By: Audrey E.

On November 5 Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) voted by 92% for an unfair labor practice strike. Their open-ended strike is set to kick off on Starbucks’ notorious Red Cup Day, November 13, where customers line up to receive a free reusable cup with the purchase of a holiday drink.

This limited edition plastic cup draws one of the company’s biggest annual sale days, which makes this day incredibly strategic for SBWU baristas who are demanding a fair contract to begin their open-ended strike.

No Detroit-area stores are among the unionized stores chosen to strike in the first wave, but keep an eye on DSA’s Slack for stores that may strike in the near future — and see below for the solidarity actions we are taking this weekend and beyond.

The strike announcement comes because of a stand-still at the bargaining table in December 2024. While there was some progress in the months prior, Starbucks denied SBWU’s demand for baristas’ pay to increase to $20/hour with a 1.5% increase yearly. Due to the union’s dismissal of Starbucks’ proposal, and the company’s lack of putting forth a serious negotiation, SBWU is preparing its biggest action yet.

Although SBWU didn’t disclose which stores are going on strike first, it did state that stores in at least 25 cities will be going out, with future locations potentially added in second and third waves. This isn’t SBWU’s first trip around the block either, with work-stoppage actions dating back to 2022. In the past, SBWU has mostly stuck to shorter strikes with a clear timeline of a few days or a couple of weeks. This year’s strike may be the longest in the union’s history.

POVERTY PAY AND UNDERSTAFFING

The top demands for unionized Starbucks baristas are better hours, higher pay, and a resolution to the hundreds of unfair labor practice charges the union has brought against Starbucks for union busting.

Topanga Hass, a barista in Ypsilanti said, “Our store has been planning for this strike since April…We’re so excited.” Topanga shed light on ongoing support from the community and how her store is well equipped for the long haul. From planning to grill on the picket line for striking workers and community members, to hosting trivia games and cornhole matches, they’re preparing to keep up the energy throughout the strike.

Topanga’s shop unionized in 2023, and she has been working there for around 1.5 years. She serves as a strike captain and her store’s bargaining delegate.

Two of the main concerns Topanga shared were rampant understaffing and being underpaid.

“Every single day for the next three weeks, we are understaffed for all of our peak times … and we just don’t have enough people to help with the demand,” said Topanga.

On November 6, Starbucks’ holiday drink launch, Topanga said, “I was getting messages from every store in the district that there were over 100 mobile orders in queue.” Due to short-staffing, baristas have to work multiple positions during their shift, while only being paid “$10/hour by the time taxes and everything else is taken out of [their] paycheck.”

Between hopping from station to station, and restocking whenever there is a (rare) opportunity, Topanga’s fitness app tracked 10 miles in a seven-hour shift. While her sneakers are wearing down from the constant pressure, she not only has to worry about getting costly new supportive shoes, but also ones that fit into the new CEO’s uniform mandate.

At the time of Brian Niccol’s appointment as CEO of Starbucks in September 2024, he released a “Back to Starbucks” campaign that listed everything from dress codes to requiring baristas to write a message on every single cup. This has been part of his mission to boost Starbucks’ sales and regular customers from the decline it had been experiencing for years. That decline resulted in part from an organic boycott that emerged when the company sued the union for its stance on the genocide in Palestine.

But Niccol can’t understand that the real divide between barista and customer has nothing to do with ink on cups. It’s a result of understaffing and chasing the bottom line.

“And that’s why I’ve been telling my coworkers that we need this contract so bad,” said Topanga.

DSA IS SBWU’S PARTNER

Over the past few months, DSA nationally has been organizing in partnership with SBWU to support the contract campaign. This collaboration came about not from a top-to-top relationship but as a reflection of the years of work DSA members across the country have done to support organizing Starbucks.

