Accidental Blogger

A general interest blog

Recent posts

about

Specter (D) (Joe)

This is probably the best-case scenario for Democrats that I have seen and believe to be plausible:

Rather than announcing that he has agreed to change his views to align
with the majority across the board, Specter understandably at least
wants to make it seem that he is maintaining his
independent-mindedness. The Democrats have surely (one hopes) felt him
out in terms of his likelihood to support them on other issues on which
Specter's positions are not yet public. (On the other hand, as Michael
Dorf pointed out earlier this week, Specter's move could also make it more difficult to win confirmation of Obama's judicial nominations.)

This could end up mattering, in that the Democrats might have just lined
up a crucial additional vote on some unspecified contentious future
issues, and in return they allowed Specter to continue to say that he
is not selling out — for anything other than the seat itself.

60 is a magic number, it seems to me, only if the 60 are all on the same page. If not, the "moderates," the purple Democrats (Ben Nelson, Arlen Specter) and the purple Republicans (Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins) are going to keep calling the shots. Filibusters will typically play out the same way. I know a lot of people were excited about this — but why?

(It may also be worth noting that Specter was going to lose to his far-right Republican challenger in the Pennsylvania primary. The way PA has gone, that person surely would have lost the Senate election to the Democrat running against him. So at mid-term elections, this is, in a sense, a loss for our side.)

Posted in

2 responses to “Specter (D) (Joe)”

  1. Ruchira

    (It may also be worth noting that Specter was going to lose to his far-right Republican challenger in the Pennsylvania primary. The way PA has gone, that person surely would have lost the Senate election to the Democrat running against him. So at mid-term elections, this is, in a sense, a loss for our side.)
    Joe, you are so right! I am hardly at all thrilled about this “defection.” Obama and the Dems didn’t need Specter. Pennsylvania would most probably (some say, certainly) have gone the way of the Democrats, most likely to a new younger candidate who could have represented the state for a long time to come. So, why have the establishment guys bent over backwards for an opportunistic 79 year old (who has done the switcheroo once before) and are celebrating his crossing over as a major advantage? I am really perplexed by this. Specter could have been asked to go home and retire in peace if his own party wouldn’t have him. Pennsylvania and the Dems could have had a fresh and yes, a reliable man or woman in the senate. I am hoping that Obama is now not going to go for a similarly wishy washy, “safe” nominee to replace Justice Souter in the Supreme Court next term.
    Does anyone think that it was Biden who pushed for Specter? The two are supposed to be buddies and used to talk to each other on the train during their daily commute home.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Joe

    I just put up a post on why a “safe” replacement for Souter might not be such a bad thing — particularly relevant because Obama hardly seems like the type to risk a controversial pick just now.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Joe Cancel reply