58... 59... 60!
This column is brought to you by the number 60.
And, of course, Arlen Specter.
Senator Specter's announcement today that he is switching parties and joining the Democrats is the political equivalent of an earthquake. Because, much like Jim Jeffords becoming an Independent (and caucusing with the Democrats) it changes the entire balance of power in the Senate. Or, to be more accurate, will change, when Al Franken is finally seated.
Specter realized this, and craftily jumped ship now, so he could honestly say "this does not give the Democrats 60 votes in the Senate." Because, technically, he is right. For the time being, it will give the Democrats 59 votes. Until Norm Coleman exhausts his legal challenges and Al Franken is seated. Which will give Democrats the magic number of a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority.
Democrats are obviously thrilled with this turn of events, from President Obama on down. But they shouldn't get too excited too soon, because it remains to be seen whether Specter will be a reliable vote or not. Specter has always been somewhat of a moderate Republican, and as chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee (until he was ousted by Pat Leahy in 2006, when Democrats won control of the Senate back), he publicly questioned a lot of Bush's actions. But, unfortunately, while he could "talk the talk" to a certain extent by making strongly-worded statements condemning the Bush administration, he never quite managed to "walk the walk," and usually ended up voting with the Republicans when it mattered.
But now, Specter has an important reason to prove his loyalty to his newly-adopted party. Because to stay in his job, he's got to get Pennsylvania Democrats to vote for him. Twice -- in the primary, and in the general election. Of course, since he jumped ship to keep his job, it's not too far-fetched to wonder if he exacted a price for doing so -- such as clearing the Democratic field of senatorial hopefuls next year, so he won't have to face too strong a challenge in the primary.
But whether Specter worked out this deal or not, he's still got to woo Democratic voters in his state. And, on crucial votes (to stop filibusters, for instance), he will be watched very closely. Proving his Democratic faithfulness is going to give him lots of incentive to vote with his new party on critical issues, which will only serve to make it easier for President Obama to move his agenda through the Senate.
The Republicans, hearing Specter's news, are in shock. They are half-heartedly trying to spin Specter's defection as some sort of "good thing" for the party, but the only people who are listening are the hard-core base who yearn to kick all "RINOs" (Republicans In Name Only) out of their party for good. It's pretty easy to see that this isn't really the way to get back into power -- to pretty much guarantee that your party shrinks even further -- but that's really all they have left at this point. On some right-wing websites, they're actually celebrating the loss of Specter, and some are even calling for others in their party (Senators Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain, and even Lindsey Graham) to be forced out as well.
But you don't have to be very good at math to see that doing so would shrink their minority in the Senate from where it stands now (40) down to 39... 38... 37... or even 36. And it's hard to see that as any kind of victory for their party.
As I wrote yesterday, Republicans are facing some pretty dire poll numbers right now. Approval ratings for congressional Republicans are down from 38 percent in February to 30 percent today. And only 21 percent of the public dares to now admit they're a Republican. This is the lowest number since 1983 for them (when they were down to 19 percent). And in 1983, they had a bunch of "Reagan Democrats" to aid them. This time, all the moderates are solidly behind Barack Obama. From yesterday's column:
What is more, Republican purists don't even think there is a problem. They increasingly ostracize any voices of insufficient orthodoxy, and their party continues to shrink as they do so. This is due to the fact that most moderates have already left the party, meaning they are down to a hard-right base. Which, in 2010, may cause a lot of very rightwing Republicans to win their primary elections (and delight their base by doing so, while beating the drums of shrillness on social issues like abortion and gays), and then go on to lose in the general election to a Democrat. They'll have very pure Republican candidates which the base approves of, and they will lose elections as a result -- which could cause the party to shrink even more.
I have to admit, I was thinking of Arlen Specter when I wrote that, although I certainly never expected what happened today (I was as surprised by Specter's announcement as everyone else). After Obama was sworn in, I thought Snowe and Collins were much more likely to be possibilities for Democrats to woo (they were asked about the possibility today, but both of them demurred).
Back in February, right after Bobby Jindal's response to Barack Obama's "it's not a State Of The Union" State Of The Union speech, I wrote an article titled "Republican Fork In The Road: Purists Or Realists?" In it, I said:
The Republican Party is at a real fork in the road... it faces two choices: absolute purity, or some shade or another of pragmatism ("the road less traveled," as it were, for Republicans these days).
