by Anonymous

Editor’s Note: An abridged version of this article previously appeared in SUNY Geneseo’s student newspaper, The Lamron. Republished with permission.

Those in administrative positions will never be able to create a sense of community. University bureaucrats imposing policies and procedures onto the general university membership does not allow for a space for an open, united community. Moreover, administrators cannot create a community when the consequence of civic disobedience is institution-sanctioned violence. 

The New York Times estimates that “3,100 people have been arrested or detained on campuses across the country” since April 18, 2024, for their involvement in protesting over the inexcusable mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. This comes after an Associated Press article in January of this year stated, “more than 1,230 people have been charged” for their involvement in the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Attack. 

I find it astonishing that more students/university members have been arrested than attempted insurrectionists. It is outright reprehensible that most arrests were made on peaceful demonstrators. A statement from the Human Rights Institute at Columbia University even mentioned that “The NYPD said that protesters were, ‘peaceful, offered no resistance whatsoever, and were saying what they wanted to say in a peaceful manner.’” Most individuals arrested broke no actual laws but violated unjust, undemocratic campus policies.

Last semester, when I was a student at the University at Buffalo, I witnessed the brutal arrest of fifteen people. The demonstration was peaceful, but despite this, UB called in several different police departments, roughly eighty law enforcement officers, to disperse and arrest the protesters. The officers then turned to the student bystanders and pushed us into the nearby buildings. During this process, officers ripped a student’s hijab off and attempted to use intimidation tactics and language to corral us inside. 

Long after the detained protesters were shipped off using university buses, a smaller police presence remained. Days later, students organized a vigil, which caused part of the campus to be completely shut down, and undercover officers walked amongst grieving individuals. To what point will it be acceptable to call out these colleges for what they are? Antidemocratic hedge funds with at least one functional library.

Colleges and universities nationwide, including Geneseo, are passing tyrannical policies that further limit students’ right to expression and organization. I find it hard to believe these policies would have been rushed through had the protests in the spring been about anything other than universities’ complicity in their investments in war profiteering and, subsequently genocide. Based on the SUNY Board of Trustees’ Rules on the Maintenance of Public Order, students’ right to organize has never been protected. The ability to have a right to freedom of expression means nothing if the right to organize collectively is effectively nullified. 

SUNY has a principle called “Shared Governance,” where policies and decisions are supposed to be worked on not just by administrators, and to be more transparent. While good in theory, it is deeply and seemingly purposely flawed. This only continues the cycle of undemocratic behavior of the university apparatus. According to Geneseo’s Policy on Policies, “All College policies require the approval of the President’s Cabinet. If the policy materials affect student life, it must be approved by the College Council. Such approval should be obtained after the policy is approved by the Cabinet.” This is absurd. Firstly, the Governor appoints members of the College Council. Secondly, it effectively makes the College Council just a rubber stamp. Only one student, the Student Association President, is on the College Council. This is not a good representation of student life. 

I believe that proposed policies related to student life should be discussed with students before they are implemented. Allowing the proposed policy to be discussed and voted on by the Student Senate would increase much-needed transparency at Geneseo. Given the recent slew of policies passed and approved directly related to student rights and responsibilities, it further proves that administrators are worried about students organizing together, which is why to allow more ways of accessible collaboration, rather than separation with a false sense of transparency. 

The lack of accessible transparency is an ongoing problem not just at Geneseo. The President of Monroe Community College (MCC) decided it would be best to supply public safety officers with long guns in the case of an emergency. It was not adequately announced, and it took an article from a local news company that put it on most students’ radar. Students immediately wrote emails to the administration and the college president about their concerns about this matter. One administrator mentioned that there were “already enough meetings” about the matter and that students should have attended them. 

The three meetings in question were mostly inaccessible to the general student population. The first meeting was held in a dorm building. MCC is overwhelmingly a commuter school, with the vast majority of the student population living off campus. How is holding a meeting in a key-card-access-only building accessible to the campus environment? The second meeting was held during a monthly MCC Board of Trustees meeting. Students are not permitted to speak at the meeting without requesting ahead of time. Meeting agendas are posted before, but many students are unaware of the importance of the Board since it is not effectively communicated. 

