Thank you for contacting my office regarding a proposal to amend the Constitution for the purpose of defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. I appreciate hearing your comments on this important matter.
In 1996, the Congress passed and the President signed into law the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). I supported the passage of this legislation. This law has two important facets. First, the law defines marriage for the purpose of the Federal government as a union between one man and one woman. Second, it provides that no state or local jurisdiction may be forced to recognize a legal union created in another state or jurisdiction, if the definition of that union is contradictory to their own.
The legalization of same sex marriage in states such as Connecticut, Iowa, and Massachusetts has led many citizens to believe it is necessary to amend the United States Constitution in order to protect traditional marriage. Although I support traditional marriage as defined in DOMA, and although I appreciate the goal of the proposed amendment, I do not believe it is necessary to amend the Constitution at this time.
I believe this is an issue most appropriately addressed at the state level, and most states are working hard to protect marriage. Indeed, nearly every state has enacted statutory or constitutional protection for traditional marriage. Furthermore, DOMA ensures those states will not be forced to recognize unions created in the handful of states with legalized same-sex marriage. Therefore, I believe it is premature to amend our founding document at this time.
Thank you for contacting my office regarding proposals to amend the Constitution to protect traditional marriage. Rest assured I will keep your thoughts on this issue in mind if the Senate considers this issue or any related issue. Should you have any further questions, please contact my office or visit my website at www.specter.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Arlen Specter
The blogger who posted this letter, Hedo, has confirmed to me over email that this letter was received on September 22nd.
Arlen Specter is engaging in some of the more absurdly bald-faced flips that I have ever seen a candidate engage. He does not care about policy or ideological consistency--only about getting elected.
This all might be tolerable if Specter was simply saying that he was representing the majority wishes of his constituents. However, he keeps claiming that these about-faces are based on principle. Again, if Specter were to admit that his highest principle is getting elected, I would agree with him.
Imagine if every conservative Democrat had a primary challenge like Arlen Specter. Would there even be any question about passing the entire Obama administration agenda?
Reward good behavior--support Joe Sestak. The second Arlen Specter no longer faces a serious primary challenge, the second he no longer cares what progressives think.
A wave of new polling has come out this week, and the Pollster.com trendline tells the story. Sestak is gaining on Specter:
Currently at 44.1%--26.5%, the trendlines show each of the campaigns moving in only one direction: Sestak is up, while Specter is down. Other important takeaways:
Specter well under 50%. Specter has not reached 50% since before Sestak officially entered the campaign. All five of the polling organizations to survey the primary since July show Specter under 50% among Pennsylvania Democrats. A majority of Pennsylvania Democrats have not embraced him, and about 12% have actually stopped supporting Specter since his party switch.
Sestak will continue to gain. The only reason Specter is even ahead at all is because of his higher name recognition. Among Pennsylvania Democrats who know both major candidates, Sestak already has a narrow lead (see here and here). As such, the longer the campaign continues, and the higher Sestak's name recognition becomes, the more Specter's lead will erode.
Sestak does better among likely voters: Even aside from Democrats who know both candidates, the two polling organizations which survey likely voters show Sestak closer to Specter than the ones which survey registered voters. Rasmussen shows Sestak within 4%, and back in August Research 2000 showed Sestak within 15%. This average gap of only 9.5% compares favorably to the average gap of 24.3% across the three polls surveying registered Democratic voters. It is also reminiscent of Ned Lamont performing 10% better among likely primary voters in Connecticut than among registered voters.
Sestak better positioned than other major primary challengers. Sestak is already doing better than other recent, major primary challenges against Senate incumbents. Consider:
In 2004, Specter led Pat Toomey 52%-20% across the three polls taken on the campaign between November 2003 and February 2004. Specter went on to win, but only by 2%.
In 2006, five months ahead of the Republican primary in Rhode Island, Lincoln Chafee led Steve Laffey 56%-28%. Laffey eventually pulled into a dead heat, before narrowly losing the primary by 4,000 votes.