In other words, does the party want the purest of the pure when it comes to ideology, or would it (perhaps) like to win some elections at some point in the future? Because make no mistake about it, that is the choice they now face. There is the Bobby Jindal / Sarah Palin path to the future, and there is the Charlie Crist / Arnold Schwarzenegger path to the future. The choice is theirs.
. . .
Republicans, to put it bluntly, are in a tough spot. They have been soundly spanked in two consecutive elections, and 2010 is not looking all that great for them at this point.
. . .
[After voting with Obama on the stimulus bill] Senators Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and Arlen Specter were all threatened by the party organization that no campaign funds would come to them, and perhaps even primary challengers would attack them from the right.
This would all but guarantee the loss of these seats to Democrats, but this fact seems to have escaped the Republican party as a whole. If an ultra-right primary challenger managed to beat any one of these three in a primary, they would then go on to lose the general election in either Pennsylvania or Maine to the Democrat, because neither state is exactly a bastion of far-right Republicans.
This is what I mean about the choice between purity and electability. Republicans, it would seem, would be happier running a candidate who swore fealty to the Republican orthodoxy (and who would, in the end, lose) than they would running a candidate not as "pure," but who might have a chance of actually winning.
But because Washington is truly a town of comebacks, I am not ready to predict the complete demise of the Republican Party. They have not gone the way of the Whigs... yet. A fresh face could emerge with new ideas, and rally what remains of the party around them. A resurgence is not beyond the realm of possibility. Our two-party system is so entrenched that the collapse of a major party (which usually results in the other party splitting into two factions eventually, to fill the void) is such a monumental event that, even if it happens, will take a while longer.
But, for those Republicans who can do simple math, today must have been a sobering day. Republicans will shortly (if Al Franken is ever eventually seated) have lost the power to even be relevant in any branch of the government beyond the Supreme Court for the next few years. They will soon be reduced to (1) wooing Blue Dog Democrats to aid their obstructionist attempts, and (2) calling for meaningless cloture votes in the Senate -- which they will then lose. That's pretty much as far out in the political wilderness as you can get in Washington. And it means that Obama's next few hundred days may prove to be even more impressive than his first, because it gives him even more power to get some things done.
Which is why this column is brought to you today by the number 60.
-- Chris Weigant
I normally don't like one party to have too much power because in this political system it is way too easy for the majority to abuse that power.
However in this instance I have to say - 3 cheers for the number 60!
...Stan
Chris, I'll go where you won't. The only demographic left to the GOP is white people with offensive signs, and that is no foundation for a majority party. Today's announcement, while welcome, heralds the high-tide mark of the teabaggers -- who, as you say, will exercise veto power over Republican candidates for at least the next two elections. Their demands of ideological purity virtually guarantee the party's irrelevance, creating space for a third party to come along -- assuming that one can emerge to craft a message that appeals to the rest of America. Otherwise, we're going to be stuck with one-party politics for a long, long time.
I normally don't like one party to have too much power because in this political system it is way too easy for the majority to abuse that power.
However in this instance I have to say - 3 cheers for the number 60!
Which is what I have been saying all along. Ya'all blast the GOP for all their corruption, abuses, their total control and what not... But when it's the Democrats who are equally corrupt, equally abusive and the DEMOCRATS are in total control, you sit back and claim all is good and right.
Personally, I think it's great that the Democrats will (probably) get their filibuster-proof majority.
Democrats have been in de-facto control of Congress for the past 3+ years, which has seen some of the worst economic times since the Great Depression.
Before today, the Democrats would always whine and cry that it's not their fault because they don't have ENOUGH of a majority to do what they want.
Now with a Democrat in the White House and a filibuster proof majority in Congress, NO MORE EXCUSES will be tolerated from the hysterical Left.
Can we all agree on that??
Can we all agree that, from here on out, EVERYTHING that happens in this country and to this country will be the fault and responsibility of the Democrats??
So say we all.... :D
Michale.....
I have read quite a bit more on the Specter issue since I posted the above.
I am somewhat surprised that no one on the Left is making the Lieberman comparison.
It's probably because the Left won't be able to denigrate the GOP for their (sure to be) raucous and unfair treatment of Specter, if they (the Left) remind everyone that they (the Left) treated Lieberman in a much MUCH worse manner..
Once again, the wisdom of my overall attitude is proven dead on balls accurate. When it comes to all the bad, evil and downright nastiness in politics, there is really no difference between the hysterical Right and the hysterical Left.
Michale.....
