Congressman Bart Stupak has been among that sort of Democratic politicians that progressives find it difficult to rely upon. He’s not formally a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, but he sometimes opposes progressive legislation, as Blue Dogs do. In 2002, Stupak voted against the resolution to go to war in Iraq. In the waning days of George W. Bush, however, Stupak voted in favor of the FISA Amendments Act, which retroactively legalized a massive spying operation against the American people.

This year, focus on Congressman Stupak is centered around the issue of health care reform. Stupak provoked a significant amount of anger among Democrats nationwide when he hobbled health care legislation by adding an amendment that would dismantle insurance coverage of abortion, not just in new government plans, but also in private insurance.

Yesterday, former teacher Connie Saltonstall announced her intention to challenge Stupak in the Democratic primary election to be held in August. Her primary rationale for the challenge is Stupak’s opposition to reproductive rights. That’s a stand that is generally regarded as politically progressive, but does it qualify Saltonstall as a progressive challenger?

Saltonstall has not yet articulated a general political philosophy, much less particular policy positions. She has merely stated that she favors health care reform and that she is pro-choice. What are her positions on other issues, such as the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, civil liberties, climate change, transportation and marriage equality?

Before progressives pledge their support to Saltonstall, they should wait to understand her political position as a whole, not just in the light of the issue of the moment.

Tags: abortion, bart stupak, congress, Connie Saltonstall, michigan, primary