Also in 2006, Ned Lamont trailed Joe Lieberman by 46% only three months before the primary. Lamont went on to win the primary by about 3.5%.
U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, trying to knock off a veteran Democratic incumbent senator in the primary, will get an endorsement Monday from somebody who succeeded in doing just that: Connecticut's Ned Lamont.
Lamont defeated Sen. Joseph Lieberman in the 2006 Democratic primary, largely by running against the Iraq war and Lieberman's support of the Bush administration's war policy. But Lamont did not win the general election. After losing the nomination, Lieberman ran as an independent in the fall, defeating Lamont and the Republican nominee.
Score!
Sestak outperforms Specter in the general election. Lamont may not have won the general election, but Sestak looks well positioned to do so. According to Pollster.com, Sestak does better against Republican frontrunner Pat Toomey than Arlen Specter:
It is hard to imagine how these numbers improve for Specter, given that he is so well known across the state. Sestak, by contrast, is not only already leading, but has significant room for growth.
I like the way this is going. If you haven't already, join Joe Sestak's campaign!
Third quarter fundraising numbers are slowly trickling in. I am pretty sure they will show no Congressional candidate in the country has more than Arlen Specter.
And you know what? Even though I am working to elect Joe Sestak here in my home state, that's fine. This is because Joe Sestak has already won the campaign.
Sestak's victory may come as a bit of surprise, especially to those at Arlen Specter's $10,000-a-plate fundraisers that shut down the entire Senate. But Joe Sestak is already voting in the Senate by proxy, via Arlen Specter. Sestak's primary challenge has caused Specter to come around to the point of view of the majority of the Democratic Party) on every major issue since he entered the race.
Red about Specter's key endorsements during his previous re-election campaign, including Rove, Cheney, Bush and Santorum.
Check out Specter's opposition to conducting investigations of wasteful contracts in Iraq, to ending private contractors conducting military interrogations, and to ending interrogation techniques not allowed in the Army Field Manuel, and more.
Learn about Arlen Specter's opposition to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), and earmarking funds for abstinence-only education that was originally designated for child abuse prevention.
On the environment, Specter voted against tax credits for investments in renewable technology, increased auto efficiency standards, and even President Obama's budget.
Specter has a long history of opposing progressive legislation for political gain within the Republican Party. He is sounding a different tune now, but that is only because he is facing a primary challenge. There are not many things that the grassroots do which actually change Democratic behavior in Washington, but primaries are one of them. Unfortunately, if Arlen Specter wins the May 18th Pennsylvania primary, we won't have that ability to influence him at all for the remainder of President Obama's time in office.
A new Quinnipiac poll in the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary shows Congressman Joe Sestak not only gaining significant ground on Senator Arlen Specter, but ahead among Pennsylvania Democrats who have enough about both candidates to form an opinion.
479 total registered Dems (MoE = +/- 4.5%) among whom 163 registered Dems (MoE = +/- 7.7%) that have an opinion about both Specter and Sestak.
(If registered Democrat) If the 2010 Democratic primary for United States Senator were being held today and the candidates were Arlen Specter and Joe Sestak, for whom would you vote?
All Democrats (July numbers in parenthesis)
Specter: 44% (55%)
Sestak: 25% (23%)
Democrats who have heard of both candidates
Sestak: 43%
Specter: 39%
The subset of 163 Democrats who know both candidates was sent to me, by request, from the Quinnipiac polling institute. So, I guess that makes it an Open Left exclusive!
By the end of the campaign, Specter's name ID advantage will have significantly dissipated, if not disappeared entirely. When that happens, it will be advantage Sestak.
The last day of the third fundraising quarter of 2009 (whoa, time really flies!) is this Wednesday, September 30. Our Democratic candidates for Senate need to make as big a fundraising splash as possible in the third quarter to help refute the growing conventional wisdom among the traditional media pundits that 2010 could be a Republican year.
Please, please, please consider making a contribution today to our Democratic candidates for Senate via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page. I've set some lofty, pie-in-the-sky goals that, if we were able to meet them, I'd be wonderfully surprised and gratified and blown away by your generosity.
Democrat
Currently At
Goal
Distance to Goal
Robin Carnahan
$681
$1,000
$319
Paul Hodes
$780
$1,000
$220
Joe Sestak
$758
$1,000
$242
Charlie Melancon
$193
$400
$207
Please click on over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page and make a contribution to help stop ongoing Republican obstruction in the Senate. Every contribution makes a real impact whether it's $100 or $25 or $10 or, well, any amount. Want to rebel against multiples of five and contribute $63 or $39 or $27, knock yourself out!
Remember, the fundraising quarter ends this Wednesday, so please contribute today if you can. Thank you SO much!
Here is a recent letter from Arlen Specter's office to a constituent query on amending the Constitution to prohibit marriage equality. It shows Specter opposes marriage equality, favors the Defense of Marriage Act, and only thinks that an amendment banning marriage equality is currently unnecessary, but should be considered if more than a handful of states pass marriage equality:
Dear Mr. Hedo:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding a proposal to amend the Constitution for the purpose of defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. I appreciate hearing your comments on this important matter.
In 1996, the Congress passed and the President signed into law the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). I supported the passage of this legislation. This law has two important facets. First, the law defines marriage for the purpose of the Federal government as a union between one man and one woman. Second, it provides that no state or local jurisdiction may be forced to recognize a legal union created in another state or jurisdiction, if the definition of that union is contradictory to their own.
The legalization of same sex marriage in states such as Connecticut, Iowa, and Massachusetts has led many citizens to believe it is necessary to amend the United States Constitution in order to protect traditional marriage. Although I support traditional marriage as defined in DOMA, and although I appreciate the goal of the proposed amendment, I do not believe it is necessary to amend the Constitution at this time.
I believe this is an issue most appropriately addressed at the state level, and most states are working hard to protect marriage. Indeed, nearly every state has enacted statutory or constitutional protection for traditional marriage. Furthermore, DOMA ensures those states will not be forced to recognize unions created in the handful of states with legalized same-sex marriage. Therefore, I believe it is premature to amend our founding document at this time.
Thank you for contacting my office regarding proposals to amend the Constitution to protect traditional marriage. Rest assured I will keep your thoughts on this issue in mind if the Senate considers this issue or any related issue. Should you have any further questions, please contact my office or visit my website at www.specter.senate.gov.
Sincerely,
Arlen Specter
Now, I know that Arlen Specter favors DOMA and banning marriage equality at the state level now, but given the way this primary has gone I'm pretty sure that in a week or two he will be demanding that Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell immediately sign an executive order legalizing gay marriage.
I'm very pleased to let you know that Democratic Congressman Joe Sestak, candidate for U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania, will join us at Senate Guru tomorrow, Thursday September 10, at 5pm Eastern Time for a live blog session. I'm sure he will update us on how his campaign is going, discuss a variety of issues, offer his thoughts in response to tonight's Presidential address on health care reform, and, of course, field your questions.
I hope you will be able to join us for the first candidate liveblog session of the 2010 cycle at Senate Guru. Bring your questions for Congressman Sestak and invite your political junkie friends to join us. (And, if you're really excited for the conversation, support Congressman Sestak with a contribution via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page.)
Right now, 14,000 people are losing their health care coverage every day because our costs are skyrocketing. Meanwhile, too many politicians in Washington, who seem to be ignoring the lessons from Wall Street, would rather leave our health insurance reform up to the insurance companies. No matter what the final bill looks like, we deserve to know how our Representatives and Senators will vote on a public option - up or down!
