When I read that Vermont Congressman Peter Welch would be facing a general election challenge from Thomas Hermann because of Welch’s failure as a progressive in Congress, I have to admit I blanched. It had been my impression that Peter Welch was a progressive. Had I misjudged Peter Welch?

A consultation of Welch’s Congressional record shows a commitment to progressive legislative action that, while not perfect, seems pretty darned good. Welch voted against the Protect America Act, against the FISA Amendments Act, against the insertion of religious instruction into Head Start programs, and for an increase in the minimum wage. Welch voted against cockfighting, for the opening of presidential records, for shareholder oversight of fatcat CEO “golden parachute” deals, and for the restriction of emissions from oily ocean barges. Welch has cosponsored legislation to cast light on the Bush administration’s shadowy wartime contracting, repeal multiple aspects of the draconian Military Commissions Act, and reaffirm the right of women to control their own bodies.

But Thomas Hermann is running with the Vermont Progressive Party for Congress because in his view Peter Welch could have done better. According to Hermann and his supporters, Welch hasn’t supported impeachment of George W. Bush and has not provided enough leadership in opposition to the war in Iraq.

There’s no Republican challenger against Peter Welch for Vermont’s congressional seat this year. This means that in the Vermont congressional campaign, the most active discussions will be on the left side of the spectrum. It’s a different conversation than you can expect elsewhere in the country this year. It may be a refreshing conversation.