Senator Specter's selfish switch

By Divya Malik

When Arlen Specter ran for Philadelphia district attorney in 1965, he proudly asserted that he was running as a Republican candidate, to take on the corruption of the city's then-legendary Democratic Party.

Forty-four years later, with five terms as a Republican senator under his belt, he has abandoned this heightened regard for the Republican Party and has unexpectedly transitioned to the Democratic Party.

As surprising as this decision may be, more shocking still is Specter's seemingly selfish motive to switch affiliations for his own personal needs.

When asked his primary reason for switching political parties, Specter declared that he was increasingly "at odds with the Republican philosophy."

Specter's decision to switch political parties was bold and fearless. Not only did he willingly subject himself to endless criticism from fellow Republicans, but also risks future rejection from his Republican voters.

Though his decision to switch political parties should not be condemned, his motives for doing so should be much more closely scrutinized.

According to CNN, on April 15, 2009, Pat Toomey, a highly supported Republican in Pennsylvania who is also considered to be one of Specter's greatest rivals, announced that he will challenge Specter once again in the Republican senatorial primary.

Perhaps not coincidentally, on April 28, 2009, Specter announced he would run as a Democrat in 2010. On the day Specter announced his change in political affiliation, he asserted he had "traveled the state and surveyed the sentiments of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania and public opinion polls, observed other public opinion polls and found that the prospects for winning a Republican primary are bleak."

With his decision to go Democrat, Specter essentially decided within a mere 13 days to transform himself from a political underdog into a favorite for re-election in 2010. Specter did not abandon the Republican Party because of its displeasing philosophy; he left the party in order to maintain his position as senator.

A senator's primary goal should be to articulate the needs of his constituents in Congress. Senators should work toward creating a better lifestyle for the people; Specter's actions, however, only promote a better lifestyle for himself.

With the people's needs set aside, it is inevitable that the progress of the state will also fall through the cracks.

Specter's actions make it apparent that he does not value either the Democratic or Republican political party. Above all, he values his highly-coveted seat in the Senate and is willing to compromise his dignity and morality to assure himself of this prestigious political position.

Can a senator who is driven to change his political affiliation for selfish reasons in the middle of his term be trusted to lead Americans toward a better future?

It is this unethical aspect of the "business" of dirty politics that should cause us to question if we are being led by a fair and trustworthy government.

If Specter was truly changing his political affiliation due to a change in ideology, his actions should not be condemned. However, based on recent statements from Specter, it is obvious that his transformation was led by selfish motives.

The purpose of a well-rounded politician should not be to risk everything in order to obtain a political seat, but to represent the people's wants and desires, without losing vision of what is wise and just for all Americans.

But once again, the essential purpose of a representative democracy has been lost in the actions of the self-serving politician.

Divya Malik is a political science and psychology double major.