DSA Labor Statement on Spanberger Veto of HB1263 and SB378
For immediate release
DSA Labor Statement on Spanberger Veto of HB1263 and SB378
Date: May 21, 2026
Media Contact: For all press inquiries, please contact media@mdcdsa.org.
Washington, DC: This past Thursday, Democratic governor Abigail Spanberger vetoed House Bill 2363 and Senate Bill 378, which would have restored collective bargaining rights to more than 500,000 public sector workers in Virginia. Metro DC DSA strongly condemns this veto. Workers in Virginia have been without such guaranteed union rights since the Jim Crow era. The state stripped public sector workers of collective bargaining rights in 1946 in response to a group of Black workers organizing a union at the University of Virginia hospital. As her Republican predecessor, Glenn Youngkin, vetoed similar legislation last year, Spanberger’s veto is part of a continuous bi-partisan assault on Virginia’s working class majority, which voted to put her in the governor’s mansion.
These bills enjoy broad popularity within Virginia, as evidenced by them being supported by every single Democrat in the state legislature and overwhelming support from labor unions. This is something Spanberger herself is well aware of: while she declined to support repealing Virginia’s right-to-work legislation she promised to sign public sector collective bargaining rights into law on the campaign trail last year. According to the Economic Policy Institute, these bills would have helped to boost the state’s public-sector unionization rate which, at 14.1%, is the fourth lowest in the country, and narrow one of the largest public-sector pay gaps in the country (state and local government employees in Virginia earn, on average, 26.7% less than private-sector peers with similar education and experience). This would have improved public education and services in the state by reducing crisis-level shortages of educators, first responders, health care workers, and other essential workers. By being so eager to throw the working class under the bus, Spanberger has shown where her allegiances truly lie.
While this action is deeply disappointing, it is not surprising and has proved most Virginia unions that refused to endorse her last year correct. Governor Spanberger is a former CIA intelligence officer, the very same government agency that has suppressed working-class movements for justice at home and abroad. The CIA has spent millions of taxpayer dollars attempting to overthrow other nations’ governments over 72 times, while undermining and splitting labor unions abroad, drowning workers’ hopes in blood in places such as Guatemala, Iran, Congo, Dominican Republic, Brazil, Indonesia, Chile, Jamaica, El Salvador, and Nicaragua. Spanberger has also taken millions from corporations and billionaires, including the Murdochs, Sports Betting Alliance, and Dominion Energy. Our legitimate demands should not be subject to vetoes by the rich and their cronies, but so long as we have an undemocratic political system that allows one powerful individual to veto the will of the majority, these assaults on the working class will continue.
While Spanberger’s veto is undoubtedly a setback for workers, there is a solution, and you are a part of it. As working-class people who make society run, we must organize ourselves in our workplaces and unions to create a movement capable of standing up for our rights. These efforts must be merged with the socialist movement to wrest power from the two parties of the capitalist class and build a real democracy for all. History will look back on this act of cowardice with the disdain it deserves, but only if we continue the work of building a fighting independent labor movement brick by brick, and merge it with the broader struggle for democracy and socialism. In the words of A. Philip Randolph, whose National Brotherhood of Workers of America successfully organized African-American shipyard and dock workers in the Tidewater region of Virginia over a century ago, “Justice is never given; it is exacted, and the struggle must be continuous.”
The post DSA Labor Statement on Spanberger Veto of HB1263 and SB378 appeared first on .
Expenditure Requests
Procedure Steps
- The Chapter Member(s) wishing to make an expenditure request (hereafter referred to as the “Requestor”) fills out and submits the Milwaukee DSA Expenditure Request Form at least one (1) week in advance of any deadlines associated with the request.
- The Chapter Finance Team and/or Chapter Treasurer (hereafter referred to as the “Reviewer”) reviews the request within one (1) week. The Reviewer then determines if the request meets the following:
- Criteria:
- If the request meets both these criteria, the next steps of this procedure are then performed. If the request fails to meet any of the above criteria, the Reviewer denies the request and informs the Requestor of the reason(s) for denial, after which this Procedure is complete and no further steps are necessary.
- It is qualified for consideration according to the Governing Documents of Milwaukee DSA
- If the request meets both these criteria, the next steps of this procedure are then performed. If the request fails to meet any of the above criteria, the Reviewer denies the request and informs the Requestor of the reason(s) for denial, after which this Procedure is complete and no further steps are necessary.
- Criteria:
- The Reviewer determines what body of the Chapter is required to approve or deny the request (hereafter referred to as the “Grantor”), and refers the request to the appropriate party.
- The Reviewer contacts the Requestor to inform them of the date, time and location at which the Grantor will consider the request, and asks if the Requestor or another person is available at that date and time to explain and motivate the request to the Grantor.
- The Grantor approves or denies the request at the next available opportunity, and informs the Requestor of their decision.
Internal Communication and Moderation
Purpose
The Internal Communication and Moderation policy will ensure that chapter communication spaces remain welcoming, constructive, and aligned with the DSA’s Code of Conduct for members as well as Milwaukee DSAs Online Code of Conduct policy and Meeting and Events Code of Conduct. By establishing consistent moderation practices and clear guidelines, this Policy will help facilitate productive discussion, reduce disruptive behavior, and protect the ability of members to organize effectively online.