One major role DSA has played nationally is cohering support for workers among the public. Chapters across the country have undertaken crowd canvassing and actions outside nonunion stores, collecting thousands of pledge signatures to support a boycott, and raising awareness of the contract fight. Chapters have organized movie screenings to fundraise for the SBWU hardship fund and taken initiative on strike kitchens and pantries to feed striking workers.

To support Starbucks workers, sign their No Contract, No Coffee pledge to commit to boycotting Starbucks for the duration of the strike! You can donate to the strike fund here.

On Saturday morning, November 15, DSAers will be leafleting and talking with customers at several nonunion stores, as requested by SBWU. We’ll be informing them of the strike and boycott and convincing them to go elsewhere to get their joe. To get hooked up with one of these actions, see the Labor Working Group Slack.

Starbucks Baristas to Strike on Red Cup Day was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

On November 4th, a 1% sales tax was passed (52% to 48%) in Mecklenburg County to fund the P.A.V.E. Act.

We remain opposed to the sales tax increase. The working class had no say in the P.A.V.E. act, yet we are those with the most to lose. With the current $20 billion transit plan, we will also gain the least. We will not be able sit on the new governing Transit Authority Board of Trustees, but we're free to be harassed and kicked off transit by the new transit police force. There are no guarantees that these transit expansions will be completed, and that this tax money will actually go towards transit or bike infrastructure.

We support transit when it serves the working class. This Bill does not. It serves to support corporations.

Bills like the P.A.V.E. act get passed because these politicians don’t care about workers, only their corporate donors.

We're building an organization by and for the working class that can stand up to the capitalist class and fight for reforms like fast, free, reliable, and comprehensive public transit. We hope you will join us!

In Solidarity,

Charlotte Metro DSA

by Yarrow

“Ten Days that Shook the World” is an account of the Russian Revolution in October and November of 1917. It follows the complex and rapidly changing events, people, and factions of the struggle in detail. The author, John Reed, was a U.S. American journalist and socialist who traveled to Russia along with some fellow journalists and witnessed these events first hand. It’s mostly made up of his first-hand accounts with some second-hand reports from his colleagues and from contemporary written sources.

The book includes a map of Petrograd and a map of western Russia; a forward by Lenin; Notes & Explanations; and background information. These were essential for understanding the main text. I referenced the Notes & Explanations a lot to keep all the parties, factions, and people straight. The end of the book has appendices with extra explanations and source texts; a chronology; and an index. It also includes lots of astounding photographs.

Before I read this book I didn’t know much about the Russian revolution. I knew when it happened, that there were Bolsheviki and Mensheviki, and I knew something about the constituent assembly (which this book stops just short of). This book helped me understand the failure of the constituent assembly because it showed the split of the Right Socialist Revolutionaries and Left Socialist Revolutionaries.

The events of 1917 were so complex, changed so dramatically, and there were so many lies and rumors flying around (spread by the reactionaries to smear the Bolsheviki), that it was easy for things to get twisted, taken out of context, and misreported. This book gave me a really solid understanding of what actually happened and why, and why the actions of the Bolsheviki were necessary.

Before explaining the events of October, Reed summarizes the earlier stages of the uprising which began in February. This uprising, lead by the Menshevik & Social Revolutionary parties and driven by the Soviets—autonomous workers’ and soldiers’ councils—deposed the Czar and put a provisional government in power, with the promise of a Constituent Assembly that would later be elected by the citizens (this was endlessly postponed). This provisional government issued at once ineffective reforms and harsh repression.

The Menshevik & Social Revolutionary parties were the moderates: they believed that this was a bourgeois revolution which should put the capitalist class in power, and that Russia should continue fighting the Great War.
The Bolsheviks were the principled socialists, whose line was summarized by the slogan “Peace, Land, and Workers’ Control of Industry”. After the uprising of February, many Bolsheviks were imprisoned or exiled.

After the uprising came the July Days, a massive demonstration lead by women and the Bolshevik party, which was quickly gaining members and votes in the Soviets and Unions because they refused to compromise with the bourgeoisie and based their platform on the immediate desires of the workers, soldiers, and peasants.
This set the stage for the final uprising that would finish the revolution and place the Soviets in power.

