Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), Cancer Survivor and Ranking Member on the Senate Appropriations Committee, has decided to leave the Republican Party and run in the 2010 Democratic primary. You can read the Senator’s statement below.
April 28, 2009
Statement by Senator Arlen Specter
I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.
Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.
When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.
Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.
I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.
I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.
I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.
I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.
While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.
My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.
Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.
April 28, 2009 at 8:01 pm, j.d. said:
I think the C3 site is unique and valuable so my criticisms are meant constructively.
The Specter topic is all over the news & is wildly inappropriate here *unless* a direct connection is made to issues surrounding colorectal cancer.
Something similar could be said for other political/ budgeting news posted on the C3 site, usually by Arite. Visitors to this site need information, yes, but they also need analysis of issues that directly impact cancer patients and caregivers. How might the Specter switch impact this group? Instead of posting a long speech, which never mentions cancer, why not analyze what this might mean?
In general I would urge C3 to cut down on the amount of cut-&-paste political news available everywhere on the net & concentrate more on showing *how* current events may or may not impact the site’s targeted audience.
Again, I say this out of love for this site. The political angle may be important but it should not be allowed to crowd out other topics essential to the colorectal cancer community. The more this site becomes a raw data dump on politics the more it loses its audience — & that will be a real shame.
April 30, 2009 at 10:34 am, Joe Arite said:
Thank you for your comment and I am sorry I wasn’t clearer about why this impacts colorectal cancer. C3 and our partners in the cancer community are currently looking at this issue and gauging what the ramifications are going to be regarding cancer funding and general health care reform. As new developments come about be assured I will keep all of our loyal readers up to speed.
Thank you again for your comment and I appreciate your support of C3.