Community Standards
- At all chapter meetings and events, members must adhere to the Policy: Meeting and Event Code of Conduct.
- For all online communication, members must adhere to Policy: Online Code of Conduct.
- Members may appeal a moderation decision through the Procedure: Moderation Appeal Process. All thoughts and concerns regarding a moderation action may not be shared on public platforms. Any questions regarding a moderation appeal or action must be asked privately and directly to a moderator or HGO.
Platforms
- Milwaukee DSA members may use the Discord server, moderated by the chapter (hereafter referred to as the chapter Discord) to communicate with other active members, to discuss among themselves as individuals, and to advocate for their own individual perspectives. With the exception of announcements from moderators or duly elected or appointed chapter officers, posts are understood to represent individual opinions, not official decisions or positions of the Milwaukee chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.
- Signal should be used occasionally, concisely and for person to person, immediate communication. Signal may also be used in the event that said communications need to be encrypted.
- The Milwaukee DSA Signal Chat has been terminated. There is no official Milwaukee DSA Signal Chat.
- The primary official method of outreach shall be through regular direct outreach to members and supporters at the contact information they have shared with DSA and Milwaukee DSA (e.g., email newsletters and occasional phone calls or texts). Chapter officers shall organize this outreach. Outreach using chapter contact lists shall be conducted using DSA resources to ensure members’ privacy. Scripts and emails shall be approved by duly elected or appointed chapter officers to ensure that they reflect the collective decisions of Milwaukee DSA.
Role Definitions
- Moderators: members who moderate and monitor discussion in chapter chat servers
- Harassment and Grievance Officers (HGOs): responsible for overseeing the investigation of Members accused of engaging in prohibited behavior according to the Harassment Policy (Resolution 33) of DSA. See chapter bylaws for more detail.
- Administrators: Maintain membership in the chapter chat server, adding in new members and channels plus removing members who are no longer in the chapter. Admin roles will be given to mkedsaoutreach@gmail.com and milwaukeedsa@gmail.com and be maintained by the Secretary, Outreach Officer and Communications Officer. More admins will be added on an as needed basis.
Role of Moderators
- To remove, mute or ban any content or person that does not follow all applicable codes of conduct and policies
- To document all incidents in which the moderation team removed, muted, or banned content or persons
- To seek advice from those on the moderation team for guidance on how to proceed with member infractions/removals
- To cooperate with Chapter HGOs in the event of content needing to be retrieved for an HGO filing
- To keep discussions and other chapter business on topic and concise
- To receive feedback from members regarding content or user interactions, and clarify to members why the moderators modified their participation in the chapter server
- Provide 48 hour notice to members who receive infractions or banning
Guidelines for Moderation Actions
- This set of community guidelines follows a “three strikes you’re out” guideline for removing members from the chapter server. Once a member has acquired three or more infractions, they will be removed from the chapter server for a year or possibly more, depending on the severity.
- Infraction #1
- Member(s) will be notified by a moderator why the content they shared did not follow the Community Guidelines within 48 hours of the incident occurring
- Member and Moderator will discuss and/or re-educate the member about how to interact with the chapter chat server in the future
- Infraction #2
- Member(s) will be notified by a moderator why the content they shared did not follow the Community Guidelines within 48 hours of the incident occurring.
- Member will be banned from server ranging from a day to a week, depending on severity
- Member and Moderator will discuss and/or re-educate the member about what they can do in the future
- Infraction #3
- Member(s) will be notified by a moderator why the content they shared did not follow the Community Guidelines within 48 hours of the incident occurring.
- Member will be banned from server ranging from one to indefinitely, depending on severity
- Member and Moderator will discuss and/or re-educate the member after the length of the ban time to determine if both parties are ready to bring the member back into the server.
- Infraction #1
- Moderators will use their best discretion to enforce all applicable Community Standards (see section I.) and to maintain an orderly and safe place for all members to organize.
- At any point a member may discuss with the moderation team about why they received any moderation actions (deleted posts, account banned or muted) against them. Questions regarding a moderation appeal or action must be asked privately and directly to a moderator or HGO. Members may appeal moderation actions through the Procedure: Moderation Appeal Process.
- In the event that a conversation is generally heated and may escalate, a moderator may temporarily put a channel or thread into “slow mode” to allow all parties time to cool down. Moderators should consult other moderators and/or HGO(s) if they chose to put a channel in “slow mode”
Choosing moderators
- Chapter Harassment and Grievance Officers (HGOs) will manage the moderation team under the purview of the Executive Committee; they will not personally moderate membership posts except in the case of inappropriate moderator behavior or when immediate emergency action is needed.
- There must be at minimum 2 moderators (not including HGOs). The Executive Committee may appoint additional moderators as recommended by the moderation team. Appointed moderators will be subject to a confirmation vote by membership at a General Meeting.
- Moderators must be members in good standing
- A Moderator’s term shall be no longer than 1 year following their confirmation vote, unless reappointed by the Executive Committee. All moderators are subject to appointment or reappointment by the Executive Committee in June each year.