Flashback: Specter Opposed Confirmation Of Potential Obama Supreme Court Nominee
Here’s a sign that Obama and Dems may not be able to count on much help from newly-minted Democrat Arlen Specter in the fight to get his eventual Supreme Court justice confirmed:
Earlier this year, Specter came out strongly against the nomination of Elena Kagan, Obama’s pick for the post of Solicitor General. Kagan is one of several people who’s being talked about as a potential Supreme Court pick for Obama.
This doesn’t bode well for Dems. Specter raised concerns about Kagan’s positions on the death penalty, her earlier work for Ruth Bader Ginsberg, her claim that Ginsberg is a “moderate,” her views on judicial activism, and other things, according to his written questions for her at the time.
While Specter didn’t ultimately pass judgment on her answers, he rejected her because he maintained she hadn’t answered his questions to his satisfaction, and his line of questioning suggests a hostility to anyone with liberal to moderate legal views.
Indeed, Specter was pretty elusive on why he opposed her, which also suggests that he’d be unreliable at best as an ally in the Supreme Court fight.
So for all the talk we keep hearing about how Specter is putting Dems within reach of the 60 Senate votes they need to break the GOP filibuster, there’s little reason to imagine that he’d be likely to help in this regard on what will prove one of the biggest and most consequential Senate fights of all.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
I don’t know. We know Specter’s ideology shifts with the wind. He was probably still banking on having to court the Republican base in Pennsylvania in the primary next year, so opposition to an Obama nominee may have been what he thought was a smart play. His “elusiveness” on his opposition to her is probably an indicator of that.
Surely deals have been made. Surely Specter committed to voting with the Democrats at some point, else why bother to work on getting him to change? Surely Specter knows that if he keeps voting “NO” on everything, Obama will withdraw the party’s help when he’s up for re-election.
Surely someone somewhere along the line made this part of the deal. Please tell me that someone got some kind of commitment out of Specter…
I agree with Matt. Maybe that elusiveness was a cover for keeping w/ the righties? I mean, if he didn’t give a full-throated opposition to her actual answers, and used her supposed refusal to answer to his satisfaction as a sticking point, then it sounds like he was (as is often the case for Specter) trying to have it both ways.
.
If she is nominated, then I could easily see him say something to the effect, “Well, I’m now satisfied with your the thoroughness of your answers, even if I don’t agree with all of your views, and I think you’ll make a fine Supreme Court judge.” Or something to that effect.
.
But, you are right to take note of his shiftiness. He’s as unreliable as he is reliable. If you know what I mean.
dunno, Tena. So far: No on EFCA. No on Dawn Johnsen. No on the budget. And, of course, the original No on Elena Kagan.
Greg
.
I understand why you keep framing the story this way but you aren’t accounting for the reality of Specter being
.
1. A guy who often says one thing then does another.
.
2. A guy who was constantly pressured by the GOP leadership to tow the line.
.
Go back and look at all the things he said about Eric Holder when his confirmation was up. He made it seem like Holder was either dumb or criminal and he said he knew for sure that Holder wasn’t dumb. But when it was all said and done he voted for confirmation. Right now NOBODY has a line on how Specter will be as a Democrat. You definitely can’t go by his time as a Republican unless you at least acknowledge that being a Republican colors his record as it does anybody elses. And like I keep saying, if Arlen Specter votes against the administration Sestak is going to blow his a$$ out of the water in the primary. And whether he was a Democrat or Republican we would still be begging for his vote every time something came up including confirmation of Supreme Ct justices. A lot better to have him inside our tent trying to persuade him than on the other side where he would still face pressure to tow the party line. Oh and one more thing, I think all of the mud the GOP is slinging his way right now might also be a motivating factor in the near future for how he votes.
Greg – how come nobody who works with the man can see what is so clear to even a casual outsider? Mainly, that you cannot count on anything Specter says he might do or not do. He’s like the wind – he’ll box the compass inside of an hour if the conditions are right.
