Posted on 03/31/2004 12:34:34 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican
Darlin' Arlen By Tim Carney
In the Pennsylvania primary battle between pro-choice liberal Sen. Arlen Specter (R) and pro-life conservative challenger Rep. Pat Toomey (R), self identified "conservatives" as well as "pro-life" voters are almost as likely to pledge support for Specter--who shrunk Bush's 2001 tax cut, supports Roe v. Wade and opposes school choice and tort reform--as for Toomey, who came to Washington as mostly conservative and has drifted right since then.
Conservatives' mixed loyalties mirror the mixed messages they are receiving from the top figures on the right. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), a hero to pro-lifers, endorsed Specter early in the campaign. Many Washington conservatives, including Toomey backers, wrote that off. "He has to endorse his colleague against a challenger," one Toomey staffer said.
But Santorum certainly didn't have to cut a TV ad defending Specter against charges he is a liberal (Specter's lifetime American Conservative Union score of 43 percent puts him to the left of three current Democratic Senators, and renowned liberals Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine).
Santorum also went above and beyond the call of duty when he began personally lobbying other conservative Senators to back Specter. Sen. Sam Brownback, another top conservative in the upper chamber, is now behind Specter, and sources say it was Santorum who persuaded him.
George W. Bush has also gone to the mat for Specter, lauding the liberal Senator and even saying in Pittsburgh on December 2, "I look forward to working with [Specter] as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the United States Senate to make sure my judges get through and get appointed."
Why are these conservatives going to great lengths to make sure fellow conservative Toomey loses? There are four main reasons. First, Santorum and Bush do not want to play defense in yet another open Senate seat. Second, Bush mistakenly believes that Specter will help him beat Kerry in Pennsylvania. Third, Santorum feels loyalty to a colleague. Finally, Specter provides Bush with cover vis-à-vis the conservative base.
Uncontested in the Democratic primary, Rep. Joe Hoeffel is also rooting for Toomey. Specter has the incumbent advantage, which is the single most important factor in a congressional race. In polls, Hoeffel trails Specter badly, while polling evenly with Toomey.
But, from a conservative perspective, the thought of losing Specter's seat to a Democrat isn't that bad. Considering that Democrats have five open southern seats to defend, it is a long shot for them to gain seats in the Senate. Republican candidates are on the upswing in the tough GOP open seats of Illinois, Oklahoma and Alaska. The question on the Senate for 2004 will not be "who is in control?" but "how much does the GOP gain?"
With Specter in line to chair Judiciary, any conservative would prefer Senator Hoeffel to Senator Specter. If the choice is between 53 GOP seats and Chairman Specter (who sunk the Robert Bork nomination in 1987) or 52 Republicans and Chairman Jon Kyl of Arizona (ACU rating 97 percent), it's not a tough call for anyone who cares about the courts.
Bush thinks having Specter on the ballot will help him win the Keystone State. It is hard to imagine a voter showing up to vote for Specter over Hoeffel and along the way pulling the Bush lever because, "hey, he's the same party as Specter."
Also, it will be tough to explain why Kerry's voting record is awful, but Specter's very similar record is great. More likely, having Toomey on the ballot will turn out disaffected conservatives who might otherwise stay home, displeased with Medicare, immigration and education boondoggles.
Santorum's loyalty to Specter is an odd thing. Specter is perhaps one of the most disloyal GOP senators in the past 20 years. He turned his back on the party on impeachment. He sabotaged the 2001 tax cut. He killed Bork's nomination. This year, he promised conservatives he would not support the Democratic amendment to the partial-birth abortion bill, and then went to the floor and broke his word.
Finally, and most deviously, Specter actually does fit perfectly into the White House plans. Karl Rove has no desire to see Roe v. Wade ever overturned.
Many Red-State voters will pull the GOP lever this fall for the purpose of striking a blow against that 1973 decision, but the White House has signaled its intention to appoint Bush ally Alberto Gonzales to a Supreme Court vacancy. Gonzales, on the Texas Supreme Court, played a central role in eviscerating a parental notification law on children's abortions.
When conservatives raise an outcry about a Gonzales appointment, expect the White House proxies to tell the right wing, "hey, we needed someone whom Specter could feel comfortable championing."
There are many reasons for conservative to back Specter, just no good ones.
Tim Carney is a reporter for the Evans-Novak Political Report.
"With Specter in line to chair Judiciary, any conservative would prefer Senator Hoeffel to Senator Specter. If the choice is between 53 GOP seats and Chairman Specter (who sunk the Robert Bork nomination in 1987) or 52 Republicans and Chairman Jon Kyl of Arizona (ACU rating 97 percent), it's not a tough call for anyone who cares about the courts."
And, given the fact that Pat Toomey is actually less vulnerable to a Joe Hoeffel candidacy than RINO Arlen Specter, it's a win-win situation for conservatives (and moderates, for that matter) in Pennsylvania to pull the lever for Toomey. GO, PAT, GO!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.