but inevitable process of moving into the Democratic mainstream. But it's already having a political effect. I asked Sestak's office to comment on the possibility that Specter will agree to an EFCA compromise, and they responded.
"Congressman Sestak supports EFCA and is a cosponsor of the bill," says a spokesman. "He would also be supportive of labor and business coming together to compromise on something they both agree with, and with which they are comfortable."
| TOPICS: Arlen Specter, Barack Obama, Dawn Johnsen, Democrats, EFCA, Filibuster, Health Care, Joe Sestak, Labor, PA-SEN, Republicans, Senate, Senate '10
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
If Specter really is moving to the left, we all owe Joe Sestak a big debt of thanks.
May 15, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes indeedy.
But that's a Grand Canyon size if, given Specter's history.
May 15, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, his history says to me that he has no real convictions and WILL respond to sufficiently credible threats.
But I wouldn't trust him any farther than I can throw him after 2010. I'd really, really like Sestak to get in the race and just get rid of him altogether.
May 15, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me too. Because the moment the threat Sestak poses is lifted (i.e., if Sestak pulls out of the race or loses to Specter in the primary) Specter will go back to being a world-class unreliable putz.
May 15, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right after the Primary, Specter will shift to match the new set of voters he faces. If he has a solid support base of Democratic voters he'll pander to them. If he needs Republican voters, he'll pander to them. First priority for Specter will always be getting reelected.
You don't think he has any principles other than those needed to get reelected, do you? Those are priority, and once reelection is assured, his real convictions will come into play.
May 15, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter will be back to voting 80% with the republicans after he is reelected. He has already shown that he doesn't care much for the democrats agenda and is falling in line only because his own ass is in danger. As soon as that danger is past you should not expect an iota of loyalty from the old reprobate.
May 16, 2009 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Specter was on record on the current issues as a Republican trying to fend off a Toomey primary challenge, where he veered harder right. He couldn't come out and say "Well, gee I really didn't mean what I said before", so he had to restate these opinions again even as a Democrat so it would look like he was taking principled stands rather than just toeing the party lines (first Republican and now Democrat).
I still hope for a Sestak primary challenge, but don't think it's going to come since he's be giving up his House seat for a long shot challenge. It's likely now or never for Sestak though. If he could get the backing of the netroots and the unions he could make real noise. However if he gets out of the way, well Rendell is in the on deck circle for the Senate seat when it is eventually vacated.
May 15, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
With Snarlin...nothing he says can be reliied upon til we see his votes. The Sestak primary challenge is the best tool to keep "hopes" alive he votes the right way! Plus, it won't be long before we see how the wind is blowing with several key votes coming. Believe his words..never! only his voting record going forward!!
May 15, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing that scares me most about Arlen Specter is Harry Reid. He holds the real power over Specter and is equally as wishy-washy. I really don't trust him to hold Specter's feet to the fire and can only wonder, what would have happened if Hillary hadn't taken the SOS job?
May 15, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hooray for opportunism!
May 15, 2009 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Precisely.
May 15, 2009 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean double or nothing, not double down. You double down from a position of strength, when you have 10 or 11 and the dealer shows 3, 4, 5, or 6. The reason is because the odds are dramatically in your favor, which is rare in a casino. You go double or nothing when, like senator Specter, you got nothing to lose. And even if you win, you only get back to nothing, so you still have nothing.
May 15, 2009 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd guess that Specter is frantically looking to find what has happened to the election coalitions that he had before the move and finding what fell away and what remains. Now he has to rebuild his support base rapidly to keep Sestak or someone else from getting him in the Democratic Primary.
He probably lost more of his Republican supporters than he expected. He's a very capable pol. He'll work very hard to replace them, and I'll bet now that he succeeds.
His public changes of position have to be slow and careful. They amount to testing out the new waters in which he is now swimming, as did his earlier Republicanisms. But they still face the deadline of the Democratic Primary next year, and they have to be set before that.
It should be an interesting transformation.
May 15, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter is old, sick, and deranged. He is 79 years old, a cancer survivor in remission, and seemingly terrified of becoming inconsequential in his remaining time in the spotlight. I once conceded some respect for him as a thinking moderate Republican. But as a progressive myself, I am now nothing less than appalled by him in his new guise as a pseudo-Democrat.
May 15, 2009 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Traitors may occasionally be useful. They are never to be trusted.
May 15, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well put.
May 15, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the party is compromising with Specter all that means is that the Dems have not stopped marching right.
May 15, 2009 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still can't trust him. I want Sestak to take him out, PERIOD.
May 15, 2009 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ugh - I hate these awful old men who think they DESERVE that Senate seat, they can't give up the power and the perks - it's an addiction.
They sit so long they forget that the seat belongs to the people. Tell Arlen it's time to leave.
May 15, 2009 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have been drinking, and I have a lot to say, but I will limit myself to this simple matter of Specter. And that is this:
I believed when Specter came over, Obama greeted him with the full understanding that Arlen will eventually come around on a number of these issues. EFCA, certainly, and maybe Johnson (although in my heart of hearts I do not think the Obama Administration will lose sleep if she is not confirmed). Arlen needed time to settle, he needed that time after the Klieg lights went off.
