Specter Proposed Ban On Switching Parties in 2001

In a great example of the vagaries of modern politics, the LA Times takes the wayback machine to 2001, when the Republican party was once again up in arms over the defection of one of its own. Then-Senator from Vermont Jim Jeffords became an independent, bumping the Dems into the majority, and one Republican in particular took him to task publicly. It was... Arlen Specter, this week's newly-minted Democrat. Jefford's jump cost Specter the chairmanship of the Veterans Affairs Committee and he was not happy.

"If somebody wants to change parties, they can do that," Specter said at the time. "But that kind of instability is not good for governance of the country and the Senate."

Specter went so far as to float a rule banning party switches that had the effect of elevating the minority to majority status during a congressional session. It didn't really go anywhere.

Specter's proposal quickly ran into opposition. Democrats balked. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) called the proposal unconstitutional. (Lieberman would later leave the Democratic Party to become an independent.) The proposal was never adopted.

Ross Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, said the rule would have "deprived a senator of the free will to make a decision."

Specter's proposal, Baker said, was intended "to ingratiate himself with colleagues with whom [Specter] was on the outs" -- the Republicans. "That was one way he could do it. And it was received with the coldness it deserved."

Specter is now trying to make a distinction between his protestations in 2001 and his actions today, saying his defection won't switch the power balance in Congress. Of course, it could give the Dems a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority, which is close enough for many in the GOP.

Bitter Republicans will no doubt use this bit of history to further bash Specter and point out his hypocrisy. It's their inclination and right, though they might be better served to try and look towards the future. I only bring it up to point out yet another dramatic twist in this week's riveting political theater.

UPDATE: Here's video of Specter introducing his proposed rule in 2001: