Slate Carries Analysis, "Should Specter Have Run as an Independent?"

Last year, U.S. Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania changed his registration from Republican to Democratic, after he and others in Pennsylvania realized that he would probably lose the May 18, 2010 Republican primary.

Now, however, he is trailing in the Democratic primary. Slate has this interesting article by Steve Kornacki, asking whether Specter would have been wise to change his registration last year from Republican to independent, and to have run for re-election this year as an independent.

Ironically, in 1997, Specter tried to make Pennsylvania ballot access far more difficult. He used his influence with Pennsylvania Republican legislators (who were in the majority in both houses) to get a bill through the legislature, quadrupling the number of signatures for independent and minor party candidates. The bill passed, but fortunately Governor Tom Ridge vetoed it.

The reason Specter tried to make ballot access for independents and minor parties more difficult back in 1997 is because he was up for re-election as a Republican in 1998, and he hoped to prevent the Constitution Party from getting a candidate on the ballot against him. Specter has always been pro-choice, and he had seen how well the Constitution Party had polled in the 1994 Pennsylvania governor’s race, when the Republican Party nominee for Governor had also been pro-choice. As things turned out, Specter was overwhelmingly re-elected as a Republican in 1998. Although the Constitution Party did get on the ballot against him, it only polled 68,377 votes.


Comments

Slate Carries Analysis, "Should Specter Have Run as an Independent?" — No Comments

  1. Is it too late for Senator Specter to run as an independent at this point in time?

  2. Pingback: Should Arlen Specter Have Switched to Independent Instead of Democrat? | Independent Political Report

  3. Longtime readers of Ballot Access News may recall that the 1997 legislation supported by Arlen Specter that Richard refers to above, quadrupling signature requirements for minor party and independent candidates, passed the Pennsylvania Senate by an overwhelming vote of 47-1 and, I believe, by a lopsided margin of 140-55 in the state House of Representatives.

    What they may not remember, however, is that Richard, along with a handful of Pennsylvania third-party activists, personally urged Gov. Ridge to veto that draconian legislation.

    Ridge’s veto — a profile in courage — stunned the leaders of his own party, especially since he was the one who arguably had the most to gain by signing the bill.

    After all, the Constitutional Party’s Peg Luksik, a pro-life candidate had garnered 460,269 votes against Ridge and his Democratic opponent in 1994 and had already started raising money to run again, in 1998, by the time the bill reached the governor’s desk in June 1997.

    It’s curious that Senator Specter, unlike Gov. Ridge, was looking for a “magic bullet” to eliminate any minor party competition, when he really wasn’t expected to have a strong Democratic opponent in 1998 — and, in fact, didn’t.

    The senescent Senator is no friend to third parties.

  4. Thanks to Darcy for post #3. The turning point in the battle to get Governor Ridge to veto the bill was when the NY Times ran both a story about the bill, and an editorial urging the veto.

    Specter can’t possibly change his mind and switch to running independent, because assuming he loses the Democratic primary in six days, he will then be a “sore loser”, and Pennsylvania law wouldn’t allow him to petition as an independent; also if he wanted to run as an independent he should have been registered out of all qualified parties several months ago.

  5. Thanks, Richard. It looks as though Senator Specter will have to retire or move to another state – if he loses his primary battle. Or, he could run for congress in a couple of years.

  6. Perhaps it is time for Senator Specter to simply retire from politics. He is certainly old enough.

  7. Separate is still NOT equal — even in PA having the 1776 Liberty Bell in Philadelphia.

    Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954

  8. Specter is extreemly self-serving, even by D. C. standards. That’s why I’m hoping Sestak wins, despite agreeing with Specter more on issues.

  9. Pingback: Ballot Access News » Blog Archive » Specter Loses Democratic Primary for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania

  10. Pingback: Specter Loses Democratic Primary for US Senate in Pennsylvania – Ballot Access | DEMOCRAT.GNOM.ES

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.