Souter is the reason that they cut the deal with Specter.

[Pab Sungenis]

On last night's Olbermann, the point was raised that Obama must have wanted to lock down Specter's vote on something. With the money being on Specter losing the Republican Primary, or at least being wounded enough to not be able to make it through the general, the Democrats were all but assured a young, probably much more liberal, Senator from Pennsylvania when the next Congress convenes in 2011. The only reason to hitch your wagon to Specter and make all the concessions to him that they did had to be that they needed his vote on something.

With Specter now no longer beholden to the Republican powers that be, he would be free to vote his conscience on a number of important issues without having to worry about pandering to the Club for Growth and the frothing right that control the Republican Party both nationally and especially in Pennsylvania. As a Republican, Specter would have been under intense pressure to join in the lockstep "no" on everything with the rest of his party, to be a loyal little lemming as he followed them off the cliff. As a Democrat, however, he can feel free to vote for the things he agrees with Obama on, and know he'll be cut some slack where he disagrees.

The speculation had been that Specter's vote was needed on Health Care Reform, but the announcement of Souter's retirement less than 72 hours after Specter's jump makes me think that the vote that was needed was for something a lot more important.

First, Justices don't just announce their retirements without consulting with the White House. It's common courtesy for a departing Justice to meet with the President and give him advance warning. The coming Souter's announcement must have been known within the White House days ago, and that's why the pressure was finally put on Specter to make the jump. Especially when you consider the reports of Biden's taking part in the arm-twisting, Souter's retirement must have been the impetus behind the Democrats cutting what had appeared to be a lopsided deal to get Specter on board.

Also consider where Specter will be wielding the gavel as a Democrat. The obvious committee chairmanship for Specter is one of those that he had when the Republicans controlled the Senate: Judiciary. As Judiciary chair, he'll be able to help usher Obama's nominee through quickly. Even more important, he can be expected to vote for cloture when the time comes to break the inevitable Republican filibuster.

Look at the timing of the process. Souter announces his retirement effective at the end of term (although he could stay on until a successor is confirmed). The Supreme Court's session ends in June, right around the time that Al Franken should finally be seated as the 60th Democratic vote. Thus, once the Minnesota case is finally finished, confirmation hearings can be brought to a smooth conclusion, cloture invoked, and Obama's first Supreme Court appointment confirmed 60-40.

Alternately, consider the actual wording of the Senate's rules on cloture. It's not specifically 60 votes that are needed, but "three fifths" of all Senators. There are only 99 Senators at the moment. Three fifths is actually 59.4 votes. Biden could always hand down a ruling from the Chair that for the purposes of cloture, the number of votes needed is rounded down if the fraction is less than one half and up if more. If that were to happen, Specter would represent the filibuster-breaking vote (when he agrees to do it) even if Franken doesn't get seated in time.

The deal with Specter seemed stupid to me yesterday. We gave up a hell of a lot for what is, at best, an unreliable vote. But if the scenario is as I laid it out above, then it's a small price to pay to help keep the Court out of the right wing's hands.

[usregimechange]

1. Interesting...

[tekisui]

2. I called it the day Specter announced.

I knew it was to get a judicial nominee out of committee. I was surprised at how quickly Souter revealed the cards.

[Egnever]

3. um the idea that specter will be handed a chairmanship is I think fantasy land

if it happens I will eat my shoe.

[grantcart]

10. prepare your shoe

They have already announced that they are going to credit Spector's time in the Senate as part of his seniority so he is going to be ranked one of the longest serving Senators in the Democratic Caucus. There is some speculation that he may get appropriations, but it has been virtually confirmed that he is going to get a chair.

[TreasonousBastard]

4. And don't forget the little bit about Rendell...

wanting his wife on the Supreme Court.

I keep saying deals like this are complex and not made in a vacuum, and there's no one particular deal that made Specter jump across the aisle, although there might have been one last hurdle.

[Pirate Smile]

5. I still think it is health care. The Dems could have won the seat in 2010 - the new

Senator would be seated in 2011. Presidential election in 2012. He has to pass Health care THIS YEAR or else it gets tangled up in election year crap. Specter would be fighting to win the Republican primary and, after the Stimulus vote, he would have to be a hard ass. Now he doesn't. He owes the Dems and Obama - the payout is health care.

Of course, I could be wrong. :)

[quiller4]

9. Specter has voted for Democratic health care legislation

his entire career and was likely to support Obama on health care in any event. I think he will chair judiciary and thats were the payback will come.

[Thrill]

6. hmmmm. Not sure I buy that. I don't think Collins, Snowe, or Specter

would filibuster a pro choice Supreme Court nominee. I think we could always count on them for that

[ShadowLiberal]

7. True, but the fact is the democrats have been trying for years to get Specter to jump ships

Biden's been trying for five years, he only recently started it up more seriously when becoming VP, and then he stepped it up even more after the stimulus vote (which as a PAer I can tell you really did piss off a LOT of republicans I know, it made several of them who didn't even vote in his last primary very motivated to vote against him this time).

Judges are certainly an important issue to have Specter's vote, but it's not the sole reason they tried to get Specter on board.

[MiniMe]

8. Chairmanships won't change until 2011, and Leahy still outranks Specter

However, he will be free to vote his conscience instead of his party.