Pennsylvania is the primary challenge everyone can agree with! In an email leaked from Journolist, Joe Klein endorses Joe Sestak even while attacking the concept of progressive primary challenges in general:
Joe Klein on Journolist
(in reverse chronological sequence)
From: Joe Kelin
Date: Aug 29, 6:03 pm
Subject: A letter from Mr. Billy Ralph Bierbaum of Waxahachie, Texas
re: condensed journalism
To: Journolist
Luke--i think primary challenges are valid in some cases. I'd vote for Sestak over Specter in a heartbeat. They are much more tricky in the House...As for Greenwald, he knows little about politics, less about journalism and cares not a whit about the national security of the United States. I find the Limbaugh-like, knee-jerk devotion of his flock depressing.
----- Original Message -----
From: journolist@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat Aug 29 16:54:11 2009
Subject: [ JournoList] Re: A letter from Mr. Billy Ralph Bierbaum of
Waxahachie, Texas re: condensed journalism
Joe
You are arguing with a straw man. No one here is "more interested in whacking moderates than in making sure that moderate districts are represented by Democrats rather than Republicans." No one is calling for a Naderite heightening of the contradictions.
Why do you insist on characterizing people who disagree with your tactical assessments as "self-righteous political naifs" hellbent on achieving some sort of solipsistic emotional release by way of "purges" and "litmus tests"? That hardly seems civil.
In any case, the question before us is: Are primary challenges a useful means of achieving liberal policy goals? I think they are, based not only on basic human logic and my personal preference for more rather than less democracy, but also on the concrete example of Arlen Specter's recent and pleasing ideological evolution.
You seem to think they are not. Other than suggesting that a theoretical victory by a theoretical liberal in a theoretically conservative district could, theoretically, throw a Democratic seat to Republicans, what is the actual evidence from cases that is causing you to reject the validity of one half of the entire democratic process?
The whole exchange is amusing, even if the leak isn't.
Arlen Specter is having difficulty selling tickets to his fundraiser with President Obama in two weeks. So, according to PA Progressive, Pennsylvania State chair TJ Rooney is giving away $1,000 tickets to hundreds of state committee members for free:
Senator Specter promised the county Chairs free tickets to his upcoming $1000/person event in Philadelphia with President Obama. TJ Rooney then announced the Senator will pay for every state committee person to attend. This makes me thing the Senator is having trouble selling tickets if he has to begin tickets away at $1000 apiece. It'll remain to be seen if he can buy off committee people for a thousand bucks a pop. This hits me as trying to buy votes.
PA Progressive also got a video of Congressman Sestak talking at the Pennsylvania State Democratic Committee meeting over the weekend:
As the number of people in danger of losing their homes continuing to increase, Congressman Sestak has been keeping his office open seven days a week and designating two staff members to help out constituents. From the Delco Times:
For the Mignognas, Strohl, Bettcher and the Fuciles, their journey brought them to Sestak's door.
"Your office did more for me in two weeks than two attorneys that I had hired in a year and a half," Strohl said.
Bettcher said she was unsuccessful trying to refinance until she called Sestak.
"Two days later, I got a response," she said. "I've probably talked more to (Sestak's office) than my family members in the past few months to keep me from becoming a statistic."
Partly because of this, Sestak has kept his office open seven days a week.
In 2007, his office fielded 49 housing-related calls. Last year, it jumped to 224. This year, he expects to take more than 500.
"A lot of these are just conforming loans, 30 years," Sestak said. "People had it and all of a sudden, something happened."
The congressman has designated two staff members, Sean Kelly and Bill Walsh, to handle the cases.
The above excerpt is a small part of a longer story about how an effective member of Congress can make a real difference in the lives of local residents. Check it out.
Another thing we learned years ago was that the entire scheme was made possible by Senator Arlen Specter, who quietly changed the law allowing US Attorneys to be replaced. Without this change, President Bush could have threatened to fire Christie and the other USA's, but he would not have been able to easily replace them with political hacks. Apparently, Specter inserted the changes to benefit Bush and the Republican party--and after all, it's easy to guess at his motives since Bush and Rove saved in him in his 2004 primary contest, and Republican control of the Senate rested on the upcoming 2006 elections.
The biggest campaign even of the week will take place on Wednesday from 6-8 pm when Congressman Sestak debates Republican frontrunner Pat Toomey. It will be broadcast live on JoeSestak.com, and takes place in Allentown at Muhlenberg For ticket requests call (610) 891-8956 or send an email to townhall@joesestak.com.
Does anyone else find it impossible to to not start singing the Bill Joel song of the same name whenever they hear about Allentown?
Congressman Sestak is / was on Rachel Maddow tonight talking about veterans. You can still catch it, depending on where you live and if you watch the second airing.
When realtor Virginia Barr implored Specter to "to tell Congress to move to the center, please, and make some progress" on the critical issues facing this country, Specter found the perfect foil for his message.
"I don't know where else to move to," Specter said.
"But (a move to the center) is not going to happen until all citizens of America participate" in the political process, Specter said.
So just as lunch rush started today, a fellow Democrat came in and asked if I was going to the Sestak endorsement announcement that was to take place at 2pm in Penn Square which is about 1/2 a block from my Creamery...so naturally I closed at 1:55 and headed on over.
Now I'm back and wanted to write up my impressions while they are still fresh. Pardon me if they seem rambly, that's just my writing style.
Rep. Sestak was in Lancaster today to be endorsed by our Democratic County Commissioner Craig Lehman, a couple of City Council Members and 4 out of 5 of our State Committee Representatives (for the record, the 5th State Committee Person is running a campaign of her own and is not endorsing either Senatorial Candidate during the Primary).
Spedwybabs has lots more from the event--stimulus, Afghanistan, the public option, and single-payer.
And now for some eye candy. A campaign volunteer took 78 pics of Congressman Sestak at Netroots Nation. The pictures are beautifully shot, not to mention chock full of candid moments, backstage moments and shots of me awkwardly stumbling through my first staffing experience. You can view the entire set here. For a more soothing experience, here is a slideshow:
"The agreement we reached was the best one we could under the circumstances. We were able to cut out $100 billion from the package and include 35% in tax relief in the overall bill. My preference would have been John McCain's proposal, which I voted for, to have the stimulus package of $421 billion in tax cuts alone. I voted for the Reagan tax cuts back in 1981 and that would be the best course, but in a legislative body you don't have exactly your own choice.
Maybe they will only build half of the train station in Elizabethtown.
Arlen Specter has received more press for having right-wing protesters yell at him than any other Senator. According too a new Rasmussen poll, it doesn't seem to be helping him electorally:
Rasmussen, 8/11, 1,000 LVs (6/16 numbers in parenthesis)
Pennsylvania Senate general election Toomey: 48 (39)
Specter: 36 (50)
Here are my thoughts on this poll (they do not necessarily reflect the thoughts of Joe Sestak):
Rasmussen may ask pro-Republican questions on issue polls and commentary, but I have never seen a reason to discount their election polls.
It is just one poll, and needs confirmation from other sources before being taken as an overall trend.
Both Specter and Sestak have lost ground in the general election, reflecting a deteriorating political environment for Democrats in general.
Specter, who has received massive press attention for the negative reaction at his town halls, dropped 7% more against Toomey than Sestak. He also lost 6% against Sestak in the primary.
Given all of this, it is hard to see how the "extreme protesters vs. Democratic politicians: media narrative is helping Democrats right now. No politician has received more attention in this narrative than Arlen Specter, and a poll taken after his town hall in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, shows him losing substantial ground.
While it may be easy to dismiss the vague, abstract Gallup poll released on the protests yesterday, polling on Specter is far, far more difficult to dismiss. The extensive attention he has received makes him the perfect test case, really.
