Kerry Spot    [ jim geraghty reporting ]
[ kerry spot home | archives | email ]

Hugh Hewitt is one of the smartest radio show hosts and bloggers out there, a true rising star of the right. His books are page after page of thought-provoking strategy and analysis.

So why is he going to the mat for Arlen Specter?

I can understand Hugh's position endorsing party-line voting. I can understand his preference for a wishy-washy Republican over a conservative Democrat (control of the chamber, mostly).

Today he offers some questions for those who are fighting to keep Specter out of the position of chairman of the Judiciary Committee. I've been a late-sleeping slacker since Election Day (2800+ posts in six months, people) while Kathryn has been fighting like Joan of Arc on this issue, but let me take a shot at Hugh's questions:

Would stopping Specter make it more or less likely that he would vote for Bush nominees to move from the committee to the floor?

Arlen is a pro-choice, left-on-lots-of-issues, NARAL-welcomed, mainstream-media-favorite "Republican." His vote wasn't all that reliable on Bush nominees to begin with. We're supposed to believe this fight is going to make him unreliable to the GOP?

Would stopping Specter make it more or less likely that Specter would vote to end filibusters on the floor?

There are 54 other Republicans and a smattering of red state Democrats, some of whome have to be nervous about reelection. There's Baucus, Bayh, Bingaman, Conrad, Dorgan, Tim Johnson, Landrieau, Lincoln, Nelson, and Prior.(I didn't count established red state lefties like Byrd and Rockefeller.)

The call is the president's and Bill Frist's, but frankly, I would take my chances without Specter.

Would stopping Specter make it more or less likely that Specter would vote to confirm nominees once they had made it to the floor and once a filibuster had been broken?

At that point, Bush doesn't need 60 votes, he needs 50 and will have 54, if Chafee, Snowe, and Collins are in a good mood.

What would the effect of blocking Specter have on the conduct of his colleagues from the GOP's "center-left" wing, especially Senators Snow[e] and Collins of Maine and Chafee of Rhode Island? Would blocking Specter increase the likelihood of their opposition to Bush nominees? Can opponents of Specter guarantee that they can have their cake and eat it to[o], or might these four (and perhaps Hagel of Nebraska) respond by returning fire on nominees?

You deal with them individually. Chafee is a liberal Republican representing a liberal state - he's the best the GOP can get in Rhode Island. Collins and Snowe are in a similar position - Bush will appreciate their votes on defense and taxes, and let them vote the way they need to vote on other issues. Cuddling with Specter isn't really going to change the facts on the ground, which is that these senators are as conservative as their states will allow.

Specter has no such excuse, since his state also sends Rick Santorum to the Senate.

Specter's opposition to Bork in 1987 was 15 years ago. Specter supported Clarence Thomas and every Bush nominee since W's election in 2000. On what basis do opponents of Specter base their belief that he will oppose Bush nominees in the second term?

Call it a gut feeling, Hugh. This is the same senator who, right after getting reelected to a six year term, cited Scottish law and voted "not proven" on Clinton's impeachment.

Last week, George W. Bush had just won the biggest victory for conservatism since Reagan's reelection when Specter shot his mouth off and gave everybody to the right of him the finger. Never mind how much social conservatives had carried the GOP to victory after victory in state after state - Arlen Specter loves the endorsement of the Philly Inquirer, and to keep those nice editorials coming, he's not going to let this reelected president have his way on an issue central to his base.

If you push the right, the right is going to push back. And Specter just pulled on Superman's cape.

What would the effect of blocking Specter be on the re-election of Rick Santorum in 2006? What would the effect of blocking Specter be on the chances of turning Pennsylvania "red" in '08?

I would say jack squat to both, Hugh. Santorum will rise or fall on his own merits, and he will be running as a two-term incumbent. As for 2008 - well, we saw what a big help Specter was in 2000 and 2004. It probably would have helped if there had been fewer "Kerry-Specter" signs.

I hope this response doesn't seem too snarky to a genuine leader of the right - but I just can't see why Hugh is putting such rhetorical effort into protecting Specter.

Why do I suspect Specter wouldn't return the favor to Hugh?

[Posted 11/08 10:48 AM]