Arlen Specter

Richard Morrison and Jeremy Lott welcome Reason magazine Senior Editor Michael Moynihan to Episode 93 of the LibertyWeek podcast. We take on the high-profile congressional primaries, Chuck Schumer’s hypocritical stance on privacy, the fight for wine liberation in New York, passing the buck on debit card fees and we embark on a Tea Party Euro Trip.

The possibility of parts of the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), specifically EFCA’s binding arbitration provision, coming back into the political arena has focused public attention on how some centrist members of the Senate might vote on cloture if an EFCA-minus-card-check bill were to be introduced. EFCA’s card check provision, which would allow unions to circumvent secret ballots in organizing elections, was extremely controversial and proved unpopular.

Under EFCA’s binding arbitration provision, if a newly unionized company and the union cannot agree on a contract after 120 days, a federally appointed arbitrator can then step in and impose a contract. This provision is finally getting some public attention — including recently from George McGovern. While it would be ideal to see EFCA defeated in toto, the good news is that right now the centrist Senators who hold the balance of power on this issue are unlikely to support binding arbitration. The Hill‘s Michael O’Brien reports:

Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) indicated last week she does not favor the so-called “binding arbitration” part of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) as currently written.

Lincoln joins two other centrist Democrats in opposition to the second key component of EFCA favored by organized labor, making it difficult for a final compromise of the bill including the provision to overcome a Senate filibuster. …

Sens. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) have expressed their qualms about the arbitration section.

For more on EFCA, see here.

Contradicting earlier claims, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter has switched to the Democratic Party, cementing the liberals’ filibuster-proof majority on most issues in the Senate.

What is strange about this is that the reason Specter gave for leaving the Republican Party was not social issues (Specter is socially liberal, not just on things like abortion, but also on racial preferences, which are unpopular with the general public and moderate voters), but rather his vote for the bloated $800 billion stimulus package, which will actually shrink the economy in the long run.

It’s not as if Obama has ended Bush’s lackluster record on the economy. Indeed, he’s appointed figures involved in the devastatingly costly Bush bailouts, like Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who “missed early signs of the crisis,” and helped ruin Indonesia’s economy, to high posts in his Administration.

Now, Obama is busy catering to the United Auto Workers union, at taxpayer expense, in the Detroit auto bailout. As Larry Kudlow notes,

“The government is about to take over GM in a plan that completely screws private bondholders and favors the unions. Get this: The GM bondholders own $27 billion and they’re getting 10 percent of the common stock in an expected exchange. And the UAW owns $10 billion of the bonds and they’re getting 40 percent of the stock. Huh? Did I miss something here? And Uncle Sam will have a controlling share of the stock with something close to 50 percent ownership. And no bankruptcy judge. So this is a political restructuring run by the White House, not a rule-of-law bankruptcy-court reorganization.

Meanwhile, top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett opened the door wide on CNN yesterday to bank nationalization and CEO firings. Unfortunately, my take that the economic stress tests are a political stalking horse for more government ownership, more government control of the banks, and more government disruption of shareholder rights and normal corporate governance looks to be coming true.”

Obama has been a profligate big-spender. He claimed his $800 billion stimulus package was needed to avert “irreversible decline.” But the Congressional Budget Office concluded before and after its passage that the stimulus package will actually cut the size of the economy in the long run.

The stimulus package also guts welfare reform, which Specter voted for in 1996 and has claimed to support.

Obama’s budgets don’t add up, either, piling up $9.3 trillion in red ink, according to the Congressional Budget Office, a staggering $2.3 trillion more than Obama claimed, and more than double the deficits under the Bush baseline.

Liberal Republicans are claiming that the Republican Party should be a “big tent” that welcomes big spenders like Specter. But historically, the “big tent” was a concept designed to enable the GOP to compete in socially liberal parts of the country by offering socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative candidates — not an excuse for supporting big spending (like Obama’s) that goes even beyond Bush’s record of “fiscal profligacy.”

There’s nothing worse for an economy than uncertainty. Today, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter has thrown large swathes of America’s struggling economy into a guessing game, with his announcement that he plans to switch parties from Republican to Democrat.

While he has indicated that he would not switch his vote on cloture against the so-called Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), he will likely be under pressure from his new fellow Democrats and organized labor to switch that vote, as The American Spectator‘s Phil Klein notes. However, Specter will also be under pressure from businesses in his state, and his stating now that he would maintain his opposition to EFCA could be intended to preempt pressure from his new pro-union allies.

Here’s hoping for the latter scenario. What Specter’s switch means for his other votes, however, is anyone’s guess.

For more on card check, see here.