Last week, a Franklin & Marshall poll showed Republican Pat Toomey pulling away in the Pennsylvania Senate race, with a large lead over newly minted Democrat Arlen Specter, 45-31 among likely voters. Toomey had a similar lead against Congressman Joe Sestak, 41-19, with a higher amount of undecideds. But Sestak is not fazed by such a result. He is focused on defeating Specter in the Democratic primary, and “taking on the DC establishment” in the process. After winning that election, Sestak told FDL News in an interview, he would pivot to talk about Toomey’s long record of “voting with the GOP establishment,” and his former profession on Wall Street.
Sestak is seemingly positioning himself in between both parties, as an outsider whose principle guides him instead of fealty to political party. “Democrats are going to have to wake up,” Sestak told me. “The question is, do we deserve to lead? We seized the White House out of audacity, out of the promise of change. But that included a change in our politics. And people seeing the dealmaking to get the 60th vote on health care were turned off. The lack of trust in our politics is harming America. If you follow your principles, the politics will follow.”
This is an outsider message. Sestak, who is the highest-ranking military member (a Navy Admiral) ever to get elected to the US House, was warned against taking on Specter by the state political establishment. Undaunted, he has jumped into the race, and has amassed over $5.1 million dollars in cash on hand. Specter’s fundraising was uncharacteristically soft last quarter, and had to return $600,000 in donations because of a Club for Growth-led campaign by conservatives to take back previous contributions. Specter still has $8.6 million in the bank, more than Sestak.
(Sestak and Specter were caught up in an unusual moment this weekend at a Keystone Progress forum, where Specter jumped the gun and took the stage while Sestak was finishing his closing statement.)
Sestak spoke about key issues in a wide-ranging interview with FDL News.
• On health care, he said “we have a duty” to get a bill through in the House. He floated an idea to take the best of all the proposals to get an agreement, package that to get something across the line, and then use the reconciliation process to make the fixes in the Senate. He thinks that a new process of explaining the bill, one that is open and transparent, can alleviate some of the concerns among the public. He did say that “we should not sacrifice good policy on the altar of bipartisanship,” and that he would be willing to lose his job to get health care through.
I found the idea of packaging the “best of the bill” together to be a bit jumbled, but Sestak was focused more on the determination to get something done, rather than the policy specifics. He also is correct that process concerns really harmed the bill.
• On Senate process, Sestak acknowledged that “the Senate rules may have gone beyond utility.” While he stated that the Constitution set up the Congress to allow for the protection of minorities, and that such protection is important, the “deep freeze” whereby legislation just withers in the Senate is “harming our nation,” in Sestak’s words. He thinks we should be careful in unraveling this rules conundrum, and not creating a mirror of the House, where “having the votes is more important than thinking things through.” But he added that James Fallows’ article on America in decline had a profound effect on him, and that he has become convinced that “the Senate needs to reform.” Needless to say, this is probably more than you’d get out of Arlen Specter, a creature of the Senate.
• On jobs, Sestak stressed many of the features that we’ve seen pop up in the Obama budget. He wants to see support for small business and community banks, perhaps in the form of a job creation tax credit. He lamented the fact that Specter took out $100 billion dollars for aid to the states in last year’s stimulus, leaving Pennsylvania with a large budget deficit. “Arlen bragged about that on his website,” he said. Sestak supports a “focused” jobs bill, but also supports fiscal discipline efforts like paygo. On a budget deficit commission, he made the point that “Congress should have the courage to make the cuts themselves” instead of letting an independent panel do the work for them.
This is in line with Sestak’s major complaint about government in the modern age: “The thing lacking most is the courage to articulate a vision. Then go home to your constituents and explain it. The nation is yearning for courage. We have to earn their trust.”
“We have to ask if Congress understands Americans? Do they understand working Americans and what they go through?”



40 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
” “The thing lacking most is the courage to articulate a vision. Then go home to your constituents and explain it. The nation is yearning for courage. We have to earn their trust.”
yeah especially after most of them voted for a war based on a “pack of lies” Sending young men and women off to their potential deaths and 50,ooo and counting injured. Sent them to kill people who had never done a thing to the U.S.
Allowed torture, have never held anyone accountable for that immoral and illegal war in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands are dead in Iraq because of the U.S. led invasion.
You bet your ass they need to work on trust issues
Is “courage” under sole proprietorship of the MIC of which Sestak is a member?
Sestak wanted the House to pass a Massachusetts model of health care reform earlier this year.
If I had wanted Romney care, I would have voted for him.
ah, but that’s not what really happened, that’s what was released for public consumption
they used that “we need 60 votes” crap to write the bill that was on the preisdent’s desk since he sold out to pharma, a corporate bill laden with corporate profit, forcing americans into buying a private product
it’s what the white house wanted from the start, forget that “we need 60″, we didn’t
sestak on healthcare reform last may:
more at the link.
i owe you a drink (well, probably more than one, but one for sure today *g*)
p.s. at the rate we’re going, the country will be lucky if they get romneycare and not something worse.
I think Sestak is a poseur. Insofar as he makes Specter move left, fine. But to expect anything objectively progressive from a military guy, not so much.
exactly right.
I had mention in a previous post, that maybe now is the time for a Progressive Party. And I would say that Joe Sestak is a prime example of what a Progressive candidate might look like. Joe obviously sees serious fault lines in both parties, has all the right ideas, in that they are progressive (read that as populous agenda – helping out the average joe), and is willing to buck political correctness.
Maybe somebody should talk to him about becoming a Progressive Candidate.
Food for thought.
i don’t envy the people of PA. but then i’ve already had my senate election angst and now have 2 years to live with the results.
I agree.
I remember something about Lincoln losing his first attempt at office. Just wondering what the chances would be that someone like Sestak might lose his Senate bid, but end up later being a Progressive Party presidential nominee. (Sure, it’s fantasy, but after the sorry reality we have to deal with, a little fantasy is all that sustains the soul these days.)
I can’t speak for anyone but myself but what I would like to see is an elected Democrat( progressive no New Democrats or Blue Dogs need apply) with a strong grounding in history( you know, someone who knows who HowardZinn was and had read his work) US, as well as World History, basic knowledge of economics – especially the differences between Keynesian economics and Milton Friedman’s theories, and finally someone who refuses to look at a focus group poll until Sept. of an election year.
Sestak is onto something.
Sad day when the choices are beyond worse and worster. And the only way to register a real protest is to choose worster.
Added on edit: Especially when you are sure that choosing worster will convince beyond worse to become worster.
Visions in politics are almost always dangerous things. They often commense as idealism [or renditions of God] and generally procede from the assumption the world would be a much better place if only it reflected the, well, vision inside the head of the visionary.
We don’t need visionaries in Washington. We need men and women willing to expose how the rich and powerful manipulate the democratic process in order to stack the deck against working Americans.
To the extent Sestak embraces that, let’s back him to the hilt.
But Washington is not about visions, it is about power. And what we need are dozens and dozens more Dennis Kuciniches to stand up to it.
?????????
yikes. good thing i stocked up on advil.
sad day indeed.
i think i may have had the wrong idea about what the term “progressive” means. for sure, recent evidence and experience is making me reconsider.
Since when has any military guy been progressive?
Sestak is about as Progressive as Cheney is a bleeding heart Liberal.
Sestak is a a corporate warhawk. A status quo man if I ever saw one who loves the sound of his own voice.
Awful choices for PA. The whole lot of them should be put out of our misery.
Mod note: Peacefully of course.
I had the opportunity to see Joe Sestak at an event last week. It did little to make me think he deserves my vote.
Sestak opposes single payer health care, not because there aren’t enough congressional votes for it, but more along the lines of American Exceptionalism – we need a special solution because the laws of economics and human decency apparently don’t apply to the United States.
More disturbingly, Sestak opposes the Kucinich Amendment to grant states the ability to create single payer systems, unless there is a feature that permits an individual to opt out. He flat out stated that his daughter would have died under a single payer system. He apparently believes that single payer = rationing.