I was surprised to learn just how much the revolutionary consciousness was fueled by the horror of the Great War. The soldiers were desperate for the fighting to end, and the Bolsheviki were the only ones who were willing to demand it.
I was also surprised to discover the dizzying proliferation of organizations and parties. Factory-shop committees, soldiers’ and workers’ soviets and peasants’ land committees, consumer cooperatives, army committees, Mensheviki, Bolsheviki, right and left Socialist Revolutionaries, Cadets… they split and merged and formed alliances here and there as they were tested in struggle.

One surprising thing that I appreciated about this book was how funny it is. Many parts of it read like a novel. John Reed included many anecdotes that give refreshing insight into the real situation on the ground, and I found many of them amusing. Mr. Reed showed the actions of everyday people who came together and organized themselves, not just the bigwigs in the CIK (executive congressional committee), the provisional government, and the dumas. I felt that there were real people getting swept up in these events, that circumstance brought unlikely personalities together, that normal everyday life was continuing somehow in spite of everything. I recommend this book just for the funny bits.

Much of the book consists of accounts of meetings. There were so many of them. I particularly enjoyed the movements when, during one of these meetings, tensions would run high, people would shout over each other and get agitated and confused, and then some noble person would stand up and give a rousing speech that stilled the commotion and united the crowd. Reed definitely had a flair for the dramatic.

A lesson that I took from this book was that any revolutionary party must have its base in the people. The Bolsheviki did this by speaking to the material demands of the peasants, soldiers, & workers, and actually delivering on promises. It was only the principled refusal of the Bolsheviks to collude with the bourgeoisie which brought the revolution to victory, instead seeking alliances with the peasantry. (The German Revolution of 1918-1919 showed the failure and backsliding that happens when moderate socialists are allowed to take charge.) The revolution definitely wouldn’t have been possible without all the autonomous civil organizations that were lead by the workers, soldiers, and peasants, and defended by the Red Guard.

This was how the Bolsheviki won the propaganda war that raged in the newspapers and on the streets, as well as the contest of arms and the stubborn resistance of the bureaucracy and logistical workers. The Bolsheviki cemented their legitimacy by delivering on the demand of peace, land, and power to the workers, by daring to struggle and be bold. They pushed forward as soon as the opportunity came, and met every new challenge without wavering. It’s so inspiring, and I think it is owed in large part to the leadership of Comrade Lenin.

One thing I want to know more about is the origin of the soviets and how they actually worked. I also want to know more about the earlier stage of the revolution which this book summarizes but does not detail, and the failed 1905 revolution.

I’ll end this review with a quotation that I found extremely moving:

“I went back to Petrograd riding on the front seat of an auto truck, driven by a workman and filled with Red Guards. We had no kerosene so our lights were not burning. Across the horizon spread the glittering lights of the city, immeasurably more splendid by night than by day, like a dike of jewels heaped on the barren plain. The old workman who drove held the wheel in one hand, while with the other he swept the far-gleaming capital in an exultant gesture.
‘Mine!’ he cried, his face all alight. ‘All mine now! My Petrograd!’”

All in all, I think this book is absolutely essential reading for anyone who is interested in socialism. And it’s a proper page turner. 10/10!

The post Book Review – Ten Days that Shook the World first appeared on Red Fault.

Sunday Nov. 9^th, eight Senate Democrats voted with Republicans to end the shutdown. 

Despite the outrageous cruelty Trump wielded during the shutdown, including stopping food assistance to millions of Americans, Democrats had been both justified and moral in standing their ground. They were fighting to keep healthcare costs from doubling, tripling and even quadrupling for 24 million Americans. 

Last Tuesday, voters made it crystal clear that the fight for healthcare was resonating. Across the country, voters turned out for Democrats, and even Trump acknowledged that the shutdown negatively affected Republicans. It seemed like Democrats finally had leverage.