As I argued earlier this week, we want a people vs. the powerful debate on health care, and it seems like we are getting one. Unfortunately, the version we are getting is wingnut protesters versus Democratic politicians, instead of average Americans versus a broken, for-profit health care system. No matter how crazy those protesters may seem, it is still going to come off as individual Americans versus politicians. Many Americans will be sympathetic with anyone standing up to politicians, purely out of spite.
The "wingnut protesters are crazy" narrative doesn't seem to be working. Certainly, it hasn't been helpful for politicians like Specter to video of protesters yelling at them spread all over the airwaves and internets. I think that we in progressive media have gone overboard in focusing on right-wing protesters.
Last cycle, I started an ActBlue page specifically for Democratic Senate candidates working to pick up seats held by Republicans. I named it the Expand the Map! ActBlue page because the goal was to expand the map of competitive Senate seats. The effort was a big success, achieving over 300 contributions and $40,000 for the Democratic Senate candidates included on the page.
Today, I kicked off the 2010 edition of the Expand the Map! ActBlue page with three Democratic candidates for Senate: Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, New Hampshire Congressman Paul Hodes, and Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestak.
In New Hampshire and Missouri, we have the strongest candidates available, candidates who will also make terrific Democratic Senators. In both races, however, fundraising will always be a top priority. Missouri Republican Roy Blunt will be able to tap his lobbyist buddies and corrupt cronies for cash ad nauseum. No doubt the NRSC will also make holding New Hampshire a top priority; and the D.C. GOP establishment has already begun fawning over Palin-esque quitter Kelly Ayotte. Carnahan and Hodes need our support! A few years back, all four of New Hampshire's and Missouri's combined Senate seats were held by Republicans. Wouldn't it feel great to have flipped all four?
In Pennsylvania, y'all know the deal. Arlen Specter was a Republican Senator for decades. Even though he changed his Party affiliation, he's still not a Democrat as far as I'm concerned. Joe Sestak is a real Democrat, and he - not Specter - should win the Democratic primary. But Specter has a significant edge when it comes to campaign cash; and, Ed Rendell will do all he can to shut off Sestak's fundraising. Let Specter, Rendell, etc. know that they can't shut down the netroots by supporting Sestak!
Please, please, please help kick off the 2010 cycle's Expand the Map! effort by sending these highly deserving Democrats a few bucks. $100 makes a huge difference, $20 makes a huge difference, $10 makes a huge difference! Hop over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page and make your voice heard.
This is not just a contribution to these Democrats' campaigns. This is a contribution toward slowing and eventually stopping Republican obstruction in the U.S. Senate. Thank you SO much!
I can't tell you how energized I am after seeing all of those people come together, veterans and teachers, laborers and doctors, students and seniors. They all made the early morning trip out to Folsom, and were joined by thousands watching live online, because they know that we must work together to restore the promise of the American Dream.
Watch my announcement here (part one):
And here (part two):
The American Dream is a great compact between generations - a promise that we will all pass down a better world than the one we inherited. Now, it has been lost for the first time in our history, because too many of those sent to Washington to represent you, the people, have instead acted on behalf of the powerful and well-connected.
This campaign is not about me. It's about all of us, and we are going to need your help to win. We have an opportunity -- if we act with resolve - to put college back in reach for our children, to demand transparency and accountability from our financial system, and provide quality and affordable health care to everyone. We can be a world leader again, working toward peace or putting American ingenuity on the front line against global climate change.
To succeed, we must remain committed to our principles and let the politics take care of itself. For too long, people in powerful positions have failed to remember that the American Dream has never been about a few people getting ahead, or about protecting those in power -- it is about everyone having an opportunity to do well, and creating a better world to pass down to the next generation.
I am already on the road and over the next two days will take this message to Pittsburgh and Johnstown, Harrisburg and Scranton, and finally on to the most daunting event of all -- a featured appearance on the Colbert Report Wednesday night. You can support this message by making a contribution. In addition to our principles, we need every dollar to help restore the American Dream!