Yes, and we can’t forget Specter’s role in the whole “magic bullet” theory surrounding the cause of Kennedy’s assassination — if only to underscore his comical ridiculousness.
.
Again, I think he’ll pretend to be in opposition, and in some areas might even vote that way (especially if it’s no real threat to actual passage.) I imagine he still wants to court the moderate Repub’s and Independents in PA. But, the more he caucuses w/ the Dems, the more cover he’ll feel to comfortably take flight with the shifting political winds.
.
I think that’s why the President said Specter’s been “liberated” the other night.
If Specter’s voting record SINCE he became a Dem is any indication, then Greg’s analysis is exactly correct.
I think Specter will continue to be totally unreliable, especially on important or critical votes, just as he has always been. That’s how he built that large war chest.
Like Reid said, “he’s alwdasy there with use, except when we need him.”
Specter was awful on Anita Hill (and Biden was far from perfect). There may be some underlying gender things at work with Specter. Man of a certain age thing. In spite of that, I think SG has the clearer view on this. I suspect we’ll see Specter voting with the Dems on a lot of crucial legislation in the months to come. And, yes, it’s a much easier deal with him on the inside. And I can’t believe Obama and Biden were willing to offer support without some promises of brand loyalty.
Nicole, I like that argument- So far the litmus tests for Specter have been bills that were either guaranteed to pass (Budget), or guaranteed to fail (Cramdown- given that it was also opposed by Bayh, Nelson, Dorgan, Baucus, Tester, Byrd, Bennet, Carper, Lincoln, and Pryor)
Wait for a Democratic bill that is actually in the balance- one that needs cloture, and is close. Then and only then, can we know for sure if he’s worth our time. Patience is key.
That said, in principle, I prefer Sestak, especially if Specter fails us.
“I think that’s why the President said Specter’s been “liberated” the other night.”
I so hope you’re right. That’s just how I saw it at first, before he voted “no” on the budget. But perhaps you have your eye more closely trained for the details of his vote. I really cannot imagine that they didn’t think he’d vote with the Democrats if he switched – and Biden and Clinton courted him.
Your point about the moderates is excellent.
Just a thought. Pres Obama nominates; Specter tries his usual mind games and then he stands up for election as a Dem Senator in 2010. Do you think his mavericky credentials can immunize him? Whatever deal he has made, getting up the President’s nose won’t help. My take: lots of wind on the President’s nominee but not much else. I think we are getting carried away here. However one looks at Specter he is “damaged goods: to some extent.
“getting up the President’s nose won’t help.”
I agree with that 100%.
Everyone should have gotten the message when the president went all Chicago on the GOP and told them Congress was going to use reconciliation to pass health care since the GOP decided to do nothing but obstruct. My single favorite thing he did in his first 100 days.
Let me put it to you this way. If Specter votes against major issues and is the deciding vote cast then he will lose in the primary next year. We don’t lose anything in the meantime. He won’t get any chairmanships until after the midterms next year. The President has said he would support him in a primary but there are always different levels of support. Sestak is a viable candidate who is already nipping at Specter’s heels. Whether he was a Dem or Republican we would still need his vote. And bestest of all the defection has the Senate Republicans in disaray. I will ask again, what is the downside of Specter being a Dem right now? The only one I could see is if people really think that he will get unconditional support in a primary regardless of how he votes this year. I happen to think thats is taking a very naive view of our President.
sgwhite – I like your thinking and I’m going with your view of this.
“And bestest of all the defection has the Senate Republicans in disaray”
O yeah, baby. I was walking 10 inches off the floor that entire day and the next. I loved their pain!