But instead of wielding this leverage and forcing Republicans to support healthcare, Senate Democrats folded. They caved to Republicans’ cruelty, with nothing but a promise that the Senate will vote on extending the Affordable Care Act subsidies—which we all know the Republican majority will reject, if they keep their promise at all. (Speaker of the House Mike Johnson has already stated that he won’t allow this vote in the House.)

We don’t know why Democrats caved. Maybe they truly are naive enough to believe that ending the shutdown would end Republicans’ assault on the most vulnerable. Or maybe they capitulated to elite pressure from a coalition of hotel chains, casinos, and convention bureaus, who urged them to end the shutdown before the most “economically important” travel week of the year. Or maybe they just utterly lack conviction. 

What we do know is that establishment Democrats won’t save us. They have consistently failed to protect us from anything, because they stand for nothing. They are too comfortable collecting their checks from donors and corporations, while ignoring the people they claim to represent. It is time, instead, for working class power—a party for the working class that believes our government can and should care for its citizens. 

The Seattle Democratic Socialists of America believe that food, housing, and healthcare are human rights. We believe in putting people over profits. And we know that we, the people, are worth fighting for. 

Stand for something. Join DSA today.

1. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/watch-johnson-says-he-wont-promise-aca-vote-in-the-house-as-part-of-a-shutdown-deal
2. https://www.ustravel.org/sites/default/files/2025-11/UST25_Letter_ThanksgivingTravelShutdown_v6.pdf

The post Democratic Socialists Have Spines appeared first on Seattle Democratic Socialists of America.

In mid-August 2025, on a sweltering Chicago weekend, ringing with camaraderie, over 1200 socialists descended for the Democratic Socialists of America’s biennial National Convention. The Democratic Socialists of America or DSA is the largest socialist organization in the United States, boasting 80,000 members nationwide. DSA, democratically run by this membership, organized in different chapters, is on the front lines of building a better tomorrow through: labor organizing, international solidarity, standing up to America’s fascist administration, and many more actions. 

The National Convention is DSA’s highest decision-making body, where the next two years of direction is decided by delegates, elected by the membership of each chapter, and the National Political Committee is elected to shepherd DSA until the next Convention. From Silicon Valley DSA (SV DSA), there were 12 delegates, from veteran attendee Chapter Officers to DSA newcommers.

DSA has several diverse tendencies, many of them disagreeing on specific issues, often vehemently. However, there is still unity in this diversity, as all DSA members share a vision for a better tomorrow under socialism, no matter what form that takes. One visiting officer commented regarding this unity at the Convention, “Being surrounded by so many like minded comrades was an energizing experience”, demonstrating that DSA’s membership has more in common than it has differences.

At the Convention, DSA delegates deliberated and debated many resolutions, putting its democratic values into practice. One item that took more than a day to debate was Resolution 22: For a Fighting Anti-Zionist DSA, which would reaffirm a previous resolution to “Make DSA an Anti-Zionist Organization in Principle and Praxis.” Our Chapter’s delegates, by the democratic will of the Chapter, swore to vote “yes” on this Resolution and “no” on a controversial amendment, which some (including much of our Chapter) argued would dilute the intent of the original resolution. The resolution passed with a majority of 675-524 votes. This would earn DSA the praise of groups like Palestinian Youth Movement and outlets like Middle East Eye, who noted DSA’s evolution into a truly Anti-Zionist group devoted to Palestinian Solidarity.

Additionally, on Saturday afternoon, DSA hosted its first Cross-Organizational Political Exchange from 3 PM-6 PM, where groups were invited from all over to observe the convention and how DSA’s socialists conduct themselves within the Convention. Groups represented an entire section of the left, from activists like the Palestinian Youth Movement and Sunrise to American labor unions.