"Congressman Sestak is a flagrant hypocrite in challenging my being a real Democrat when he did not register as a Democrat until 2006 just in time to run for Congress," Specter said in the statement. "His lame excuse for avoiding party affiliation, because he was in the [military] service, is undercut by his documented disinterest in the political process."
Of course, Sestak was an Admiral on active duty until only a couple months before February 2006. So, what Arlen Specter is really doing here is criticizing Sestak for not being partisan enough during his time as an Admiral.
Lots of officers, including Colin Powell, do not register with a political party when they are still in the military. The basic idea is that you don't want to politicize the military leadership.
Would Arlen Specter rather that all Admirals and Generals state their political preference for the whole county to see? I'm sure that wouldn't cause any problems at all.
Now, I am a partisan, and I argue that more Democrats should be active partisans. However, it also strikes me as Honduran-ly obvious that high ranking military personnel should most definitely not be partisans while they are still in the service.
Further, to call a veteran a "hypocrite" for only becoming a partisan after he left the service is to deny all veterans the right to fully participate in American political life. Once you leave the service, you should be allowed to become as much of a partisan as you want, free from charges of "hypocrisy" simply because you served your country in a non-partisan way.
Specter's ignorance of the enormous difficulties active duty service personnel face in voting (see here and here, for starters) was a nice touch to this classy attack.
Arlen Specter hasn't been a Democrat for very long, and he clearly still needs practice acting like one. As the Sestak campaign itself says, this is a Republican-style Swift Boat attack on Joe Sestak's military record, pure and simple.
Defying the wishes of the national Democratic Party leadership, today comes news that both Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Representative Joe Sestak (D-PA) will mount primary challenges to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Senator Arlen Specter, respectively. Good for both Sestak and Maloney. If the leadership can't control their own Senate caucus enough to pass progressive legislation, then they shouldn't be able to prevent progressive primary challenges, either.
Although neither Sestak nor Maloney are making their official campaign launches at this time, in the extended entry I discuss polling, voting records, and other important information that will help you make sense of these campaigns.
While this is an improvement for Specter from his position in the Republican primary, and while being ahead is better than being behind, this is still a pretty tenuous position for the 29-year incumbent. The campaign is likely to become a dead-heat before long, and the final results are highly likely to be within single-digits.
At first glance, Joe Sestak reiterating that he is a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act while speaking at a United Steelworkers conference doesn't seem like much of a news story. As the title of this post implies, however, there is something that made it very interesting:
U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak keeps increasing the likelihood that he'll challenge Sen. Arlen Specter for the Democratic Senate nomination next year.
On Sunday, he told the United States Steelworkers Legislative Conference in Atlantic City that he backs the Employee Free Choice Act, the proposed law that would make it easier for unions to organize.
The catch is that Senator Arlen Specter did not speak at this event. In fact, he was disinvited.
Here is the full story, courtesy of an email exchange with Jim Savage, who is President of a Steelworkers local here in Philadelphia:
"The Senator [Arlen Specter] was invited & confirmed as the keynote speaker."
"There was quite an uproar when we found out. He was uninvited because of the rank-and-file reaction."
"Also, it's worth noting that the Senator was none too happy about it."
At that point, Sestak was then invited. Before he spoke, he was "introduced to the delegates as "our next Senator" to a rousing ovation."
The general sentiment toward Specter was "fuck'm."
I have to say, talking to local union leaders is a lot more fun than talking with communications staff.
Specter's staff grew increasingly aggressive at every event, Pennsylvania union members report. At Specter's Wilkes-Barre office, where union members and allies delivered thousands of letters and petitions, United Steelworkers (USW) member Tim Waters reports that they were told by a staffer, "as soon as you leave, your letters will go straight in the trash."
Stay classy, Specter staffers.
Needless to say, it is a good bet labor unions in Pennsylvania are not going to be as pro-Specter as the upper echelons of the Democratic Party leadership would like.
Yesterday, Rasmussen released a poll on the Pennsylvania Senate campaign. It showed Arlen Specter leading Joe Sestak, 51%--32% among likely voters. This confirmed other polls on the campaign that were taken after the first week immediately following Specter's flip. GQR showed Specter up 54%--35% among likely voters, and Quinnipiac showed Specter ahead 50-21% among registered voters.
While Specter is ahead, that is a pretty weak margin for an incumbent Senator in a primary campaign. For example, Ned Lamont didn't close to within that margin on Lieberman until only two months before the elections. In 2004, Pat Toomey didn't get that close to Specter until less than two months before the primary. In this case, there are eleven months before the primary. As such, given that he is already unable to break out of the low 50% range and with a nearly 100% name ID, Specter's absolutely best case scenario is a narrow, single-digit victory over Sestak.
Some Democrats asked the candidates where they stood on single-payer health care. Neither came out in favor, but both supported a public health insurance plan that Americans could join if they found private insurance unattainable or undesirable. It appeared to be the first time Specter has explicitly backed the public option for health care that so many of his former GOP colleagues loathe.
I'm sure that this is in no way connected to Sestak cutting Specter's lead by more than half in just six weeks. At the same time, I am sure that as Sestak continues to close the gap on Specter, it won't be long before Specter starts taking up positions to the left of Bernie Sanders.
But, as I said, I'm sure that will be in no way connected to Sestak closing the gap on Specter. No connection whatsoever.
(Via Swing State Project) According to a report in The Hill, a state legislator in Pennsylvania has introduced a bill to make the Pennsylvania primary open (that is, any Pennsylvania registered vote can participate), instead of the current closed format (that is, only Pennsylvanians who have registered as Democrats can vote). The Hill argues that such an open primary would benefit, and is the work of, Arlen Specter:
Such an approach could feasibly help Specter (D-Pa.) win the Democratic primary, too, as he prepares for a challenge from the left from Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.).
The timing could be more than coincidental.
When The Hill sat down with Specter before his party switch, he talked about opening up the primaries in Pennsylvania to independent voters, in the name of helping him defeat a conservative primary challenger. He acknowledged he was contacting state legislators in hopes of doing just that.
While it is highly likely that this bill is being introduced in the hopes of benefiting Specter, and that the pro-Specter Democratic leadership of the state had a hand in introducing the bill, the overall effort is flawed from the start. This is because polling shows clearly that an open primary would benefit Joe Sestak, not Arlen Specter:
Specter is much weaker among Independents and Republicans than Democrats. Among registered Democrats that self-identify as Independent or Republican, Joe Sestak already leads 46%--39%, according to the detailed GQR poll on the campaign (PDF, page 12). Further, according to the latest Quinnipiac poll on the campaign, Specter's favorability among Republicans was only 18%, his favorability among Independents was 46%, and his favorability among Democrats was 70%. Given these numbers, it is hard to imagine how introducing more Independents and Republicans into the electorate would actually help Specter. Pennsylvania Republicans hate Arlen Specter, and they will come out to vote against him en masse in the primary if given the opportunity.
Specter loses if he appears to be trying to win at all cost. Here is one of the two money quotes from the GQR polling memo (page 4):
Among those inclined to believe Specter switched because agrees with Democrats more on the issues, he trumps a potential Democratic challenger by 56 points, 74 - 18 percent. However, among those who believe Specter's primary rational was political expediency, he trails a generic Democratic candidate by 32 points, 28 - 60 percent
If Specter has already acknowledged that he tried to make an open primary to save himself electorally, then any legislative attempt to create an open primary will only reinforce statewide opinion that Specter is acting mainly to save his own job. As the GQR poll shows, no message could be more damaging to Specter's re-election chances than that (expect, possibly, when people learn that Joe Sestak exists, given that Sestak leads 52%-44% among Democrats who have heard of both candidates.)
So please, by all means, make Pennsylvania an open primary. As a Sestak supporter, I can think of few moves that would do more to help defeat Arlen Specter.