The third meeting, like the Board of Trustees, was poorly planned. It was here that the Student Government Association was asked to pass a resolution supporting the purchase of long guns. Again, there was no prior discussion that the topic would be discussed, and also the “speak to the senate” section is before resolutions are voted on. If students were not properly informed about the resolutions, how is it fair to speak beforehand? 

If colleges and universities nationwide truly claim to stand for the ideals of diversity, equity, and inclusion, they need to start being more equitable and inclusive. Transparency without inclusivity and diversity is not equity. Transparency without inclusivity and diversity is not equity. If colleges intend to be and continue to be purposely inaccessibly transparent after demands of change, then they are outwardly oppressive.

Student movements may have different main goals, but all eventually boil down to the struggle for democracy. Despite what colleges and university administrators claim about their democratic-adjacent systems, none of that matters if students do not have the right to organize together. We as students may have a student government, but that isn’t enough. We need a student union. A union to protect us while we organize to call out the undemocratic and unjust rules that limit our rights to freedom of peaceful expression. 

Currently, these structures and systems incentivize us to be competitive, not collaborative with each other. Clubs and organizations may foster small communities, but not a united community. Administrators across the country have seen what happens when students are united. Meaningful change happens when students are united. If we want to protect and enhance our rights, we must unite and demand our colleges to be democratic, not bureaucratic. Accessible transparency is worth fighting for. Expressing and organizing ourselves is worth fighting for. Demanding democracy is worth fighting for. We the students deserve nothing less.

The post ON-CAMPUS DEMOCRACY DOES NOT EXIST first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

Seattle DSA Housing Justice Working Group statement written by Tom Barnard

On September 19th, the Seattle City Council finally unveiled its alternative to I-137 after refusing to act earlier to put it on the November ballot. Clearly trying to subvert the newly created Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD), the council created an alternative which results in significantly less funding, contains methods to keep the developer from accessing that funding, and creates a bureaucratic process designed to erect operational roadblocks. 

The council’s alternative cuts funding for new housing from approximately $50 million/yr to a maximum of $10 million/yr, and then sunset in five years. This would sharply curtail the number of units that could be purchased or built, setting the SSHD up to fail. 

Worse yet, instead of creating a new excess compensation tax aimed at the richest companies in the City, it would raid existing funds from the JumpStart payroll expense tax, most of which is currently earmarked for other affordable housing projects limited to people making less than 80% of the area median income (AMI). This not only deprives other essential social services of funds, but also forces the SSHD to compete for those funds with other affordable housing nonprofits. During public comment, spokespeople from the Low Income Housing Institute and Plymouth Housing urged the council to vote “no” on the alternative.

In fact, the Council’s option would not create social housing at all, as incomes for the housing units would be capped at 80% AMI. As specified in I-135, Social housing is a mixed-income housing model in which wealthier tenants, at 120% AMI, subsidize the rents of those making less, with rents permanently capped at 30% of residents’ income. 

Council members engaged in various attempts at rhetorical subterfuge by describing the alternative as “proof of concept” for social housing, which in fact it is not. Sponsor Maritza Rivera claimed their alternative, “balances the need for innovation with the need for accountability” without giving “a blank check to yet another new agency that does not have the experience creating housing.” And after doing everything they could to keep it from the November ballot, Councilmember Rob Saka claimed that having two competing measures on the ballot was “simply good governance … centering choice [and] optionality.”

The fact is that the Seattle City Council and its real estate backers who fueled their rise to power are attempting to keep in place a housing system which does work for the vast majority of Seattle renters. Tenants face ever increasing rental rates that beggar them, from developments owned by Wall Street dark money investors whose only interest is a maximum return on investment. Seattle DSA’s Housing Justice Working Group believes that housing is a human right and we stand in solidarity with House our Neighbors and coalition partners in opposition to the Council’s alternative.

Seattle voters will not be fooled. The idea of social housing is on an upswing, from the recent King County workforce housing initiative, to ongoing discussions at the state level, to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez’s brand new legislation that will establish and fund federal social housing. SDSA’s successful effort to get the signatures necessary to place I-137 on the ballot will need to follow up later this year with a vigorous effort to turn out the vote for the February ballot.

To get involved in the fight to fund social housing, join us at the Let’s Build Social Housing Prop 1A Field Kickoff. Join your fellow social housing supporters to learn about how we’re going to win Prop1A (formerly I-137) at the February 11th, 2025 ballot. We’ll have a couple activities, refreshments, and an update from House Our Neighbors and campaign field staff about the strategy to win funding for social housing at the ballot with your help. Hope to see you all there!

Saturday, November 9 from 5:30 – 7pm PST at 800 Hiawatha Pl S. Seattle, WA 98144

RSVP: https://mobilize.us/s/NvTOuZ

The post Seattle DSA Will Always Stand with Social Housing appeared first on Seattle Democratic Socialists of America.

The Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee is providing crucial lessons for unions and organizing everywhere. It might be an example of labor’s best bet.

The post EWOC Is Modeling a Path Forward for Labor appeared first on EWOC.

By Connor Wright

CAMBRIDGE – It’s a crisp 45 degrees on Friday morning, but instead of finding warmth at their desks inside, workers at the Cambridge Public Library (CPL) are standing out on the broad strip of sidewalk in front of the main branch.

All 20 or so library workers wear coordinated T-shirts, carrying signs that read “HONK IF YOU LOVE LIBRARY WORKERS” and “FAIR CONTRACT NOW.” Parents driving their kids to the nearby Cambridge Ringe and Latin School honk their support, as do construction vans, garbage trucks, and buses. A few workers carry a large green banner with the name of these workers’ union: the Cambridge Public Library Staff Association (CPLSA), Local 4928.

This is no one-off action. Library workers have been organizing similar rallies every Friday morning. The weekly standouts are part of a months-long campaign for a fair contract, as the CPLSA fights to address long-simmering workplace issues in the CPL system that have reached a boiling point this year.

Worn Down and Pushed Out

The CPL is consistently one of the highest-rated public departments in Cambridge, a fact library management is quick to tout to their staff. But as multiple staff described to Working Mass, their working conditions at the CPL don’t match their high degree of support from the public.

One big issue is pay. Library workers technically received raises in their last contract – 2% in 2021, 2.5% in 2022, and 2.5% in 2023. But these “raises” either just held even with inflation over those three years, or fell well below it. In terms of real wages, that means the city has been slowly cutting pay at the CPL, making it nearly impossible for library workers to live in the community they serve.

Hill Saxton, the Senior Youth Services Librarian at the Central Square branch, has been working at the CPL for almost 9 years. They described Cambridge’s cost of living spiraling out of control for library workers, a sentiment echoed by every CPLSA member Working Mass talked to.

“Very few members live in Cambridge,” said Saxton, waving at a honking car. “Some of us can afford Somerville, but even that is becoming really expensive. We’re getting pushed further and further away from work.”

Cambridge rent costs have soared in recent years. In May 2024, the average cost of a studio apartment in the city was $2,339 a month, according to Boston Pads, a real estate networking and research company. Even as a senior librarian – at $38.81, one of the highest-paid positions in the CPL – more than a third of your pay could be sunk into rent, just to afford the smallest possible apartment in the city that employs you.

In this round of contract negotiations, management is making a similar wage offer. According to the CPLSA, the figures currently on the table are a 3% raise in 2024, 3.5% in 2025, and 2.5% in 2026 – all numbers that are unlikely to rise above inflation.

Michael Roberson, a 13-year librarian and vice chair of the CPLSA’s executive board, has been through three contract negotiations in his time at CPL. He didn’t mince words about library management’s most recent offer when he spoke with Working Mass.

“If you’re offering a wage ‘increase’ that falls below inflation – that’s a pay cut,” said Roberson. “The city is not budging on wage increases in any real way, even though inflation has gone way up.”

Sick time is another major issue for library workers. They receive just one sick day a month, in addition to 3.75 days they can use any time during the year.

During the first years of the Covid-19 pandemic, Cambridge mandated two weeks of paid sick time on top of whatever sick time employers offered. But that Covid-specific time expired in 2023.

