"Republican" and "Democrats"

It was a cloudy day in Philadelphia on October 14^th, 2012. Arlen Specter took the last breath of his life in his home at age of 82.  As everyone who know about Arlen Specter, he was one of America’s most prominent Jewish political and the longest severed senator for the state of Pennsylvania.  He had served five terms as a Republican senator for 30 years since 1980.  In those 30 years, Specter was tough on his political views.  His colleagues saw him as an intellectual and stubborn politician. The former Republican senator Pat Toomey called him “a man of sharp intelligence and dogged determination.”  The 2002 PoliticsPA Feature story also named him the “toughest to work for.”  However, he was most known for his moderate political stand, which made him capable of turning either side of Republican or Democrat.  Philadelphia magazine stated him as “one of the few true wild card of Washington politics…reviled by those on both the right and the left.”  As a senator, Specter would side with Democrat on some issues, but support conservatives on others.  For him, party seemed to be just a name on the paper with no power to limit his political decision.  As he said, “I believe that my duty is to follow my conscience and vote what I think is in the best interest of the country, and the political risks will have to abide.”

                  Nowadays, people like Arlen Specter are rarely anyway.  American politics has grown more and more polarized between conservatives and liberals.  Many people have the assumptions that if you are Republican or Democrat, you will only have a certain political views.  Republican and Democrat have became more than names of the parties.  They are more like representations of set of values. Party names are like frames, which categorized people.  Politicians, who are not voting with their “political party,” are facing huge political risk from both the public and their own party.  However, can those party names really conclude people’s political views?  And where does that put people, who have moderate political views or have different values on only some of issues from their party.  The truth is, “Republican” and “Democrat” are really nothing more than party names.  People, who are pro-choice, do not have to be pro-renewable energy.  People, who support expending military, do not have to be against gay marriage.  The same thing should true for politicians in Washington.  There should be no requirement on how you should vote base on your party membership.  A betrayal is not to vote against your party, it is to vote against your belief of what is the best for the country and the people.  One of the hottest topics for this election is the president should be able to work with both Republicans and Democrats in Washington.  But in order to have Republicans and Democrats work together, the first thing is to put the name of party behind and put the country and the people in front.

Arlen Specter was certainly one of the best examples of moderate politician who are not afraid to say what they believed without limited within their political party.  As consequences, Specter faced many challenges in his political career, and was criticized by both Republicans and Democrats.  But his strong belief in closing the best for the country and the people put him in the senate for more than 30 years.  Even though he was fighting with sickness in later years, he had never backed down from a fight.  As President Obama said, “Arlen Specter was always a fighter. From his days stamping out corruption as a prosecutor in Philadelphia to his three decades of service in the Senate, Arlen was fiercely independent — never putting party or ideology ahead of the people he was chosen to serve. He brought that same toughness and determination to his personal struggles, using his own story to inspire others.”