Specter Likely to Pull it Out

Although I would not be the least surprised if Joe Sestak wins today's primary battle against Arlen Specter for the Democratic nomination in the 2010 US Senate race, I expect the end of the day will see Specter hanging on by as many as four points.

Neither candidate has polled a majority since the race began in earnest (which is a Philadelphia suburb), leaving a swath of undecideds out there right up to yesterday's most recent poll. Generally, undecideds in these kinds of races tend to break for the challenger, and I suspect that will also be the case today.

Offsetting that, however, is the GOTV. Any one of Specter, the Obama machine, the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, the Ed Rendell machine, and the Pennsylvania Unions may boast of enjoying one the most effective GOTV forces this side of Mason-Dixon. Together, as they are for Specter, it is an awesome juggernaut that can situate Specter to compensate for the undecideds going to Sestak.

Up against that is the weak Sestak statewide campaign, which didn't even manage to put an office in all of the key regions, much less a GOTV effort. This morning Sestak's campaign distributed a list of party locations for this evening. I think they have half a dozen in the entire state, most within 100 miles of Philadelphia. Nothing in the Northeast beyond the Lehigh Valley -- the Poconos, Wilkes Barre, Scranton, Northern Tier, all but ignored tonight and throughout hte campaign.

But for the snippet of video showing a creepy Specter boasting about switching parties to "enable me to get re-e-lect-ted", Sestak's family-run campaign would have left him where he was a few months ago -- down 20 points to a mean spirited, Iraq-supporting, Anita Hill bashing, Thomas-supporting, Kagan-opposing-now-supporting, half-deaf, party-switching, octogenarian Republican recovering from cancer.

This race should not have been close. Sestak should have had it sown up months ago. The main reason he didn't was his stubborn insistence of using his family to run their first statewide campaign. Ignoring offers of assistance, office space, and personnel tendered by Democratic faithful before he even announced a final decision to run, his campaign has been the poster child for why one needs to switch staff when moving from a local district race to a statewide effort.

Of course, Sestak's anemic debate performance didn't help -- but an experienced staff could have better trained him for the event.

So, when Sestak is suddenly out of a job, it won't be Arlen Specter's fault, or President Obama's, he can just look around the Thanksgiving table for the reasons.

By the same token, if he does manage to hold off Specter and win this, no credit is due to his campaign staff. If they knew how to do their jobs, this would not have been a nail-biter depending on poor turnout in Philadelphia for success.

Summary only...

Santorum Planning Primary Challenge to Specter

The Pittsburgh Gazette publishes an interview today with former Senator Rick Santorum, who confirmed rumors that he was planning his comeback in '10.

Seeking to capitalize on long-simmering wingnut dissatisfaction with octogenarian Arlen Specter, Santorum is getting the old band back together to post a primary challenge to Specter, who is up for reelection in 2010.

Pat Toomey has agreed to lead Santorum's fundraising and Robert Traynham is back as communications director.

Santorum told the paper that he believes that his loss to Bobby Casey was the "unfortunate consequence of the public's dissatisfaction over Iraq." By 2010, the former Senator predicted, "Democrat-forced pull out from Iraq will have been devestating for US interests, emboldened the Islamofacists, and opened the eyes of the voters", all, the Senator expects, paving the way for his reemergence.

At first, this story brought moans of disgust and disbelief in these quarters -- after all, we thought we had buried this guy with a wooden stake through his heart. But it may well be the best move for the Democrats, to have the two leading Repubs in the Commonwealth clawing each other to bits in the primary, paving the way for Fast Eddie to make the moves on DC in an easy conversion for the Dems.

Run, Rick, Run.

NOTE:Please update to the NEW URL NOW:

www.abigfatslob.com

Summary only...

Senate Blocks Minimum Wage Bill

Senators earn $165,200.00 a year. At the current minimum wage, they'd have to work over 32,000 hours this year to earn that much (that's 87 hours a day). The last time that the minimum wage was increased, 1997, Senators earned $133,600 -- the $31,600.00 raise which they have taken in the interim is nearly three times what a full-time worker earns on today's minimum.

