Noted.

Noted.

Arlen Specter’s switch; The Progressive turns 100.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

A SWITCH IN TIME:

Barack Obama

promised to change politics, and on April 28 the oldest Republican senator put an exclamation on the point by changing parties. Of course,

Arlen Specter

‘s changeover was motivated by more than Obama’s “postpartisan” appeal. Specter–a prochoice, pro-civil rights, union-friendly Rockefeller Republican whose vote for the stimulus bill inspired the ire of the right–was all but certain to lose next year’s Pennsylvania primary to a conservative challenger.

The prospect of forced retirement clarifies the mind, and Specter now finds himself “more in line with Democrats.” But which Democrats? If he aligns with mushy centrists, his defection won’t mean much, even if Dems have the sixty votes to avert filibusters. Nowhere is this more evident than with the

Employee Free Choice Act

, which Specter and several other Democrats refuse to back. Praise from union leaders for his move suggests that they think he’ll help them forge a compromise. But if Specter’s switch makes an already compromise-prone Democratic caucus more squishy, then he’ll deserve a primary challenge–no matter what the party leaders have promised him. More encouraging is Specter’s professed belief in “the need for Congress and the courts to reassert themselves in our system of checks and balances.” His recent New York Review of Books article reads as if it was written by

Russ Feingold

. If Specter changes course on EFCA and fights for civil liberties, he might finish his career where he started–as a liberal Democrat–and his switch could be one of the most important developments of Obama’s first 100 days. Let’s hope.   JOHN NICHOLS

WELCOME TO THE CLUB:

The Nation was a mature 43 years old in 1909, when one of its favorite senators launched

La Follette’s Weekly

, a muckraking journal of Midwest radicalism that would eventually become

The Progressive

. The immodest goal of

Robert La Follette

‘s magazine–which was gathering editors, writers and fans to celebrate its 100th birthday May 1-2 in Madison, Wisconsin–has long been to win “back for the people the complete power over government.” Even if that mission remains incomplete, The Progressive has surely done its part: opposing war and empire; fighting for the New Deal; and advocating for women’s suffrage, justice for Native Americans and civil and gay rights.

The Progressive championed the public’s right to know when editor

Erwin Knoll

and writer

Howard Morland

successfully challenged the

Atomic Energy Act

‘s secrecy clauses; The Nation supported it in that struggle. As clouds again gathered over the Constitution during the Bush era, Progressive editor

Matthew Rothschild

defended civil liberties with his meticulous “McCarthyism Watch.” This ongoing crusading is, as our own

Victor Navasky

noted in welcoming The Progressive to the circle of 100-year-old magazines, a boon in an era of declining print fortunes. “That’s because they are a cause as much as a business,” says Navasky.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x