I agree that that would be the most 'amicable, politically (man, do I hate even typing that word!) feasible' solution. But I don't think that would sit well with Specter, since he has had his eye on the chairmanship of that particular committee for decades.
We have to take seriously TakeChargeBob’s assertions earlier on this thread that Specter is capable of merciless vindictiveness (he wasn’t dubbed the cruelest man in the senate – by his fellow senators, his staff, and even members of the sympathetic mainstream, media -- for nothing). When it comes to critical votes, and filibuster threats, he could easily mean the difference between victory or defeat.
At the same time, we cannot, under any circumstances, allow him the chairmanship of Judiciary – no matter the promises he makes in order to obtain it. His promises aren’t worth the breath it takes to voice them. So I believe your suggestion (keep him on the committee) is the only viable solution – and let the chips fall where they may. If he chooses vindictiveness over graciousness (and who in his right mind would better on the latter?), so be it.
~ joanie
The only other option is giving Specter a leadership position on another "very desirable" committee. What that might be I don't know....someone else might can sort out those details
...and as long as Specter could do minimal damage in that desirable position...
..really gets complicated, but it can be done. Maybe some other extra rewards thrown in for him giving up the Jud. committee. Would have to be a lot, so he can save face.
Surely this is workable. He doesn't own the party.
I saw where he's already schmoozed Carl Rove, and during the next hour, Specter's scheduled to go on Hannity's show. I'll see what the RINO has to say, but I agree that he'll probably LIE as much as necessary to get the chairmanship.
Good work, joanie...MUD