Specter Should Go

The inside political baseball has recently centered on whether Republican Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania should be allowed to become chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary committee whose job is to approve new judges and new Supreme Court justices.

Specter is pro-abortion, and made a post-election statement that in effect warned President Bush that pro-life judges would have a hard time getting confirmed in the Senate. Specter has since disavowed any attempt to "warn" the President and claims that he was merely noting the political reality in the Senate as a whole. But, as Shakespeare would say, methinks he protests too much.

One recent article noted that Specter began his political career as a Democrat who became a Republican as a matter of mere political expedience. Apparently, Specter was rebuffed by the Democratic establishment in an early run for office, and so turned to the Republicans. So, in reality, Specter is a liberal Democrat.

The Republican majority in the Senate is now secure, with a net gain of four seats in the just finished election. Even if a newly rebuffed Specter switches back to the Democratic Party or becomes an independent at this point, it will make no difference. What do pro-life forces gain from accommodating Specter at this point? Some say that rebuffing Specter will alienate other "moderate" Republican senators. What is not mentioned is that, regardless of Specter's treatment, certain "moderate" Republican senators will do anyway what they are already set to do: protect Roe v. Wade as much as they can.

The post of chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is too important to the pro-life cause to leave at the hands of a pro-abortion, thinly Republican senator. Whatever the outcome, the outcry over Specter's assumption of the chairmanship has been a welcome development. Specter may not make it; and, if he does make it, he will have been strongly forewarned that his job is to push the President's appointees and not obstruct them.