Sestak fully supports our current wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He believes that our continued presence will serve to stabilize the Pakistan government and keep nuclear arms out of the hands of those who would use them as terrorists.
You can say many things about Joe Sestak. Liberal, Progressive, and Democrat (my kind of Democrat) are not among them.
Uh, I think Wesley Clark is about as close as you get. Which makes your point.
Were there any Bolshevik and/or Menshevik officers that served in the Czar’s army during WWI who then returned home to make revolution?
That’s just what the politicians plan for the working and middle class, peacefully of course, one drip at a time.
He sounds perfectly centrist and vague, across the board.
No definitive YES for a vibrant Public Option . . . . a centrist poseur as you say, who will shift corporate right HARD the minute in office.
I wouldn’t spend a DIME to support this guy . . . . I hope FDL and ActBlue aren’t . .
No shit . . . I’m gonna be glass high into the Merlot at this rate . . . a few times.
*headthrobbing*
Sestak is totally flawed, but until he has voted for the confirmation to the Supreme Court of the likes of Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito: until he has weasel worded his way around FISA and torture outrages, you are a little too cavalier in rejecting him in favor of Specter.
Yeah, this guy was a rep from around Philly. If I remember correctly he caucused with the blue dogs. Elected in 2006, some big vote thereafter he voted for one of Bush’s bills. He was highly thought of at Booman’s prior to that. Haven’t been to Booman’s in quite a while, to damn centralist for my tastes.
PLEASE stop shooting off ignorant comments and go to Project Vote Smart to look up BOTH their records and their ratings from numerous groups. Why insult a man who is trying to offer an honest alternative to snarlin’ Arlen because he isn’t as liberal as you and me. He is about as liberal as it is possible to be and still have a chance of winning Pennsyltucky!
I know, I am an active Dem in his district.
Mod note: Opinions vary, but around here, we try to avoid terms like “ignorant”.
IMHO, slow motion violence is still violence, and maybe crueler than the non-slow-motion variety, in that it is much more demeaning and degrading of the spirit of its targets.
I wouldn’t write the man off just because he has a military background, there are some honorable warriors, and I think he may be one. In any case, he can’t possibly be as bad as Arlen.
He voted for warrantless spying, he voted for more needless war, he asked for Romney care from the get go… which we know is too expensive and 19 percent of MA citizens get no care.
Dude is not progressive. And I am willing to admit it after supporting him for his winning run for congress.
He was a Blue America candidate in ’06.
Why keep voting for Democrats who don’t support your legislative agenda?
I’ve come to the conclusion that a bad Dem is worse than a Republican. The only way the former can be replaced with something better is to leave the seat or lose a primary. Sitting members of Congress almost never lose primaries.
I’m done voting for the lesser of two evils. Thank the New Corporate Democrats for that.
I live in Phila., PA. I listened to an interview with Sestak on WHYY, our local public radio station, and he sounded as though he were talking down to us. On FISA, he also voted for retroactive immunity from prosecution for the telecoms after they helped the government spy on us. We don’t have much of a choice between him and Specter. We’re doomed.
EXCEPT that getting rid of Specter, a consummate traditional politician, would have many benefits, it would send a message to the Democratic party, and Sestak would have less seniority and influence than Specter. Specter is a turncoat Republican. He does not deserve any support from true progressives or Democrats. He’s part of what’s wrong with the Senate. At least Sestak would be a fresh new face AND might have the potential to turn more progressive once in office. That will never happen with Specter who will revert to his old, Republican form.
I live in Joe’s district and have gotten to know him. He is not a progressive though he uses the word with some abandon. He works his *ss off for his constituents. He’s smart. Yes, he’s from the military, but not all military folks are war hawks. I’d rather see people like him in the service than the reich wingers who have taken over. He’s Catholic and pro-choice. He screwed the pooch on the FISA vote and we argued about it for 40 minutes when he could have cut me off at 10 and his aide tried several times to rescue him from that conversation.
After having spent time and energy working for Ned Lamont to defeat Liarman when so many people though Liarman wasn’t so bad, I really sense that if Snarlin’ gets elected as a dem there’s nothing to keep him from joining the CT. for Liarman party and being a total *ss.
Also, Snarlin’ has cancer and is what, 79 or 80? The odds of his serving out another term aren’t too good and we are almost sure to have a rethug governor next time around who will appoint the successor to Snarlin’
The choices aren’t that great but there’s lots to convince me to vote for Joe, that is, unless the whole dem party continues on the trainwreck track that it’s traveling on. Are we just rearranging the chairs on the Titanic?
As of today I’m disgusted enough to just sit it all out. I’m tired of being taken for granted. Having moved from MA I do understand what happened. The dems lost the enthusiasm of the base for good reason. They have little time to ramp it up and hold on to the steering wheel.
Lots of mixed metaphors. Oh well.
You’re wrong on that bc1946. He was never a Blue Dog. In fact, he’s helped the White House argue against some of the defense spending programs in public.
He’s been part of the New Democrat caucus, but in my estimation, he’s a small business supporter, in a strong way, and not a corporaDem.
Why can’t “THE MOST POWERFUL PERSON IN THE WORLD” (President Obama) do these 6 simple things?
1) End the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Invest the $200 billion HERE – see new budget.
2) Create a monumental Infrastructure Bank to provide millions of jobs building a national high-speed rail system. The rail system would increase productivity dramatically in this country.
3) Expand health care coverage to 40 MILLION people using reconciliation.
Expanding Medicaid, Medicare, and SCHIP are all doable under reconciliation.
4) Tax the rich to pay for Health Care Reform. $1.2 trillion over 10 years.
(The top 1% in this country take in 29% of ALL income)!
5) Instruct the secretary of the Treasury and other financial regulators to draw up a plan to implement as many of the financial reforms that the president has proposed as possible, using the broad regulatory authority they have under existing law. The plan will take effect April 1 unless Congress acts on a broader regulatory reform bill.
6) Ask Congress, as an interim step, to impose a modest carbon tax beginning in 2011 equal to 25 cents on a gallon of gasoline, rising to 50 cents in five years, with the revenue to be used to reduce payroll taxes. That will result in no net increases in federal taxes.
He is the President with huge majorities in the Senate and the House. Something he won’t have next year! Time to act!
Sestak and Specter are not liberals.
My problem with Sestak is that he is financially supported by the arch-reactionary millionaire Richard Mellon Scaife. Scaife is also financially supporting Pat Toomey and formerly Sen. Rick Santorum.
I also witnessed the Sestak-Specter presentations at the PA Progressive Summit. Sestak was clearly acting when he posed as a liberal/progressive.
There is one additional point that should give pause. Sestak has the highest turnover rate of office staff in the House.
The Navy cited Sestak for a “poor command climate.” A former Navy officer interviewed by The Times Herald said the command climate comment was “a euphemism for poor leadership that results in low morale amongst the sailors and officers. If everyone is upset, angry and there is a general lack of camaraderie, we would call that ‘poor command climate.’ For a captain or admiral to be reassigned is big. A career end.”
@ comment 35 from Joanneleon
I think you’re right re Joe caucusing with the new democrats. I think it may have been Patrick Murphy that I was thinking about caususing with the blue dogs! Though I see he is also listed as a new democrat in the new congress. However, I still wouldn’t consider him a progressive democrat in any way!
I doubt that I’ll be voting for either snarlin’ Arlen or Joe in the primary.
He’s on the New Dem list but he doesn’t really caucus with anyone. He doesn’t like to be categorized—so he says. He doesn’t really fit neatly in any caucus.
Been around his staff frequently. It isn’t low morale per se. He works like a dog and expects them to put the long hourse in that he does. His constituent services are going 7 days a week.
As for Scaife, that’s the first I’ve heard of it. I’ll have to look it up. But Scaife doesn’t usually support folks who are pro-choice and pro-gay rights. That just does not compute.