With only 54 votes in favor of raising the minimum wage for the first time in ten years, supporters of the bill came up six-votes short of the 60 needed to cut off debate. Arlen Specter (R-PA) voted in favor of the bill, as did all Democrats and the two independents. All of the "no" votes were cast by Republicans.

From Senator Casey's floor statement in favor of the bill:

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 2 which will increase the federal minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $7.25 per hour. I speak today of an issue which I believe is one of economic justice. Those earning this minimum wage have not had an increase in ten years!

Who are these Americans who have not had an increase in years? Most are adults working full-time and 60% are women working to make ends meet, supporting their children. If the minimum wage is raised, six million children will benefit. Recently, the Children’s Defense Fund reported that a single parent working full time at the current wage of $5.15 earns enough to cover only 40% of the cost of raising children.

Those who earn the minimum wage are not people who are connected to the wealthy and the powerful. They don’t have high-paid lobbyists here in Washington advocating for them.

No, these Americans are people who lead quietly triumphant lives of struggle and sacrifice, overcoming hardships and setbacks. They do hard work -- like waitresses carrying heavy trays, on their feet hour after hour even as they dream of a better life for their children. At the end of a long day, they return home exhausted, often after working two jobs. The dignity of their labor gives meaning to their lives but no one, no matter how hard they work, can keep pace with the avalanche of cost increases over the last ten years.

Here are some of those cost increases since 1997:

Congressional pay has risen 24%, which is approximately $31,000. This has occurred while the value of the minimum wage has eroded by 20% The cost of living has risen 26% The cost of food has risen 23% The cost of housing has risen 29% The cost of gas has risen 134% The cost of health care has risen 43%. The average premium for a family of four costs is $10,880, which is more than a minimum wage worker earns in a year.

The cost of raising a child has risen 52% The cost of educating those children has risen 61% The cost of heating a home has risen 120%

So, what we’re talking about here is an issue of economic justice.

There's more on his website, which is finally up and running.

{MORE}

If you're interested in talking points, well, then, there's comedian Rush Limbaugh, on a radio near you every afternoon. For the other 72%:

• Hundreds of Economists Say: Raise the Minimum Wage
• The minimum wage relative to the average wage, 1950-2006
• Minimum wage trends: Understanding past and contemporary research
• Minimum Wage Rises, Sky Does Not Fall (A visit to Washington state, which has the highest minimum wage in the country, reveals a booming economy with none of the problems Big Business had been warning about.)

Washington State is an interesting example. The last Federal minimum wage raise went into effect in 1997; Washington's 1996 unemployment rate was 5.5%. Beginning in 1999, the state raised it's minimum on January 1 every year. At the end of 1999, Washington state's unemployment rate was 4.7%; The 2006 rate was 5.0%. On January 1, 2007, the state's minimum wage increased to $7.93. In the eight years since Washington began raising the state minimum wage, the impact on unemployment has been negligible and today it is half a point lower than it was before the last Federal increase.

From a recent New York Times article:

LIBERTY LAKE, Wash., Jan. 9 — Just eight miles separate this town on the Washington side of the state border from Post Falls on the Idaho side. But the towns are nearly $3 an hour apart in the required minimum wage. Washington pays the highest in the nation, just under $8 an hour, and Idaho has among the lowest, matching 21 states that have not raised the hourly wage beyond the federal minimum of $5.15.

Nearly a decade ago, when voters in Washington approved a measure that would give the state’s lowest-paid workers a raise nearly every year, many business leaders predicted that small towns on this side of the state line would suffer.

But instead of shriveling up, small-business owners in Washington say they have prospered far beyond their expectations. In fact, as a significant increase in the national minimum wage heads toward law, businesses here at the dividing line between two economies — a real-life laboratory for the debate — have found that raising prices to compensate for higher wages does not necessarily lead to losses in jobs and profits.

