Senator Defector

Arlen Specter’s recent announcement that he would be leaving the GOP to join the Democratic Party has been greeted with the predictable media bru-ha-ha. Exaggeration and blatantly partisan analysis of the senator's decision has dominated coverage of the story. In a phenomenon that is becoming increasingly familiar, anchors on the 24 hour news networks framed Specter’s switch as a "seismic, seismic" political story, despite the rather mundane realities behind the senator’s political switcharoo.

Pundits have been quick to inform the public that Specter’s decision is a "political earthquake" because it will place the Senate Democrats at the all-important 60 member majority. 60 votes are required to stop filibusters, and theoretically - if Al Franken gets his seat – Specter’s position as a Democrat would allow the party to achieve this (largely symbolic) milestone. This angle, which has dominated much of the coverage regarding Specter’s decision, is a fairly shortsighted take on the issue. It seems as if many political experts are simply ignoring Specter’s assertion that he will be no more bound to vote along the party line as a Democrat that he has been as a Republican. It is therefore entirely possible that Specter’s switch will not result in the Democrats having any more voting power than they did when he was a moderate Republican who occasionally strayed from the party line.

Specter’s announcement also drew the predictable partisan coverage that has come to define the 24 news networks. Left wing pundits, such as MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, gleefully hailed Specter’s defection as yet another sign that the Republican Party is a sinking ship, noting that the newly minted Democrat explained his switch by denouncing the GOP as "impractical and extremist."

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Conservatives have jumped at the opportunity to dismiss the senator, who was one of the few Republicans to support the President's stimulus package, as a traitor and political hypocrite. The conservative blogosphere, meanwhile, has gone predictably wild with the news. Michael Steele, whose reputation for hyperbole precedes him, jumped at the chance to condemn Specter for betraying the party, going so far as to question how his mother raised the 79 year old. In a (slightly) more rational editorial, Fox News contributor Peter Roff minimized the significance of Specter's new affiliation in a piece entitled "Harry Reid's Headache Now."

Arlen Specter's decision makes for a sexy story if it is framed as a triumphant success for the Democrats or a bitter betrayal for the Republicans. However, both of these versions belie the fact that in all likelihood the Pennsylvania senator based his decision on dry, boring electoral politics. Specter has not attempted to obscure the pragmatic reasoning behind his late in life transition. Pennsylvania is becoming increasingly Democratic, and leaving the Republican Party is a necessary step if Specter wants to hang on to his seat. Although he did state that the change was inspired by the growing gulf between his principles and the ideology of GOP, it is evident that Arlen Specter based his "shocking" decision, at least in part, on what the Daily Show identified as the “I still want to be a senator” principle.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Changeling
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis First 100 Days