Arlen Specter's defection and the big picture

The U.S. political system is becoming more and more like . . . ours

by Jaime Weinman on Tuesday, April 28, 2009 5:11pm - 11 Comments

Arlen Specter's defection and the big pictureThe big news out of U.S. politics today is the announcement that Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, elected to the U.S. Senate as a Republican in 1980, will leave the Republicans and run as a Democrat. Specter is doing this because it’s the only way for him to survive politically: he was almost certain to lose a primary challenge by a more conservative Republican. But his defection is further proof that the U.S. political system has changed. It used to be a wild, unpredictable system based more on regional interests than party affiliation. Now it’s something closer to, well, a system like ours.

For many years, the party a U.S. politician belonged to didn’t necessarily define how conservative or liberal his views were. Though the Democratic party was overall the more liberal party, it also included many conservative Democrats, plus what amounted to a sort of party-within-a-party in the form of the Southern “Dixiecrats.” The Republicans incorporated everything from hard-core right-wingers like Joe McCarthy to liberal Republicans from New England. Congressmen and Senators’ voting patterns couldn’t be predicted by checking party registration. And cross-party alliances were common; in the ‘60s, when Lyndon Johnson tried to pass Civil Rights legislation, he depended on a coalition of liberal Democrats and Republicans to pass it over the objections of the segregationist Southern Democrats.

As time went on, the parties started to become more ideologically consistent; Southern conservatives started to move from the Democrats to the Republicans, and New England started voting in more liberal Democrats to replace the old liberal Republicans. There were a few stragglers left, but they were wiped out in two big Congressional landslides: the Republicans took over Congress in 1994 by defeating nearly all the Democrats from conservative districts, and 12 years later the Democrats took back the House and Senate by beating Republicans from liberal areas (including all the remaining Republican Congressmen from New England). Today, even the most conservative Democrats are to the left of the average Republican, and while Specter was considered the most liberal Republican Senator, he was actually to the right of most Democrats: blogger Glenn Greenwald points out that “time and again during the Bush era, Specter stood with Republicans on the most controversial and consequential issues.” The U.S. now has a conservative party and a liberal party, with strict rules for membership.

That explains the fact, which TV pundits frequently bemoan, that there’s no more “bipartisanship” in the U.S. government. “Bipartisanship” was a relic from a time when politicians didn’t always vote along party lines, so they pushed bills through by making deals with other politicians who agreed with them. But now, politicians must vote with their party on just about everything; if they break on even one issue, as Specter did with the Republicans on the stimulus bill, then they’ll get taken down in the primaries. But more importantly, most politicians agree with their party on most issues; that’s why they got the nomination in the first place. The reason Obama’s stimulus package got almost unanimous support from Democrats and opposition from Republicans is that the Democrats agree with Obama and the Republicans don’t. In other words, the U.S. now has what amounts to a Parliamentary democracy, where each party votes along party lines. There’s nothing wrong with that, as Canada, Britain and many other countries can attest. Maybe the U.S. will get used to being more like Canada.

Bookmark and Share
  • Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

    The most important factor here is that the party structure is more effective at controlling the nomination process (through the primaries), so any candidate is first vetted by the party. Thus, elections amount to choosing between party mouthpieces, just as our elections do. It’s funny that we’re pining after an American democracy of independent-minded legislators that doesn’t exist.

  • Mike G

    Yeah, what Andrew said – so many Canadians, who haven’t spent enough time down there to realize the realities of the process, seem to long for some mythical, superdemocratic American system that even they don’t have. Transformation of their system in any direction is a positive thing, at this point, but I don’t know if this is it.

  • Critical Reasoning

    Nice work, Jamie!

  • http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

    Perfect piece on this Specter thing. Hmm, I wonder if they’ll also be importing some of our famous caucus discipline?

    • nd

      They can have consultations with Garth Turner about that. Didn’t he write a book or somethin?

  • over easy

    It’s really a laugh to watch politicians scramble over to the winning side. Oh oh….things are going well over here…..yea actually I’m a communist, no wait I meant a libertarian er ah let’s see…… who’s paying the best anyway? Somebody get Jean Charest or Billy Bob Rae on the phone for me. Must be nice for the folks who threw their support behind this pathetic opportunist for decades, only to discover he really wasn’t sincere. No wait….. none of them are sincere, now I get it. That pinko George Bush wrecked things for the right, for a long time to come. The idiot doubles the debt and the civil service, invades other countries to fight hopeless wars and it all gets written off as “neo-con” behaviour. Reckless debt and doubling the size of government sure doesn’t sound like any right wing dogma I’ve ever heard. Fortunately for these guys, reality and the truth are non-factors in this giant Walmart we try to pass off as a culture.

    • Will

      Err, Senators are not Congressmen, the Republicans do not have any members of the House from New England.

      • Someone

        Yes they are congressmen. There are two types: Representatives (lower house) and Senators (upper house)

  • nd

    I would like to note that Specter was not quite the most liberal Republican Senator, nor were all Republican Congressmen from New England voted out – in both cases that honor goes to Maine Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.

    I still don’t think the US Congress, especially the Senate, has anything close to the Canadian level of party discipline (or even the British level, which is considerably more attenuated than the Canadian one). Specter is probably going to drift leftwards somewhat, but he’s probably going to be a problematic vote on some issues, and on others, he was going to vote with the Democrats anyway, so I’m not sure how much of a real gain this is. OTOH, it’s another Democratic vote NOW , as opposed to in 2010, so that is something.

  • Jeff

    Best thing for the GOP. Good riddance Spektor! Take McCain, Snowe and Steele with you! We need to rebuild our party with core conservative values. The tea parties showed we are retaking America! Sarah Palin will be unstoppable in 2012.

  • Will

    oops, that reply is supposed to be to nd.

From Macleans