@CW
Looks like your words are good enough to get plagiarized, CW!! :D
Senator Specter's announcement today that he is switching parties and joining the Democrats is the political equivalent of an earthquake.
-Chris Weigant, 28 Apr 1607hrs PDT
Arlen Specter’s switch to the Democratic Party is a political earthquake that will have far-reaching consequences for a host of policy and political issues.
-Ken Klukowski & Ken Blackwell, 28 Apr, 1916hrs PDT
Imitation IS the sincerest form of flattery... :D
Michale.....
Michale -
That's a good point. Is anyone keeping an eye on Lieberman right now? Boy, if I was running the GOP, I would be on bended knee right now, BEGGING Lieberman to switch.
As for that other comment (fixed the date for you, by the way), maybe I should sue? Heh heh. Nah, too much hassle. The earthquake metaphor is always on our minds out here in shaky CA!
-CW
Program Note For Everybody
I'm going to mention this in today's column as well, but wanted to let people know.
Ever wondered what I sound like? Now's the time to find out!
Friday morning, around 11:00 AM East (yes, I said EAST) Coast time, I will be a guest on East Village Radio, podcast from New York City.
"TJ and The Tux" will have me on their show "Obama's First 100 Days" which runs Fridays from 10 to noon New York time, but which can be replayed any time after that from the EVR site. We'll be talking about (naturally) Obama's first 100 days (and I'll be asking them what they're going to change the name of their show to now...), as well as other historic "first 100 days" of past presidents.
My only word of caution for those listening, this will be live, so this is what I sound like at 8:00 AM, and I am NOT a morning person. Coherence simply cannot be guaranteed. But it'll be fun nonetheless.
They're already plugging me at their show's website so I thought I would go ahead and return the favor here.
So tune in Friday!
-CW
That's a good point. Is anyone keeping an eye on Lieberman right now? Boy, if I was running the GOP, I would be on bended knee right now, BEGGING Lieberman to switch.
Ahhh But consider this..
The GOP's chances of being at ALL relevant in the coming years is virtually nil.. And, it's all but assured that things in this country (The Economy, Phase 5 W.H.O Alert, etc etc) are going to get a LOT worse before things get better. One more vote in the Senate is not going to amount to a hill o' beans.
So, if *I* were running the GOP, I would make damn sure that the Democrats have ALL the power, ALL the responsibility and ALL the rope they need..
Of course, the risk of this is that the Democrats might actually do a good job and MIGHT (emphasis MIGHT) actually do a GOOD job..
I highly doubt it but, to be fair, I must acknowledge the possibility.
As for that other comment (fixed the date for you, by the way), maybe I should sue? Heh heh. Nah, too much hassle. The earthquake metaphor is always on our minds out here in shaky CA!
Yea, it's not the ultimate in plagiaristic scandals, I agree.. But it is interesting, nonetheless.. :D
Thanx for the fix... I didna wanna look like a moron.. At least more so than normal.. :D hehehehehe
My only word of caution for those listening, this will be live, so this is what I sound like at 8:00 AM, and I am NOT a morning person.
Awwww, now that is downright disappointing..
I am a dreaded PMP myself and always thought you were a kindred soul... :D
Michale.....
Note, just for LizM -
From all accounts, the person who gets almost all of the credit for talking Specter over to the Democrats is none other than Vice President Joe Biden (DE and PA are neighboring states).
Just to give credit where credit is due.
-CW
Michale -
(I just know I'm going to regret asking...)
What's a PMP?
As can be deduced from the hours I post, and the hours I write comments, I am most definitely a night owl. Sorry about that!
-CW
Once again, for LizM -
Salon has some choice Biden quotes on the Specter switch. Although they do crack a joke to open:
"Biden, who'd reportedly been encouraging Specter to become a Democrat for years, and had spoken with him about it many times over the past few months, was particularly excited. And naturally, that meant he talked about trains."
But it's all in good fun, they love Joe over at War Room.
:-)
-CW
@CW
PMP = Perky Morning Person :D
The kind of "demon" that should be hunted by Dean & Sam...
Michale.....
Chris,
Thanks for the Biden updates! The Salon article was good in that it didn't come close to giving me a headache. It was, actually, very funny!
I didn't know the War Room was such a Biden-friendly place...heck, even the comments weren't hard to take.
Thanks again!
P.S. It sounds like the President reads your blogs - 'cause he's been sounding an awful lot like you of late! Hmmmmmmm....