Toomey’s In
Pat Toomey, the wingnut congressman who challenged Arlen Specter in a 2004 primary before becoming the head of the super-insane Club for Growth, is officially throwing his hat in the ring for a second challenge. This is very bad news for anyone hoping to see the Employee Free Choice Act passed in this congress. Specter voted for cloture on EFCA in the previous congress, which should be understood in part as payback for receiving labor support in his 2004 general election. But a vote for EFCA could be an enormous liability in a GOP primary race. Ordinarily, most establishment types in the GOP/business nexus would back an incumbent against a challenger, but your typical executive would sooner strangle his children with his bare hands than sign a collective bargaining agreement.
As I’ve said before, one possible answer would be for Specter to back Obama’s budget and EFCA and switch parties. To be a happy Democrat he would need to reposition himself ideologically somewhat, but he’s meandered quite a bit ideologically over the years. This, however, is what tends to happen with party switchers. Jim Jefford went from a voting record that would have been extremely conservative for a Democrat to being a standard-issue Vermont liberal after he switched parties. And you saw something similar with some Clinton-era D-to-R party switchers.
37 Responses to “Toomey’s In”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
March 6th, 2009 at 11:03 am
You know who funneled a lot of money to Pat Toomey last time? The head of Urban Outfitters. You know where you shouldn’t shop? Urban Outfitters.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:06 am
The Pennsylvania GOP has not even come out fully behind Specter yet. They’re really not trying hard to keep him on the team.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:11 am
He looks like a real swell chap.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:12 am
There’s still some plays EFCA supporters can call on this. It’s just a question of how much you’re willing to save Specter to get one vote.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Seriously, why the hell doesn’t Arlen simply retire? Does he really think he’ll live, or at any rate keep his marbles, through another full term? What an ego that idiot has.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:26 am
@ Dave Weigel,
The Pennsylvania GOP is run by wingnut loons. There’s always been a group of reasonably rational Republicans in southeast PA of a kind of old-fashioned Rocekfeller Republican/Machine Hack type, but their leader, State Rep. (and former Majority Leader) John Perzel, was deposed by the GOP caucus after the 06 election cycle, and now the Party is firmly in the hands of various kinds of movement reactionaries (like Toomey) and Chamber of Commerce stooges from the Alabama part of the state. I don’t think Specter has been counting on their support in any case.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Whoops, sorry — Perzel was Speaker of the PA House, not Majority Leader.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Given Senator Spector’s age and past poor health, he may not run in 2010. Or if he runs, he may have to drop out because of health. If that happens, Republican Pat Toomey could be a formidable opponent –because of the money he attracts, not because of any personal merit.
Democratic Governor Ed Rendell could probably win.
Something that is disappointing to me is that Pennsylvania Republicans are highly vulnerable because of Bush’s reign and yet the Democratic Party is doing nothing to exploit a great opportunity.
My Republican Congressman, Jim Gerlach, has barely won the last 4 elections –even with severe gerrymandering in 2001. Gerlach was on the Congressional Joint Economic Committee which was THE entity MOST RESPONSIBLE for the current financial collapse.
If you look at the Republican Majority reports in 2004 and 2006, you see them being warned of what’s coming and dismissing it out of ideology. If the voters of this district were notified of how Gerlach screwed the pooch, they would be howling for his blood. Yet we are hearing nothing. Waiting until August 2010 to bring up the issue will be too late.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Arlen Specter barely won the 2004 Republican primary against Toomey, even though Specter had the support of most of the Republican establishment leaders –Rick Santorum,etc. and a huge war chest from decades as a Senator. Finally vote was
Spector 50.8 percent, Toomey 49.2 percent. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Pennsylvania,_2004#Republican_primary
In contrast, Specter beat the Democratic challenger Joe Hoeffel by 52.6 percent vs 42 percent. I may be wrong, but I seem to recall that $Millions more were spent in the Republican primary than were spent in the General election.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:50 am
He is a ridiculous looking little bugger, isn’t he?
P.S. Thanks for the tip, Nate.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:55 am
I can see Specter switching parties with ease, since two of his biggest backers, Trial lawyers and Unions, are traditionally Democratic constituencies. If he votes for the card check legislation he will be rewarded with Union support, and barring a Rendell candidacy, I think Specter can pull it off.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Please do not slander the PA Dems like that. Since 2006 they have done the following:
Rick Santorum into Bob Casey
Don Sherwood into Chris Carney
Melissa Hart into Jason Altmire
Phil English into Kathy Dahlkemper
Curt Weldon into Joe Sestak
Mike Fitzpatrick into Patrick Murphy
That is pretty good work by the PA Dems, considering they had the disadvantage of severely gerrymandered districts. PA’s congressional map looks like ole Elbridge drew it himself.
March 6th, 2009 at 11:58 am
He could always run as an Independent, like Lieberman.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Curt Weldon into Joe Sestak
I think this one is my favorite.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Little Ricky into Bob Casey is my favorite.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Nate: Indeed. Even some of Urban Outfitters’ hilariously ironic shirts—”Voting is for Old People” comes to mind—seem designed to depress Democratic voting.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Matt, it’s Jeffords, not Jefford, and he didn’t become a Democrat — he left the Republicans and became an independent caucusing with the Democrats.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Re “That is pretty good work by the PA Dems”
————-
Well, if you want to sit on your laurels and gloat over being the lucky alternative after Republicans led the voters into a deep pool of shit, I suppose so.
That would avoid introspection re exactly how the Republicans gained the power to gerrymander all those districts in the first place.
Note that the “Curt Weldon into Joe Sestak” conversion was not the work of PA Dems — it occurred because George Bush’s FBI conducted highly visible raids onto the offices of CUrt Weldon’s daughter and political patron about 2 weeks before the election. Payback for ole Curt conducting all of those public hearings on why HumVees weren’t uparmored years after the need became evident.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
It’s a tough call, UVA lawyer. On the one hand, Man-on-Dog was worse than Weldon. On the other hand, Sestak is better than Casey.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Note that the “Curt Weldon into Joe Sestak” conversion was not the work of PA Dems — it occurred because George Bush’s FBI conducted highly visible raids onto the offices of CUrt Weldon’s daughter and political patron about 2 weeks before the election. Payback for ole Curt conducting all of those public hearings on why HumVees weren’t uparmored years after the need became evident.
That made it easier for Sestak, but the district was still trending toward him anyway, and he might have won even without the scandal. Delaware County is trending Democratic, and Sestak was a very attractive candidate on a number of levels: retired 3-star Navy admiral, brought in B. Clinton for a fund raiser, etc. In fact, the local Dems muscled out a less impressive candidate (Bryan Lentz, who does seem to be a good guy and is now a state representative).
March 6th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Arlen’s one of the few senators I’ve ever met. And I was a kid back then. He’s been in office a long time, and has been a player in Pennsylvania politics my entire life. He got elected DA of Philadelphia three years before I was born. For me, he’s more of an institution than a politician. He’s not quite on Joe Paterno’s level of rock star status in Pennsylvania, but he’s as close as it gets. I’d really like to see him go out on a high note and just announce his retirement. He could then just spend the next two years voting with his conscience. I don’t really agree with Arlen on most issues, but I do respect him. I’d hate to see his last act be losing a really ugly election battle. And Toomey will make it ugly. He smells blood, and is ready to go for the jugular. Arlen should call it quits while people still like him.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
People like Pat Toomey and Rick Santorum (and Sarah Palin) are why Pennsylvania is becoming more Democratic. So keep it up Pat!
March 6th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
As a side note, few things warm my heart more than saying FORMER Senator Rick Santorum. And I’m proud that my brother temporarily moved back to Pennsylvania just to vote against him.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Specter will be 80 years old next year. Hang it up, dude.
March 6th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
If Specter switches and wins, he will enormously strengthen the hands of his fellow Republican Senators and Congress members against the Club for Growth.
If I were him, I think that would be enough to make up my mind in favor of doing it.
March 6th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
arlen began his career as a democrat, so why shouldn’t he finish it that way. Pennsylvania will NOT elect a non-incumbent republican to statewide or national office, especially not in this climate. It is not a swing state, but a reliably democratic one, despite what they tell you on TV. (look at past 24 years of presidential votes as well as senatorial and gubernatorial votes.)
Personally, I swore that I would never forgive specter for voting “present” at Clinton’s impeachment, but I do think he was a singular voice of republican reason during the bush/cheney years, and showed that he cares more for his country than his party.
I think Pa. democrats would be smart to recruit him to switch parties, but I think he could win as an independant (no matter which side he decides to caucus with) against a wingnut like Toomey unless the dems nominate a very popular figure like Rendell.
March 6th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Several people have mentioned the possibility of Rendell running for the seat. The thing is, he’ll never run as long as Specter is running for reelection (and it would be too late for him to do so if Toomey beats Arlen in the primary). The two are old friends – Specter was Rendell’s boss and mentor back at the Philly DA’s office in the 70s – and neither has ever campaigned for the other’s opponent. It’s another reason I would like to see Arlen retire; because it could lead to Ed getting in the race.
March 6th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Ed Rendell has repeatedly disavowed any interest in being in the Seante (and in truth, he hasn’t the patience for it).
That seat’s also Franco Harris’s if he wants it.
March 6th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Richard Shelby was a Democrat — a very conservative one, but voting with his party more than 50% of the time — until 1994. Since then, he’s been one of the wingnuttiest wingnuts.
Phil Gramm started his career as a Democratic congressman, albeit in Texas. Now? ‘Nation of whiners.’
Arlen Specter has voted with his party, according to the Washington Post, only 50.8% of the time this year. He’d be quite capable of saying the right things and voting the right way if he became a Democrat.
So make the jump, Arlen; one of us, one of us…
March 6th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
NOT PROVEN!!!
He didn’t vote “present,” he voted “Not Proven,” which, he informed us, was a concept in Scottish law. Some people raised questions about whether he had sworn an oath to uphold American law or Scottish law but we didn’t get an answer. In any event, his vote was essentially treated as a vote against impeachment, so, same diff, as the kids used to say.
March 6th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
David B. says: That seat’s also Franco Harris’s if he wants it.
First Swann, then Harris. What’s next, Andy Van Slyke for attorney general?
March 7th, 2009 at 4:51 am
Fascinating stuff. On one hand running a hardline libertarian in Pennsylvania seems like suicide, but on the other hand if the Republicans don’t get someone in the place before PA turns any bluer or Specter dies in office, they will be shut out forever.
So running Toomey is a wise call.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Nope, you had it right at the beginning: Toomey is a suicide play by the PA GOP. For them to survive, they have to hold onto Specter as long as possible and meanwhile develop a new generation of moderate Republicans capable of statewide appeal, and hope there is a statewide swing back towards parity.
On that point we can agree. Inasmuch as I dislike the big-union politics of the Northeast, recognising that it is reality is not a matter of debate. The expectation of Pennsylvania having, for the long-term, a libertarian senator is, at the present moment, pretty delusional.
But I think this obscures another, perhaps equally important issue why people with my views appreciate that Toomey is running; it could perhaps force Specter’s hand on card check, and kill it for good. Once it fails, it will be difficult to resurrect; it is like defeating communism, a one-time thing.
So the question is, should we be willing to give up one Senate seat for at least the short to medium term, in return for killing card check? I think the answer is affirmative. Frankly, I have lost hope in the American political process, and don’t expect much good to come out of Washington in the next little while. However, American card check, given the sort of totemic status of America, could induce potentially insidious reverberations in other countries. French socialists, for example, could grope it as a perverse affirmation of their delusional faith. And the German Left Party is unlikely to miss using this to further their inanities. I am aware that even post-card check, American labour legislation is unlikely to be stricter than European ones; however, it is the momentum that counts.
That Democrat dirigisme has turned formerly industrial New England into union-loving hellholes unable, and unwilling, to transition to a new economy, is bad enough (I have written previously on the adversarial nature of American unionism); the last thing I want is for Democrat policy to ruin a good country like Switzerland or Austria, where at least I might contemplate residing.
I am tired of the battle about things like labour law in the United States; they are beyond exasperating, much like the education debate. All this labour interest and that corporate interest, no long-term vision, no recognition of how ludicrous it is to focus on something EFCA, some parts of which might even be meritorious, in the present, globalised world. And to puncture some of the idealistic delusions of young Democrats in D.C. grotesquely obsequious to big labour, and pushing this stuff with all their might, I think, is to render everyone a service.