One last thing that has to be said. Of the 3 Republicans who voted for the stimulus bill the only one who had any skin in the game in terms of a backlash was Arlen Specter. He knew that casting that vote would probably screw any chance he had at getting reelected as a Republican. Now there is no doubt he helped water it down but he still voted for it in the face of that knowledge. Collins and Snowe knew going in that they wouldn’t catch hell in Maine for doing so. But Specter knew the exact opposite. Now I don’t expect that he will vote for every progressive issue or for every WhiteHouse initiated bill. But I do suspect he will vote for cloture more times than not and that in and of itself will help get a lot passed. Now on the off chance I am wrong he gets blown out in a primary, but I don’t think I am.
If you go back to Specter’s press conference the day he flipped to the D’s, there was a segment where he is visibly pissed and talking about how the other Republicans were so strident and loud, that he wasn’t able to sneak a bunch of real far-right Bush judicial nominees through. I urge you to revisit it (watch it, as a transcript won’t do his tone justice).
Specter was using the term “we” a lot, indicating to me that he saw these extremist judicial nominees as his own. He is going to be thoroughly disappointing to nayine thinking he is going to help Obama get a decent nominee.
There may be one potential downside. Per the link:
“Does Arlen Specter’s defection from R to D strengthen the President’s hand in Congress? Perhaps overall but not on judicial appointments because breaking (the equivalent of) a filibuster in the Senate Judiciary Committee requires the consent of at least one member of the minority. Before today, Specter was likely to be that one Republican. Now what?”
Food for thought . . .
http://www.congressmatters.com/storyonly/2009/4/28/12534/2073
Specter is not an easy read. It could be that some of his conservative votes were done to placate his (at that time) conservative base; now that he is free of that political necessity, we’ll be able to better evaluate his true leanings. It may well be that he will be more of a liability to the Democrats than he will be an asset. Of course, I’m certain that he is aware of his trial period (until the 2010 election) and will toe the line to ensure Democratic support for reelection. One thing for sure: Specter is an opportunist who is looking out for himself first and foremost.
flounder
.
Not all of the judges he was referring to could be labeled “far right”. What he actually said was that because the Club for Growth had decimated their numbers the Republicans weren’t able to confirm ANY judges that Bush had nominated. The point he was making was that in allowing the Club for Growth to control the outcomes of primaries the Republicans were basically cutting off their nose to spite their face. Did you think a Republican Chairman of the Judiciary Committee wouldn’t work to help a Republican President with their nominees? I swear man people are looking for things to dislike about this move and its amazing to me. Guess what, if he votes against the nominee as a Dem he likely would have done the same as a Republican so what have we lost? He isn’t the chairman of the judiciary so he is only one vote in committee. We have everything to gain here and nothing to lose. The only people who have anything to lose are Republicans and Arlen Specter.
Tena, I don’t have the faith in our Dem leaders you have. I imagine they will support Specter a la Lieberman.
But this will be a good litmus test for him as far as I’m concerned. It’s not too late to mount a grass roots Dem candidate to run against him if there isn’t one in the wings waiting.
“Everyone should have gotten the message when the president went all Chicago on the GOP and told them Congress was going to use reconciliation to pass health care since the GOP decided to do nothing but obstruct.” Yes!
.
Tena, I thought the same thing and said, “Wow, the wingnuts are so busy chasing down his birth certificate that they utterly missed the actual decisiveness of that stance. Again, the “ground has shifted” and they cannot comprehend the full import of what that means…
.
One last thing about Specter: I’m sort of with Jon Stewart on this one. During his presser, AS was so blatant about his desire to remain a Senator (by any means necessary), that the sheer ruthlessness of that fact could both help and hurt the Dems.
.
Perhaps we should pay attention to polling in PA over the next year to see what the old goat “really” thinks. Maybe that will be the best indicator of all — “Um, which way is the wind blowing? Due North? Okay, I’ll go that way.”
“Tena, I don’t have the faith in our Dem leaders you have. I imagine they will support Specter a la Lieberman. ”
Well you and I both are just going to have to wait and see what happens, no?
“an of the Judiciary Committee wouldn’t work to help a Republican President with their nominees? I swear man people are looking for things to dislike about this move and its amazing to me. Guess what”
sgwhite – O I’m with you and have been from the start. I think it’s all good.
I just want Coleman gone and Franken seated and then we can really rock and roll and Specter might find himself both rocked and rolled if he keeps doing the Repug sidestep.
Did Harry Reid and His Merry Band of Incompetent Weaklings extract ANYTHING in return for their promise to Specter to let him jump over senior Democrats in line for committee chairmanships? Say, a promise to OCCASIONALLY support an Obama policy, bill or nominee??
Specter has a forked tongue.
The Democrats were dumb to take him.
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
He-He, when Specter was a Republican, he could only surprise Republicans in a negative way. Now that he is a Democrat, he can only surprise Democrats in a negative way.–Be careful what you wish for…
Specter switched parties because he couldn’t win the GOP primary. If he doesn’t keep folks happy on the left, he might just get primaried out by a netroots backed primary challenger.
He couldn’t flip on EFCA, Johnsen or the budget after already being on record as speaking out against each issue before – he needs to pretend he’s principled.
If the next few months show that Specter won’t play ball, the netroots needs to really start encouraging Joe Sestak to take a run at him in the primary.
I am sorry, but I see no gain in Specter being a Democrat. I listened to Gen. Sestak last evening on “Hardball” and I think he should run and push Specter out. Specter is NOT a Democrat, even by a stretch.
I’m going to admit that I haven’t read all the comments, but:
I disagree that Arlen Specter changes political philosophy with the wind.
He is (and always has been) pro-choice, pro-health care, pro-public education; and he is not connected with the Big Oil wing of the GOP.
That’s pretty much the agenda of the Obama administration, and not of the the Loyal Bushie GOP.
(And any individual vote of his paints a skewed picture, in my view.)
In addition, politically, Arlen has a 20% approval among PA GOP but a 70% approval among PA Democrats! The Republicans who became Democrats in 2006 and 2008 are “Specter Democrats” — and THEY are NOT being accused of changing parties for “political expediency.”
So why should he?
As far as votes, I think Specter has to please PA Democrats now, or face a serious primary challenge from Joe Sestak.
In addition, it seems to me pundits ignore that Snowe and Collins both also voted with Specter. Are we saying they will never vote with Obama again, now that they are part of only 40 Republicans, instead of 41?
No, I think the GOP is in really serious trouble now.
The conservative Democrats will keep the legislation and budgets moderate… which will then allow the moderate Republicans to easily vote with the Democratic majority… thereby pleasing those of us in the middle who sway most elections… which will result in the Democrats maintaining the majority for a long, LONG time.
The GOP is still stuck in Loyal Bushie Land, literally defending incompetence, intolerance, and torture.
They make up a mere 20% of the electorate now.
Surely Snowe and Collins aren’t planning on associating themselves with that teeny-tiny minority anytime soon, especially when they are also both honestly pro-choice, pro-health care, pro-public education, etc.
I will go on to comment about Souter, if you’ll indulge me:
Rather than being a “liberal,” Souter is what the GOP once was…
A true champion for individual freedom, with a bright line separating Church and State. (I’m from New Hampshire.)
It’s the GOP that has changed — not Souter.
The GOP is a minuscule tent these days.
In contrast, here is the current BIG Tent for Democrats:
They have 58 Senate seats– an amazing feat in itself!
And the one who will finally allow them to stop GOP filibusters will be the one who made his name (in part) by labeling Rush Limbaugh as a big, fat idiot. The irony!
They also have not one but TWO independents — one of whom is a Orthodox Jew Neo-Con-lite Capitalist and one of whom is an Atheist Pacifist Socialist.
Now that’s as big a tent as I’ve ever witness in politics!
For all these reasons, I believe that any center-left ideas coming out of the Democratic majority will pass with 60 votes easily, be it from liberal Democrats, conservative Democrats or liberal Republicans like Snowe and Collins.
Anyway, sorry to take up so much space.
Thanks, as always, for the intelligent information I find on this website.
Interesting website=) will definitely visit soon!