Idaho teenagers cross the state line to work in fast-food restaurants in Washington, where the minimum wage is 54 percent higher. That has forced businesses in Idaho to raise their wages to compete.

Business owners say they have had to increase prices somewhat to keep up. But both states are among the nation’s leaders in the growth of jobs and personal income, suggesting that an increase in the minimum wage has not hurt the overall economy.

“We’re paying the highest wage we’ve ever had to pay, and our business is still up more than 11 percent over last year,” said Tom Singleton, who manages a Papa Murphy’s takeout pizza store here, with 13 employees.

Now, if you really want to explode the heads of the 28%, talk to them about a LIVING wage.

Summary only...

It's Pay-Back Time for Specter

Arlen Specter, a so-called Wednesday Group Republican, begins his stumping for rightwingnut Rick Santorum this week. Specter, who received key support from Santorum which helped Specter ward off Pat Toomey's right-flank assault in 2004, visits Allentown today to help prop up Santorum's efforts to ward off Bobby Casey's attack from the right-center, The Morning Call reports.

It is an expected move -- Specter has frequently said that he won the battle against Toomey thanks in large part to Santorum's help. The relationship between the two has been interesting over the years. Specter is certainly left of Santorum (but not as far left as he would like you to believe). Of course, it is hard to find anyone who is not left of Santorum, although Pat Toomey probably qualified there.

When Santorum first ran for the Senate, Specter sat out the primary and didn't exactly cozy up to him. But when Santorum won the primary in 1994, Specter rushed to his side and even provided him with a campaign manager for his successful Senate run against incumbent Harris Wofford (who had been appointed to fill out John Heinz's term and then won a stunning come from behind victory in the special election). Two years later, Specter ran from for President with Santorum's support. {On Edit: Oops, it is THIS year that the Republicans are running from President.}

But in 2004, when uberconservative Pat Toomey challenged Specter in the Republican primary, Santorum pissed off his base by turning his back on his philosophical compadre in favor of the floundering Specter. That support helped Specter immeasurably and, many say, has been a factor hurting Santorum in this run against Casey. We are told that Santorum's base is lukewarm about him this year because they still feel slighted that they were not successful in getting Toomey the nomination. (I think that's nonsense -- the conservative base is supporting Santorum overwhelmingly according to the polls that provide crosstabs on political ideology.)

Obviously, Specter isn't going to move any conservative Republicans or liberals over to Santorum's side of the ledger. Santorum is hoping that Specter's support can move some moderates his way -- moderates are going to Casey in large numbers. It is unlikely, however, that many moderate Democrats would move to Santorum. After all, Casey is already to the right of moderate Democrats. So what is the best that Santoprum can hope for from Specter? Moving some moderate Republicans his way? It is hard to see how that will help at all. In the recent Quinnipiac poll, Republicans are going for Santorum 3-1 and undecided Republicans are leaning Santorum's way 8-2. Even if Specter moved three-quarters of the 25% of Republicans who aren't favoring Santorum right now, that would hardly result in two points on Santorum's side. Specter is merely paying back a debt -- he's not going to be able to do anything to help Santorum out of the hole that Santorum dug for himself. Santorum is too-far out there, even for Pennsylvania.

The relationship between the two becomes curiouser this year. Santorum has latched onto immigration as his personal wedge issue -- appealing to the rightwing bigots who are worried about brown Spanish-speakers making their towns look different. It's an old Republican strategy and Specter has called "bullshit" to Santorum's claim that the bi-partisan proposals on immigration amount to an amnesty. The two have provided dueling quotes to the media on the subject this year. They have similarly sparred on the Santorum's nutty opposition to stem-cell research.

Nevertheless, they are both good party men and we'll see the "moderate-only-when-compared-to-Santorum" Specter out there stumping for 'lil Ricky until the cows come home in Virginia.

Summary only...