Now, with Covid still a reality, workers are “maxing out their sick time, and that forces people to come to work sick because they need the money,” according to Saxton.

CPLSA members also emphasized their fight against workplace bullying and harassment. The union is fighting for stronger contract language to protect members from this type of ugly behavior from managers.

Multiple workers described instances of bullying and harassment from upper management. These issues are often dealt with slowly or not at all, even when formal grievances are filed.

“When a grievance is made by a staff member who has been harassed, it’s not dealt with in a timely manner,” one longtime CPL staff person, who wanted to remain anonymous, told Working Mass. “It becomes this rot under the surface because it’s not responsibly handled.”

Churn and Burn at the CPL

These deep-seated problems are causing CPL to lose staff at an alarming rate. According to an internal count provided by the CPLSA, the number of workers who leave the library system has increased every year since 2020, more than doubling between 2020-2021 and climbing steadily each year since.

Year	Number of staff leaving CPL
2019	12
2020	11
2021	23
2022	25
2023	26
2024	26 (as of October 1)

In 2023, 26 library workers left the CPL. That accounts for a staggering 25% of CPLSA’s entire membership, which is just over 100 library staff across all CPL branches. The same number have already left so far in 2024, and workers expect even more resignations by the end of the year.

“The amount of people we’re losing is frightening,” Violet*, who has worked at CPL since the start of the pandemic, told Working Mass. (*Violet wanted to use a pseudonym to protect herself and her coworkers from retaliation.)

“Administration has tried to say that the vacancies are due to internal promotion, but the numbers speak for themselves – 26 people have left the organization altogether.”

“People are leaving because it’s not sustainable,” added Saxton, the Central Square librarian. “We have an amazing staff, we want to keep all our staff. But we need people to feel supported, to be able to make a living wage and take care of their families, and that’s currently not the case.”

Stonewalling from Library Admin, City Managers

CPLSA members have tried to address these issues by raising them directly with management and filing formal grievances. Both avenues have run up against stonewalling from library management.

Progress at the bargaining table has been slow to nonexistent. According to Roberson, the CPLSA vice chair, library and city representatives have yet to address any of the union’s core demands. At a particularly contentious bargaining early in October, they refused to even engage with a package of compromise proposals put together by the union.

“We brought them a pretty comprehensive package,” Roberson told Working Mass. “We’ve really tried to compromise with them and meet them halfway where we could, while still keeping in a lot of these concerns that our members really want to see reflected in the next contract. But we’ve been told by representatives of the city that they are ‘unwilling’ to move on this – and they’ve repeatedly used that word, ‘unwilling.’”

With negotiations stalled, the CPLSA has been experimenting with new tactics to put pressure on library administration.

“We’ve tried to bring solutions to administration behind-the-scenes,” said CPLSA member Violet, who has been involved in negotiations. “Because that hasn’t been working, now we’re standing out and letting the community in, so they can nudge our administration to listen to what we’ve been telling them.”

CPLSA Goes on Offense

To break through the impasse in bargaining, CPLSA is running a contract campaign, aiming to get its own members and the whole Cambridge community involved in its fight for a better library system.

CPLSA members have organized the Friday standouts, run coordinated T-shirt days, and often observe bargaining sessions, where the union’s 8-person executive board sits across from library administration and city management.

Library patrons and community members also regularly show up to the Friday morning rallies. Local union members often support as well, especially teachers from the Cambridge Education Association (CEA), who went through their own contract fight with the city last year.

“When we talk to people in the community they’re really excited to support us,” said one library worker, gesturing to a group of people who had stopped to chat. “People love the library, and they’re starting to recognize that the union is the library.”

To better organize this community support, CPLSA has launched a letter-writing campaign aimed at library management, Cambridge City Council, and City Manager Yi An-Huang. City officials have received hundreds of letters criticizing the city’s handling of negotiations and supporting the CPLSA’s demands. The union has also been doing outreach at local events.

For Violet, reaching out to the community makes sense, since the union’s demands would help both workers and library patrons.

“The things that we’re talking about – they affect the community,” she explained. “The less staff we have, the less we can be there for patrons the way we want to be…. We want to be transparent with the community in a way that management hasn’t been.”

Fortunately for library supporters, the CPLSA has made it easy to plug into their campaign. Links to send letters to city management can be found on the union’s Linktree, and the weekly standouts are held from 8-9am every Friday morning outside the CPL’s main branch, 449 Broadway, Cambridge, MA, 02138.

The CPLSA may have a long fight ahead of them. Next Wednesday is the last formal bargaining session before the union and the city enter mediation, a slow, bureaucratic process that can just as easily lead to a weak contract as a strong one.

Still, members have no plans to turn down the pressure and seem determined to make real gains in this contract.

“They don’t want to back down,” said Hill Saxton of management and city officials. “But we don’t plan on backing down either.”

Connor Wright is a member of Boston DSA and a labor reporter for Working Mass.

The Labor Branch Organizing Committee wants to share some reflections and opinions about the TCDSA Convention, and also invite you to an important labor event. On one hand, DSA union activists were understandably disappointed that our labor priority proposal did not make it in the top three priorities of the TCDSA Convention. On the other […]

You make the most impact in your organizing campaign by talking with your co-workers, but what about introverts? How can they organize?

The post Workplace Organizing Tips for Introverts appeared first on EWOC.

This is a transformative election for the City of Portland, which will select the first cohort of leaders for the brand new city government. Portland DSA’s two amazing candidates will come ready to fight for social and economic justice, offering a fresh vision for Portland following years of rule by candidates committed to regressive policies.

City government has a tremendous amount of power over critical issues like housing, public safety, climate resilience, and more. It’s time for a city that prioritizes the needs of its citizens over downtown developers who live in the suburbs.

Endorsement, Green Lights, Red Lights, and Renter’s Bill of Rights

Endorsed (Rank #1)

Portland DSA’s two endorsed candidates, Tiffany Koyama Lane & Mitch Green, will be listed first — with a “#1” symbol and additional details about our endorsement. We think you should rank them number one in Districts 3 and 4!

Preferred Candidate/Green Light

Portland DSA’s preferred candidates rose to the top through an internal process that included a mock election, extensive research by Portland DSA’s Socialists in Office Committee, as well as a member forum.

Renter’s Bill of Rights: A house icon indicates green light candidates who have signed the Renter’s Bill of Rights.

DSA Member: A rose icon indicates green light candidates who are also members of Portland DSA. Join us!

District 1

For District 1, Portland DSA has greenlighted six candidates and encourages you to rank all of them. None were endorsed by the chapter:

District 2

For District 2, Portland DSA has greenlighted six candidates and encourages you to rank all of them. None were endorsed by the chapter:

*Jonathan Tasini is a member of Portland DSA. We regret the error.

District 3

For District 3 Portland DSA has greenlighted six candidates and encourages you to rank all of them. It includes Tiffany Koyama Lane who Portland DSA endorsed!

Rank Tiffany Koyama Lane #1 on your ballot! Portland DSA was proud to endorse her earlier this year. We have been out non-stop knocking doors and calling voters for Tiffany. Teacher Tiffany is a leader in the Portland Association of Teachers and their successful strike last November. Tiffany comes from a background of collective action based in the labor movement. We consider her election to validate the struggles of educators that were raised in that strike. Nike put their executive in as chair of the school board, we are striking back and putting a union teacher on City Council.

District 4

For District 4 Portland DSA has greenlighted five candidates and encourages you to rank all of them. It also includes Mitch Green who Portland DSA endorsed!

Rank Mitch Green #1 on your ballot! Portland DSA was proud to endorse Mitch earlier this year. We have been out non-stop knocking doors and calling voters for him. Mitch is a mainstay of Portland DSA, picket lines, and karaoke bars. He’s been a member for six years and has served as our treasurer. Mitch is an open, proud socialist who wears his membership on his sleeve.