However, organizations were not only restricted to the US, as comrades from around the world came to the Convention. Some, like the Democratic Socialists of Canada, were smaller and sought to emulate DSA’s internal democracy in their own country. Others, though, were much larger, including well-known parties like Mexico’s MORENA, the current ruling party of the country, and La France Insoumise, most famously represented by Jean Luc Melencheon. Other guests included members of Partido Socialismo e Liberdade (PSOL) from Brazil and comrades from Japan, Belgium, and many more. 

In this diversity of groups though, was a unified message for comrades in DSA. Of their message, our officer said: “our comrades are looking to us and relying on us to do some major organizing. We are in the heart of the Empire, and the decisions of the United States impact the organizing terrain of everyone. It was humbling and inspiring to hear that people were counting on us to have an impact and shape the trajectory of the country and the world”. Additionally, he regarded the support of American organizations as proof that DSA and its members are not alone in seeking to build a better world.

The events at the Convention show that DSA has an important role to play in building a better tomorrow not only for America, but for the whole world. As Silicon Valley DSA’s delegates returned home, they brought many lessons with them. Some like Tyler N and Fred, nicknamed “The Red”, gained a newfound appreciation for Robert’s Rules, a code of conduct that DSA uses to run meetings. “The rigidity of Robert’s Rules is worth it for large meetings where some set of parliamentary rules is required for having any reasonable debate and when the motions considered feel consequential and conducive to debate,” Tyler said regarding the rules, with Fred adding, “in the right hands, Roberts Rules can be used to ensure everyone equal access to be heard, and to weed out disruptors, ego-trippers, and saboteurs”. Such were lessons taken by our delegates to the Convention.

Times may seem tough. The government is increasing its targeting and repression of dissenters and the marginalized with each and every day, stripping away our rights. Working people seem to have less and less power every day. However, a better world is possible. And based on the lessons our comrades brought home from convention, there is only one way: working together as comrades, side-by-side. For what is weaker than the feebler strength of one? And what is mightier than the power of the masses united?

The post Thoughts on our National Chapter Convention appeared first on Silicon Valley DSA.

The High Peaks Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (HPDSA) mourns the lives of the more than 334 transgender and gender non-conforming people (TGNC) lost in 2025, including the more than 57 people who lived in the U.S. Many of those lost were trans people of color, a pattern that continues year after year, and a tragic reminder that we are failing the most vulnerable people in our communities. We are heartbroken by the loss of our comrades. 

We believe that trans people deserve to live free and full lives of peace, joy, and happiness without fear of being discriminated against, harmed, or even killed for how they choose to express their gender. We know that any lives lost–whether to direct or stochastic violence–represent a failure by all of us to address pressing issues within society. We ask everyone to stand up and defend our TGNC community at every opportunity, and push back against harmful anti-trans ideologies wherever they may appear.

We have seen an alarming increase in hateful rhetoric directed at TGNC people in 2025, along with tens of millions of dollars spent by political campaigns in recent elections to sour public opinion against them, with little political defense from the mainstream Democratic Party and its allies. Combined with influencers masquerading as experts and discredited or misrepresented studies being used as proof of harm, all backed by conservative think tanks and politicians funded with dark money, TGNC people have never been at greater risk. This damaging propaganda has led to trans people losing their jobs, new and vindictive restrictions on their ability to travel abroad safely, bans from participating in sports, and hundreds of thousands of TGNC youth losing access to life-saving medical care. Further potential injustices are a constant threat on the horizon.

“As a trans person myself, I feel the incredible pressure we’re under every day,” says Cayenne Wren, member of HPDSA. “We wake up, turn on the news, and we’re instantly confronted with unhinged social posts about us. Our very right to exist is endlessly debated about, even though we’re never included in those discussions. All too often we’re underemployed and unemployed, and when we do get a job, we are frequently harassed. Our greatest risk of harm is often from intimate partner violence and even our own family members. My heart breaks continuously for not only those we’ve lost, but also for my trans siblings who must continue to live with injustice every day of our lives. I love each and every one of you, and please know that you are never alone.”

