Economics/Fiscal

I interrupt my series of articles on why illegal immigration hurts America to discuss a politician who has no principles except that of protecting his own political career—the exact opposite of public service. This article is about the recent change of Arlen Specter from Republican to Democrat Senator.  My other fellow SquarePost-ers have weighed in, and I will also.

As most folks know by now, Benedict Arnold was general to George Washington in the Revolutionary War; he left and betrayed the American principles to support the British. The name has come to stand for a high level of betrayal.

Senator Arlen Specter’s recent party change from Republican to Democrat, while explained in language that seems like it had to be done, is nothing more than a high level of betrayal. And the sickening thing about it is he, by his own words, did it for selfish pride.

Specter’s reasons or defenses for this are: (1) that while he came in the Republican party under the Ronald Reagan “Big Tent,” the Republican Party has drifted to the right, and (2) polls of his state reveal his unpopularity and he is not going to let his 29 year Senate career be based on the voters of the Republican primary. This explanation is, plain and simple, wrong. Here’s why.

Just a brief comparison of the party platforms of 1860 (the first year the Republican Party existed; available here) , 1980 (Reagan’s first year; available here), and 2008 (the most recent Republican Party platform; available here) shows that the party has not moved; Specter is dead wrong. While each platform obviously reflects the issues facing the nation at each different time period, the approach to solving these issues and the goals of the platforms all center around (1) inalienable rights given by God, (2) limited government power, (3) low taxes, and (4) personal responsibility. In the 1860’s the issues were trade and slavery; in the 1980’s the issue were the Cold War and abortion; in 2008 it was the war on terror, social program spending, the economy, abortion, and traditional marriage.  And the Democratic opposition was against these core values each time.  In the 1860s the Democratic Party was pro-slavery, it has always been a tax-and-spend party; has no problem with the “government is the solution to our problems” approach, which has the result of giving people “fish,” creating a nation of dependent people, rather than independent responsible people.

For the Republican Party, while the issues change, the approach to the issues remains the same. Republicans believe that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution provide for inalienable rights, a limited federal government, that government is not the answer to all our problems, and that people are over the government, not the other way around. These ideas also form our solutions: we are for the rights of the unborn; allowing people to keep more tax money so that social programs come from people who care—churches and private civic groups who always [read: forever] are more efficient than government programs; handing people fish [read: constant social welfare dependency] is never as effective as teaching people how to fish [read: training folks to be independent]; and that government spending should be like household spending—that is, you don’t spend what you don’t have, and you don’t hike taxes on folks in Texas to pay for bridges in Pennsylvania.

So Specter has no truth in his claim that the Republican Party has moved to the right; but what about his other reason: his 29-year Senate career? In his press release, he wrote:

In the course of the last several months since the stimulus vote I have traveled the state, surveyed the sentiments of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania, done public opinion polls, observed other public opinion polls and have found that the prospects for winning the Republican primary are bleak. I am not prepared to have my 29-year record in the United States Senate decided by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate.

Basically he is writing that because the people of Pennsylvania are voting more Democratic, his principles must change. This, from the standpoint of the Christian public servant, is sickening. Two examples come to mind. First is that of Cincinnatus, who became a public servant in Rome only to lay down the “reins” of leadership when he was no longer needed. When he ruled, it was on his principles and only so long as the people asked him to be there. When his time was done, he went back to farming.

The best example though, by far, comes from Jesus, both in word and deed. In Luke 22, Jesus told his disciples he would be gone. “Within minutes they were bickering over who of them would end up the greatest. But Jesus intervened: ‘Kings like to throw their weight around and people in authority like to give themselves fancy titles. It’s not going to be that way with you. Let the senior among you become like the junior; let the leader act the part of the servant.’” (The Message Version) Specter is acting like the disciples, concerned about his place and position, leaving behind a set of core values which are supposed to animate everything he does for his own self interest and self gain, so he can hold onto the “title” of Senator no matter what.

And Specter admitted this. His only guiding principle is not serving others, but serving himself. He remarked, “No, I’m putting principle at the top of the list. The principles that I subscribe to are my independence, which I will retain regardless of party label.” Who knows how he will vote? Independence is good, because you can stick to your principles. But when your only principle is yourself, you will in the end bow down to and worship yourself through greed, envy, and pride—the desires that corrupt our hearts, instead worshiping God through compassion, service to others, and selflessness—the desires that make the world a better place.