Specter’s Seniority
It seems that Harry Reid and Arlen Specter cut a deal regarded Specter post-switch seniority. The deal is that for now, nothing will change. He’ll keep the committee seats he has, but won’t chair anything. But if Specter gets re-elected in 2010, then he’ll be treated as if he’d been a Democrat all along. In other words, a very senior Democrat who’d likely chair the Judiciary committee. It turns out, of course, that many senior-but-slightly-less-senior-than-Specter Democrats aren’t happy about this deal since it’s their oxes that are getting gored.
From a progressive point of view, I think “constructive ambiguity” on this score is the most useful thing. If Specter casts good votes that help brings progressive governance to the country, then progressives will see the Specter courtship as having been useful and put pressure on Senate Democrats to put their egos aside and make good on the promises that were made to Specter. But if he proves to be an obstacle to the progressive agenda, then Barbara Mikulski and others who don’t want to take a back seat to Specter will have a strong case.
20 Responses to “Specter’s Seniority”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
May 1st, 2009 at 8:49 am
We can only hope that the disgruntled Senators are sufficiently pissed off to vote out Reid in 2010 as well as blocking Specter’s seniority grab.
May 1st, 2009 at 8:50 am
Lieberman’s chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee comes to mind. The real question is what Reid thought he’d get from this. Specter has always been an opportunist and would continue to be one as a Democrat. Will his votes change? If not, then there is no reason to give him anything, especially since he’d be out of office in 18 months or so. Just being a Democrat is wonderful, I am one without any deals from Harry Reid, but that is not enough. What did Reid get in addition to a party change? Specter needs to actively advance the Democratic agenda. If so, fine. If not, bring on Joe Sestak.
May 1st, 2009 at 8:55 am
Although it would be nice to see Reid voted out of leadership (though I do have qualms about who’d take over – better the devil you know..), I’m fine with Specter maintaining seniority, as long as he’s the progressives’ bitch. The moment he starts waffling, though, out he goes. The Dems should’ve tossed Lieberman under the bus to show him they mean business.
May 1st, 2009 at 9:23 am
Re Matthew’s comment “From a progressive point of view, I think “constructive ambiguity” on this score is the most useful thing.
————–
As I’ve noted, I have mixed feelings about Specter. But the primary thing I think is being Missed in all this is his responsibility –simply by being one out of 100 Senators and especially a Republican Senator — for all the past disasters that have befallen this country.
Did he not vote for the Patriot Act? To invade Iraq? To run up $6 Trillion in debt? For Bush’s tax cut for the Rich? To gut financial regulation? If he was not a major perp, was he not an accessory?
In other words, how did his past sins get not only washed clean but swept under the rug as well?
Should he not pay ANY price for his past votes?
May 1st, 2009 at 9:32 am
Someone correct me if I’m wrong but I didn’t even see a fucking goat — carrying a signboard listing Specter’s many past sins –running off into the woods.
On the other hand, maybe Specter could tell us some interesting stories re what really went on in those Republican Caucuses the past 14 years ,especially during the Bush-Cheney era.
Kinda like that little retard Claudius , ignored as he sat in the corner. Pity and contempt placing him above suspicion. Scribbling into his dairy at night his recollections of what Augustus Caesar, Tiberius, Caligula and Livia had done that day –who they had betrayed and murdered. Year after year.
May 1st, 2009 at 9:40 am
Ding! Now you’re talking Matt. This is precisely the right approach.
May 1st, 2009 at 9:45 am
Huge swaths of the Democratic caucus voted for those things, too. Specter’s not going to be held responsible if they aren’t.
May 1st, 2009 at 9:45 am
Instead of their own oxes being gored, it could be that those Senators just have their own axen to grind.
May 1st, 2009 at 9:56 am
Wait, what? If he’s progressive he gets to keep his plum seats, and if not, not. So you’re making the litmus test ideological…. well, that’s certainly original. While I share your goals for the most part, I don’t really understand why the Senate leadership has to please Matt Yglesias first and foremost.
Also, how would this work exactly? Wait until Mother Jones gives him a progressive score of 65 or lower and then apply to the DMV for an eviction notice? No matter how it plays out, stripping him of his offices at some later point is going to be fairly ugly.
It’s much more likely that he’ll be able to keep whatever he gets now, so choose wisely now.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:01 am
As I recall, when Specter made some pro-choice Roe v. Wade noises immediately after the 2004 election when he was about to become judiciary chairman, the Republicans had absolutely no problem knocking him back into line to sing their tune again a few days later.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:04 am
If Specter casts good votes that help brings progressive governance to the country, then progressives will see the Specter courtship as having been useful
I’ve always thought this obsession with the 60th vote was unhealthy for the Democrats. Reid always seems to give away the whole store.
Specter was looking at the certainty of losing his seat next election, undoubtedly to a much more progressive Democrat. So where was the horse trading here? Reid could have offered him partial seniority so that he could retain some of his committee assignments without having him jump to the head of the line.
BTW if Reid somehow loses his seat next round, maybe sensible Dems could offer Specter the position of Majority leader.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:13 am
Is Specter really going to be a progressive voice on health care reform, as some suggest? Where’s he at on allowing a public plan to compete with insurers, for instance? He’s big into increasing NIH budgets, but his insistence on $10 billion for NIH in the stimulus plan led to decreased funding for public health (from $5 billion in the House version to $650 million in the final bill). So now they’re laying off in public health departments all across the country, just as they’re supposed to be gearing up for a swine flu pandemic.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:20 am
It’s much more likely that he’ll be able to keep whatever he gets now, so choose wisely now.
Specter won’t get anything until after 2010.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:41 am
It’s not Reid’s deal to make. The caucus gets to vote on it. And, I find it difficult to believe that they are going to make Specter one of the most senior members of the Democratic caucus with all the plum assignments.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:43 am
Since anything he gets would come from an organizing resolution, and since taking it away would require a new organizing resolution, I suspect that the moment he starts waffling, he gets to keep all his rewards with no backlash whatsoever.
Remember, the man who made this backroom seniority deal with Specter is the same man who previously said, “Arlen is always there for us, except when we need him.” The consequences of that behavior are apparently plummy committee appointments that crowd actual Democrats out.
May 1st, 2009 at 10:57 am
But if he proves to be an obstacle to the progressive agenda, then Barbara Mikulski and others who don’t want to take a back seat to Specter will have a strong case.
In what universe? Yes I’m sure Specter is quaking in his boots hoping he won’t lose his seniority and plum assignments like that other obstacle to the progressive agenda, Joe Lieberman.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:48 pm
I love Rendell, but Sestak still has the entire
Hillary-08/BillClinton 92-96/Gore00/Kerry04/DNC- PA Dem structure and most of the AFL/CIO ready to back him as soon as he announces. They will destroy Specter out West.
Obama does not own PA.
Casey’s endorsement means nothing. (ask Obama) Junior is a weak sister…always has been.
It is truly a disgrace that Obama says he’ll back Specter.
We owe that formerly ‘dead senator walking’ nothing. Its a gift to even LET HIM run in our Primary. He was 22 points down to Toomey in the GOP primary y’know, dead as a doornail….
May 1st, 2009 at 3:50 pm
What a huge “if” in the last paragraph. Personally, I’m contributing money to any liberal Democrat who opposes Specter in the primary.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:35 pm
If I were a Democratic politician in Pennsylvania and I had been considering a Senate run in 2010, then I would see this as a huge opportunity. This guy can be beaten.
May 4th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
This may have been done with an eye toward Maine’s two Republican Senators (Snowe and Collins). Think how much more enticing switching parties would be if you knew you got to keep your seniority, in addition to joining the Majority party.