For gay and bisexual individuals who fail to see the fight for trans liberation as central to the broader queer struggle, and for feminists who reject trans women as part of their coalition. Like Jewish liberal Zionists over the last two years of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, they will continue to find themselves ostracized further from the broader social justice movement, and forced into the untenable position of having to align politically with reactionary right-wing forces that subjugate them as well to uphold the white supremacist heteropatriarchal order.

HPDSA asks you to join us today in pledging to end all forms of violence against TGNC people. You can make a difference by directly donating to TGNC people in need, uplifting trans voices, showing up to public meetings to advocate for trans rights and inclusivity, being vocal against anti-trans propaganda, participating in local and state elections, and advocating for our elected officials to do more to protect TGNC in our state and provide a sanctuary for those individuals who face greater threats elsewhere. 

Together, we can make a difference in the lives of our most vulnerable community members and work towards a future where trans people can live openly and authentically without fear. 

Resources

• New York Name Change Guide

The post High Peaks DSA Honors Transgender Day of Remembrance appeared first on High Peaks DSA.

It can feel impossible to keep up with every DSA chapter across the country, even for our most active members. Luckily Democratic Left has you covered with chapter report updates from coast to coast, this time covering chapters with immigrant-rights campaigns and more. 

The post Fall 2025 Chapter Reports: Immigrant Rights and More appeared first on Democratic Left.

This article was first published in Power Map Magazine, and is being re-printed here with the author’s permission. We are including this piece as part of our ongoing debate in Maine DSA about candidates in 2026. Pine and Roses welcomes contributions. 

Earlier this year Maine Governor Janet Mills made national headlines when she quipped “see you in court” to Trump at the National Governors Association summit after he threatened the state over its laws that allow transgender athletes to play sports. In the bleak days of February, when it seemed like everyone was capitulating and few Democratic figures had yet to mobilize against the new administration, it was a bright moment for opponents of the president and trans people alike. For a relatively low profile governor from an otherwise sleepy state, it was also much of the country’s first introduction to Mills as a figure. Overnight she became a liberal icon. Sites selling shirts with her likeness and her now famous quote quickly cropped up.

Given her national reputation, one would assume that Mills’s entrance into next year’s Democratic primary race would galvanize Democrats across the political spectrum. From this outside perspective it would be easy to be confused as to why an alternative candidacy in Graham Platner so quickly ballooned when Mills was on offer. Many were quick to ascribe this to Mills’s advanced age or that Platner, as a burly white working class male type figure, had some intrinsic appeal. While both of these factors may have been in the mix, they don’t explain the full story. 

Missing from much of the discussion online is much substance about who Janet Mills actually is as a political figure. Afterall, there is a reason why I, a trans woman who is appreciative of Mills’s stance on Trump, and someone who is on the record as hating the hyper-masculine populist trend as a solution to our post-2024 woes, am so opposed to Mills’s candidacy and jumped on the Platner campaign (although now after tattoo-gate, I have jumped off it). And I am obviously not the only one, given a recent poll showing her behind by 34 points. The fact is that in Maine, and to those familiar with the state’s politics, our governor has a far more complicated history than her more recent image depicts. Far less paid attention to, for example, was what Mills was at the time doing with her powers as governor, such as (unsuccessfully) trying to cut funding for childcare, refusing to sign a bill that would end the state’s cooperation with ICE, or more recently, opposing a ballot question on Maine’s gun laws—changes being pushed in the wake of a mass shooting that claimed the lives of 18 people.

It would be easy to think from her comments to Trump that Mills is a liberal champion, but within Maine she is well understood as a moderate, leaning to the right of the Democratic Party (a party whose legislative caucus she frequently is out of step with). One should not expect her to be straightforwardly a safe vote as a senator under a hypothetical future Democratic administration trying to push anything like court packing, or trials for ICE agents. While she may not be quite the level of a Lieberman, a Manchin or a Sinema, Mills will almost certainly be in the bloc of moderate Senators who endlessly frustrate liberals with their positions, and will be a roadblock to progress—after all she’s already announced as much with her declared support for the retention of the filibuster.

It’s not uncommon for residents of a state, particularly politically active ones, to have a quite different perspective on a local figure than those looking in from elsewhere across the country. Yet the gap between how many progressives in Maine view Janet Mills, and those only familiar with her from the Trump incident, is wide and divergent. With her new national prominence, it’s worth exploring her history in detail.

First, we should give Mills a bit of credit: it was genuinely quite bold of her to stand up to Trump in the meeting. It is also not something out of character for her to do. As Attorney General, she was frequently at loggerheads with Governor Paul LePage, a far right Republican elected with only 37% of the vote, who has often been compared to the president. It was this record that helped propel Mills to victory in a crowded 2018 gubernatorial primary. And four years later she would face LePage in her 2022 reelection campaign in which she trounced him, attaining the highest vote share by a gubernatorial candidate since 1998 (and the largest by a Democrat since 1982). With Trump occupying the White House, these are certainly desirable traits in a candidate. 

At a time when trans people are under intense attack, and Democrats are under pressure to abandon trans people in the name of electability, that Mills chose to defend us is worth immense praise. Her actions put her in a tradition of Maine politicians standing up to authoritarianism, not unlike when Maragret Chase Smith (a family friend of the Mills family during her childhood) gave her Declaration of Conscience speech against McCarthyism in 1950. But it would also be a mistake to assume (as evidently many have) that the reason Mills did so is because she is a passionate defender of trans rights. Mills has a solid record on the issue—as much as any Democratic governor would—but as anti-trans bills were later introduced and debated in the Maine State Legislature, she would clarify her comments: “if [lawmakers] wish to change [the law], they have the authority to change it, but you don’t change it by executive order or by wishing it differently.” When asked about her personal stance on the issue, she declined to comment, saying the issue of trans children in sports was “worth of a debate, a full democratic debate.” Not exactly a full throated defense of trans people.

Instead these comments make clear Mill’s real passion: the law.

When Mills stood up to Trump, she wasn’t so much doing it out of strong conviction about trans issues, she was doing it because she was “complying with state and federal law.” Her disagreement with the president was around his use of executive orders to unilaterally change the law, something he straightforwardly does not have the power to do. This should not be surprising to anyone who knows Mills’s history. A graduate of Maine Law, Mills spent her whole career as a prosecutor, becoming the first female district attorney in New England in 1980, and culminating in her appointment as Maine’s Attorney General in 2009, which besides for a brief two year window, was an office she would continue to hold for the next decade. Like LePage before him, Mills is not going to simply let Trump get away with violating these laws, and the institutions she has spent decades defending and enforcing. To do so would go against the animating impulse that has defined her career. 

But there is a far darker side to Mill’s commitment to our legal institutions, and one that causes her to frequently clash with those in the state who want more out of our government and who are critical of the injustices that it has wrought. The clearest example of this is the issue of Wabanaki Sovereignty. 

Maine’s relationship with its indigenous nations can be described as rocky at best. Unlike all other federally recognized tribes, the four in Maine (the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, the Mi’kmaq Nation, the Penobscot Nation and the Passamaquoddy Tribe) have a unique set of rules that govern their relationship with the state. This is based on the 1980 Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, a law passed by Congress to settle a dispute between the Wabanaki and the state government, and since then the state has used the settlement to deny these nations the sovereignty to which they are entitled. Because of this, the Wabanaki nations do not have the same rights and legal protections as sovereign nations that other federally recognized tribes hold, nor do they have the same access to federal benefits and programs, a fact that is hindering their economic development and causing the state to lose out on thousands of jobs.

In her role as governor, Mills has played a major role in enforcing this status quo, using her veto pen to oppose both sweeping legislation, and piecemeal reform. To be quite clear this is not a question of moderation on Mills part, nor is this a partisan issue, many Republicans as well as Democrats are quite supportive of changes to the law. LD958, the reform Mills vetoed earlier this year, was introduced by the Republican House Minority Leader, and passed by the majority Democratic legislature. Mills’s defense of the institution of Maine’s state government is something we may welcome when it comes under federal attack, but we can’t forget that it also limits what she is willing to support when it comes to changes, and that it leads her to support ugly, racist policies.

Since coming to office Mills has used her veto power against a wide variety of issues, covering everything from tenant protections, to the rights of farmworkers, to the rights of public sector workers (who she has been no friend to when it comes to wage negotiation). Glaringly, she vetoed a proposal to close down the infamously racist Long Creek facility, the state’s youth prison. This past session in addition to blocking the anti-ICE legislation mentioned previously, Mills also pushed back on expanding ranked choice voting to state offices (Maine only uses RCV for federal offices due to an obscure constitutional wording—again the law). One of the major wins of Mills’s time in office—paid family and medical leave—only happened with the threat of a ballot question hanging over it. Currently, as her senate campaign gets off the ground, she is doubling down on the state’s existing “yellow flag law,” a compromise that failed to prevent the 2023 mass shooting. Following that shooting, while even conservative Democratic Congressman Jared Golden was flipping on gun rights, Mills was vetoing a bump stock ban.

Her approach to the budgetary process has been similarly frustrating. While Republicans may try to frame her as such, Mills is certainly no tax and spend liberal and under her time in office, the state has taken an extremely fiscally cautious approach. During the boom years following the COVID-19 pandemic, as federal funds flowed to the states, rather than using the flush of cash the state had to improve things for residents, Mills instead opted to save, running up huge surpluses in the state’s budgets. In fact these surpluses were so significant (and continue to be so) that the state’s rainy day fund—an account where any excesses in state funds go—earlier this year reached its legal maximum. While the state’s accounts are filling up, under the guise of responsibility Mills has pushed for cuts to public services, and generally resisted funds for new programs. She has also been an opponent of new taxation, even vetoing a proposed bipartisan tax hike on the wealthy put forward by a Republican.

It should also be understood that while Mills has nothing but contempt for the LePages or the Trumps of the world, she doesn’t have the pure hatred of the GOP that the moment calls for. Coming from a Republican family, she endorsed her brother when he ran for governor in 2006. While this is somewhat understandable, more recently, and far more damningly, when asked about her soon to be opponent just a few months ago, Mills told reporters “I appreciate everything [Collins] is doing,” something the Collins camp is already taking advantage of in its ads.

It is obvious that our system is broken. Most Americans do not think it is working. Our institutions have failed to prevent Donald Trump from attempting to rule the country as a monarch. If Democrats return to power in 2028, a return to normalcy will not vanquish Trumpism anymore than it did in 2020, and we need elected officials willing to enact greater change if we hope to see it defeated. We need to be willing to overhaul our institutions if we want to protect our democracy. And that is not Janet Mills. She will speak out against authoritarianism—a brave and laudable thing to do—but will do little to go on the attack. As a trans woman living in Maine, I am incredibly thankful that Mills did not buckle when Trump threatened the state. Because of her actions (Maine did beat Trump in court) my community continues to be protected to an extent from a federal government that hopes to attack our existence. But with our country in crisis, her particular brand of politics is not suited for the moment. Electing Janet Mills in the hopes of getting the anti-Trump crusader, is likely to get you Janet Mills, the moderate lawyer. Having those sorts of senators is what got us into this mess in the first place.

The post Maine Voters Don’t Want Janet Mills for Senate. There’s a Reason for that. appeared first on Pine & Roses.

Trans workers face discrimination and bigotry on the job, but unions can provide the protection, benefits, and solidarity missing in non-union jobs.

The post Trans workers belong in unions appeared first on EWOC.