Arlen Spector: Opportunist or Statesman

Now that Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania has switched allegiance from the Republican to the Democratic Party he has laid himself open to criticism as to his lack of loyalty and principles. Of course if he had no principles why not just accede to the agenda of the core Republican party and continue on his merry way in the Senate? It seems to me that if he is doing anything it is being true to himself. His views have not changed. The Republican party has chosen not only to abandon him, but to attack him and to gear up to defeat him. They did that recently in Maryland where they defeated an admirable moderate Republican Congressman in Wayne Gilchrist. The ultimate result was the election of a Democratic congressman in that district. The same could well happen in Pennsylvania as well, and Arlen Specter could be that Democratic Senator.

It is true that Specter started out as a Democrat, which means that he has actually changed parties twice. That fact does give one pause, but I must say I wasn't
following Arlen Specter back in 1965 when he first switched to the Repulican party so I can't really speak to what was going on at that time. It does seem, however, that 44 years as a Republican is not exactly fly by night, not to mention 20+ years as a major Republican force in the Senate.

No one can doubt that Specter is making the switch because it will give him a much better chance to be reelected in next year's senate elction. He himself has said as much. Specifically he said that he would not allow the Pennsylvania Republican electorate to decide his fate in the primary. That doesn't seem like a loyal party member. Chris Matthews of MSNBC essentially said on his show "Hardball" that Specter stands for nothing and will do anything to get elected. This seems overly harsh. Clearly his party has decided it wants to defeat him. Should he therefore be defenseless and do nothing? Is it reasonable to remain in a party that has made its priority dumping him? Is the issue really about which party he belongs to or is it about holding fast to the positions he has always believed in? Specter has not come recently to his independence or his moderate beliefs. There is nothing in his background to suggest he has ever been a right wing ideologue. If those are the only people welcome in the Republican party today, does it really make sense for him to try to remain a Republican? It does seem accurate to say that he is not leaving the Republican party, but that the party has left him.

Clearly, there was a time when the Republican party was not what it is today. We could go all the way back to Abraham Lincoln, our first Republican President. We could recall that virtually all African Americans were Republicans for many years. In the recent past there has always been a strong liberal or moderate wing in the Republican party. Whether we speak of Eisenhower or Rockefeller Republicans clearly it was a very different party. Does anyone remember that Richard Nixon was pushing for Universal Health Care? Arlen Specter had a reasonable home in that Republican Party, but it doesn't exist anymore. Today we have a party in which Tom Ridge, another moderate Pennsylvania Republican, was denied a spot on the national ticket. He fell victim to an anti-abortion litmus test. Even though Ridge was John McCain's top choice for vice president he had to turn to Sarah Palin to find an acceptable candidate for the party.

Demographically, what does this mean for Republicans? I believe it is true that the party is in its worst shape since the Goldwater disaster of 1964. My faithful blog readers will know that Barry was one of my heros in 1964. At any rate it is important to note that 4 years later, a Republican, Richard Nixon was elected President of the United States. If we know anything it is that the public can turn on a dime. At the 100 day mark for President Obama, despite all the deserved accolades, the one undeniable fact is his contunued popularity will depend almost entirely on the success of his programs. If the economy does't turn around by next year's election there will be another quick sea change in Washington.

Despite these caveats, there are some real problem areas for Republicans. They are having major problems in too many areas of the electorate. They are doing poorly with African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and young people. All of these demographics are showing continuing and significant growth. It seems unlikely that angry white males are going to win too many elections in the future. A party without outreach to growing minority populations is in trouble.

Back to Senator Specter. His long history in the senate has shown him to be a man of character and principle. He has been thoughtful and deliberate on many of the issues that have defined this country over the years. His principled vote on the President's stimulus package reflects his willingness to stand up and be counted in an effort to get things done. He also clearly enjoys being that pivotal Senator that can make or break an issue. Nothing has changed, except that he will now be that pivotal vote from within the Democratic party. He will not be any more predictable than he has been in the past. But undoubtedly he will continue to serve the people of his state and this country in trying to discern how the country can move forward to be successful and better in the years ahed. The Democratic party should feel fortunate to have him in the fold.