Sort of like Joe Lieberman. JJoe is well-heeled now. That's the best way to put it. And I always thought that Specter would come around as well. And I am not surprised it has taken him this long. The man has faced death. He will do what he thinks is best for him. If that means coming around he will. In this sense I see him as less craven than Joe Lieberman. But Arlen is learning where his bread is to be buttered, and he wants to keep the loaf right side up. Not surprising.
And the point is, said the man in the office with the Yeungling, the point is this: Sad as it may be, Obama doesn't follow the less-than-24-hour-cycle of blog outrage. he does not. He never will. It took him three days after the Wright thing blew up to respond meaningfully. But meaningfully he did.
Which is why I think he will be strategic, and not tactical, on torture and other issues. Obama wants there to be enough oxygen in the room to pass health care reform, to get energy policy in place, to get square on Afghanistan and Pakistan and the lot, but mostly to do the things he wants to do domestically. If that means that bloggers and lefties like me chafe a little for a while, so be it. We are not going to get everything, but we are going to get a lot more than we might suppose now, in the heat and the angst and the strum of it all. He saw the path on Lieberman, and we discounted it, and we were wrong. I think that will be true with Specter, also. And with torture (though, for the record, anyone who thinks they will ever live to see George Bush in a witness box is a fool; Cheney gets only slightly less longer odds; Bybee, Yoo, etc., they will get a different punishment. The verdict will largely be written by history.).
But I've typed too much. The beer is talking.
Have a good weekend, fellow travelers.
May 15, 2009 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter needs to be history.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
May 15, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is ridiculous. Of course the first priority of any elected official / politician is to get re-elected. What do you think this is? Second grade?
The man did what he did, to enhance his chances at staying where he is. Those that don't have to do what he did, have the luxury of a constituency that are fine where they are from the standpoint of policy.
He'll tack to the left. Of course he will.
Where's the Beef?
If you want someone to believe in, go to Church. That's what its for.
This is the real world. Ugly and self-serving as it is. It is what it is.
I for one, am glad he's on board.
May 15, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sestak needs some real looking-into because he has often made enemies both of those below him and above him. Numerous Congressional staff have quit on him and Admiral Mullen fired him. Do not assume that he will be a great candidate. DO A QUICK WEB SEARCH ON HIM--here's a comment I found: "Did he really quit the highest and most powerful echelons of the military to represent Delaware County in the House for the rest of his life?"
Sestak "quit" because he lost his patron Admiral and his head was on the chopping block. His treatment of those under his command was apparently just as rotten as he treats his current staff. However, his current staff has a high turnover rate because they are not stuck in a ship in the middle of ocean. His uncontrolled and vicious temper, combined with his lack of vision beyond trying to climb the ladder, and folding to Bush on Iraq War have shown Sestak to be a non-leader."
»
May 15, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
What happens after he is re-elected? 6 years is a helluva long time before he's have to run again. You cannot depend on his vote for anything after he gets re-elected. You can depend on Rep. Sestak's vote because he'll be looking to run again, whereas this is more than likely Sen. Specter's last re-election bid.
May 15, 2009 10:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
At 79, of course his move is slow. Only kind of a joke:) If re-elected in 2010 he'll be 81, which of course means he'll be 87 by the end of his term. The question isn't only, how will he vote but will he make it long enough to vote? Will he still have all his marbles? Can he possibly have a fresh perspective? Also will there still be a republican party left for him to vote with or switch back to?
May 16, 2009 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Specter really is moving to the left, we all owe Joe Sestak a big debt of thanks.
May 17, 2009 1:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why is everyone here looking at Sestak as the savior and preferable choice to Specter?
Yes, it's advantageous for Sestak to threaten a primary run. But how effective such threats are it's hard to say. Obama and Rendell are committed to clearing the Dem field for Arlen, but of course Specter will have to pay the price for that commitment and it's WAY TOO EARLY to suggest he has not toed the party line with any consistency.
But Nate at fivethirtyeight did a feature on how advantageous would it really be for progressives should Sestak be in Arlen's place? An analysis of Sestak's voting record is hardly a beacon of liberalism. Quite the opposite it tended to skew conservative, much more conservative than PA's other Dem Casey. Sestak falls fairly equally in between Casey and Specter on voting record. Now that Specter has switched parties, he's bound to start moving leftward on that spectrum.
There's a chance he could come out further left on the spectrum than Sestak, and historical precedence of Senators switching parties has revealed a pretty sharp move toward their newfound constituency.
So with Sestak, you all should remember the maxim; careful what you wish for ... because it might come true.
May 17, 2009 4:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is not much of a surprise to me. The initial clinging to old positions was more of a face-saving measure. You can't appear to flipflop too readily, especially when your 'brand' is to be somewhat independent minded.
Pressure from Sestak is good to keep him honest. But I don't see much of a problem for Democrats with Spector. He will move to the left, in line with his voters, and he is not getting any younger. We might want to think about a viable successor to his seat, even if he wins 2010.
Once Franken is seated, we'll have 60 votes on most major issues.
May 18, 2009 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink