The Solution Backfired
Once upon a time, in 2004, the Great State of Pennsylvania was represented in the United States Senate by two Republican: Pro-choice liberal Arlen Specter, who had led the fight for the confirmation of Clarence Thomas’ nomination to the Supreme Court but had also voted to acquit Bill Clinton at his impeachment trial, and pro-life lion Rick Santorum, who had gained recognition as the Senate’s foremost defender of unborn human life.
In that year of 2004, Arlen Specter’s term was up.
The Goal: keep that seat Republican.
The Plan: As an incumbent has a better chance of re-election than a challenger seeking an open seat, re-nominate Specter.
The Problem: Pro-life Pat Toomey, more interested in the lives of the unborn than in the continuance of Specter’s political career, was challenging Specter in the primary, and showed every sign of beating him.
The Solution: Santorum, and even pro-life President George W. Bush, would campaign for Specter’s re-nomination.
And just how well did that solution work out for the Republican Party?
Today, the Great State of Pennsylvania is represented in the United States Senate by two Democrats.
Let’s take a look at just where, as a former boss of mine used to say, did the wheels come off?
Specter, with Santorum’s and Bush’s support, was re-nominated, and re-elected. He was grateful for this support to them and to the Republican Party, yes? Maybe not so much.
Two years later, faced with his own re-election challenge, and with the sting of Toomey’s defeat still marring his pro-life credentials, Santorum was defeated by Robert Casey Jr., son of the late popular pro-life governor Bob Casey (who is most famous outside Pennsylvania for being denied permission to make a pro-life speech at a Democratic National Convention). Casey Junior, running as a pro-life candidate was able to draw enough of Santorum’s pro-life supporters away to defeat Santorum. After over two years, Pennsylvania pro-lifers are still awaiting Casey’s first pro-life vote. Specter did support Santorum’s re-election, but somehow Specter’s support was not persuasive to Pennsylvania’s pro-life communinity.
And now, with liberal Specter voting with the Democrats on virtually every issue, and faced with the task of running for re-election again in 2010, and faced again with a challenge from Toomey, Specter, told by his pollster that he cannot win a Republican primary (no doubt due to his abandonment of every distinctly Republican principle), has switched parties, and will seek re-election as a Democrat.
Was this not utterly predictable? Was it ever likely that Specter, as one of the Republican minority in the Senate, would stand up against the majority for GOP principles?
The Lesson: The Republican Party will win as a pro-life party, or not at all. The label isn’t enough, Republicans must actually believe in the platform.
(Cross-posted to Thoughts of a Regular Guy.)
Ironically enough, I was sitting at a coffee shop this morning where the former Senator Santorum was also enjoying some morning brew. The temptation to cross the room and ask him, “how do you like them apples” definitely came across my mind.
At the time, I remember Santorum vehemently defending his position in Crisis Magazine (Deal Hudson’s outfit) and other places stating that choosing Spector over Toomey was the “greater good” in order to preserve a necessary majority to get pro-life measures through. I believe in 2004 we hadn’t yet seen PBA passed and signed by the President, but I could be wrong on the time-line.
Santorum stuck me always as a confused conservative. He preached limited-government and fiscal accountability, but a read of his work “It Takes a Family” reveals that many of his policy preferences involved federal government intervention in schools and local communities. Policy wise, I’m not sure I necessarily have an issue with many of his ideas, but it wasn’t the “libertarian” flavor of conservatism that’s favored by men like Toomey and the WSJ.
That said, despite being a pro-life Champion, Santorum spent the last two years of his senate career championing primarily the war on terror and in 2006 we were facing a strong media thrust against Iraq, etc. We heard very little from Santorum in his final two years of the Senate on the pro-life cause.
Which brings us to the bigger issue: I want pro-life republicans, but many of those who are pro-life talk a good game, but move the ball very little (see, e.g., Bush, G.W.). More deeply, the pro-life plank is precisely a policy position, but it doesn’t permeate other areas of policy. That’s not a “seemless garment” argument so much as it is to say that if we’re really pro-life, shouldn’t we also be pro-family in other areas (family friendly taxes; favoring local community; not having a knee-jerk protectionism of wall street interests…).
That’s a long rant. It’s a frustrating area of GOP politics.
That’s not a “seemless garment” argument so much as it is to say that if we’re really pro-life, shouldn’t we also be pro-family in other areas (family friendly taxes; favoring local community; not having a knee-jerk protectionism of wall street interests…).
There’s nothing here for me to take issue with.
I heard Fred Barnes speak last night in Libertyville, IL, and he said something that really struck me: “Things change. And they change for one reason: people change them.”
I’m working on something I can do. I hope we all will.
Arlen Specter making friends and influencing people on the Democratic side? NOPE!
What if Specter is really a Republican mole sent in to cause havoc behind enemy lines?
BS of course. Specter is exactly how he appears, mendacious, but it is nice to day dream.
I was not a big fan of Senator Santorum. Yes he was pro life and on that and other issues I agreed with him. But Alberto nails the confused part above. Would I have preferred Santorum over his challenger, yes. Would I have preferred that Spector went down to Toomey when it was possible Toomey could have won, absolutely. But if, for example, Santorum ran for the nomination and won it, he would likely get trounced by Specter.
I also doubt Toomey can beat Specter in the general. So why not find another Pennsylvania Republican (who is also pro life) who can? Specter has feet of clay and is beatable in the general.
Karl from Patterico has a prety good analysis of the Specter matter.
Let’s also remember that Santorum didn’t just lose to Casey in a narrowly, hard fought contest. He got decimated by an 18 point margins, one of the worst drubbings ever taken by an incumbent Senator, largely on the grounds that he’d gotten a reputation nationwide as being, essentially, a crazy person.
Toomey will be defeated by about 25 points by Specter — maybe worse. And Toomey would have been crushed in 2004 too. And that’s b/c PA is very Democratic — and Toomey is very, very conservative.
As a matter of political tactics, this is just insane
The smart move here Feddie is for Toomey to bow out and PA Republicans to run a pro life moderate.
The cynical, self-serving move by Specter had absolutely nothing to do with values, policy, or any high-minded thinking of any kind— though President Obama surely would like for you to think that.
Everybody knows he did it because he was down 21% in the polls leading-up to the GOP primary for his seat- and Joey Pluggs made a deal with him, he already admitted as such. The sad truth is that this hack has spent three decades in the Senate, while accomplishing very little.
And Barack and him have a lot in common- as unprincipled political opportunists, I’m sure they’ll get along just great.
Just a little over a month ago, the Senator said in an interview that he wouldn’t switch parties due to the importance of checks and balances.
And back in 2001, Sen. Arlen Specter, then a Republican, proposed a rule forbidding party switches… he was upset when Vt Sen. Jim Jeffords’ left the GOP to become an independent.
Who knows what the truth is with this guy, you’ll never get it from him.
With all due respect, Senator- don’t let the door hit your butt on the way out. Nobody on our side’s going to miss you.
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com
The cynical, self-serving move by Specter had absolutely nothing to do with values, policy, or any high-minded thinking of any kind— though President Obama surely would like for you to think that.
Everybody knows he did it because he was down 21% in the polls leading-up to the GOP primary for his seat- and Joey Pluggs made a deal with him, he already admitted as such. The sad truth is that this hack has spent three decades in the Senate, while accomplishing very little.
And Barack and him have a lot in common- as unprincipled political opportunists, I’m sure they’ll get along just great.
Just a little over a month ago, the Senator said in an interview that he wouldn’t switch parties due to the importance of checks and balances.
And back in 2001, Sen. Arlen Specter, then a Republican, proposed a rule forbidding party switches… he was upset when Vt Sen. Jim Jeffords’ left the GOP to become an independent.
Who knows what the truth is with this guy, you’ll never get it from him.
With all due respect, Senator- don’t let the door hit your butt on the way out. Nobody on our side’s going to miss you.
Then Senate is just chock full of living, breathing, walking, talking arguments for term limits, ain’t it?