Mayor

For Mayor we do not have an endorsed candidate and were only able to pick 4 from the list:

Red Light / Do Not Rank

The following is our list of candidates we encourage members not to rank at all on their ballot. These are candidates who were endorsed by the Portland Police Association (police union) and United for Portland / the Portland Metro Chamber (formally known as the Portland Business Alliance). Some are vitriolically opposed to the Renters Bill of Rights. Others are critics of the teachers’ union. None of them belong on your ballot. Portland DSA is supportive of the Don’t Rank Rene movement and we want it to be clear which candidates have stood against our movement and its demands like Jesse Cornett and Jon Walker.

Many candidates for the new Portland city government are not listed in the Portland DSA’s voters guide. Voters might consider ranking these candidates to fill out the ballot if they run out of DSA-endorsed or preferred candidates to rank. Filling out your ballot helps to keep Red Light (Do Not Rank) candidates out of office.

Made it to the end? WOW. Ready to take action and secure a pro-working class majority on Portland City Council? Take the pledge here and join our movement!

When I was canvassing for Jovanka Beckles’s State Senate campaign (Senate District 7) in late September, I spoke with a woman in north Oakland who was concerned that rents in her neighborhood might get too high for long-time residents to stay. It was, she said, that mix of new and older neighbors that made the area feel special in Oakland and, for her, like home. My canvassing partner and I assured her that Jovanka has consistently used her political office to fight for working-class tenants like her.     

Many of the East Bay DSA canvassers who went out that afternoon for Jovanka heard the same thing from neighbors:  thanks that we were the first people to knock on their doors to tell them about a statewide race. 

Active Champion

The DSA campaign for Jovanka has reached voters across the East Bay and has activated new members in the process. We’ve spoken to residents’ concerns by talking with them about our chapter’s campaigns, from our demands that local government divest from Israeli apartheid to our advocacy for fair schedules for transit workers. That integration is possible because Jovanka has consistently been an active champion of all these causes as an elected socialist and as a member of our chapter. 

When I spoke with an Oakland resident in July who was concerned about the unfolding genocide in Gaza, I could tell her that Jovanka has been an avowed supporter of the Palestinian cause and that our chapter was collecting signatures for a local divestment campaign, which the voter eagerly signed. For our canvass focused on labor, we could easily transition from talking with a neighbor about Jovanka’s successful effort to raise the minimum wage as a city councilor in Richmond to asking whether they wanted to organize in their workplace. When we talked with voters about her work as a transit board member, we could tell them about our chapter’s campaign to work alongside Jovanka and the transit workers union (ATU 192) to demand fair and humane schedules for bus operators.    

Talking with neighbors works

Talking at the door about how our campaigns align with Jovanka’s vision helps bring our members and new organizers to our events. At our last two canvasses, I partnered with new members who had joined our chapter within the last month. Talking with neighbors about our work also helps those members see the scope of our chapter’s organizing. 

For canvassers and canvass-ees, Jovanka’s corporate-free campaign starts the conversation. It also sharply distinguishes her from her opponent, Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguín. Arreguín has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations from real estate lobbyists, a correctional officers union, PG&E and Uber. Jovanka, on the other hand, helped win millions for the community from Chevron, which has a refinery in Richmond. While Arreguín, who proudly took a pro-Israel lobby trip in 2022, has loudly opposed any ceasefire resolution from Berkeley City Council, Jovanka has stood firm in her support for an end to US complicity in the genocide.

Whether in Gaza or in our own East Bay senate district, Jovanka has consistently supported just causes that align with our chapter’s organizing. We can confidently tell neighbors like that resident in north Oakland that she’ll keep fighting against the root causes of displacement and for social services that empower the working class. 

Bay Area DSA members (and those who aren’t yet members!) can join our next canvass for Jovanka and our other endorsed candidates on the morning of Sunday, November 3.  

You can contribute to Jovanka’s corporate-free campaign here.

As we near the November election, California DSA and our local chapters have been ramping up efforts for our Affordable Rent-Controlled Housing (ARCH) campaign. But we’re not the only ones intensifying our campaign. Over the weekend, deceptive text messages were sent to residents of Los Angeles implying that DSA Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Tenants Union do not support Prop 33. Don’t buy the landlord lies!

The ARCH campaign supports Prop 33, which would overturn a 1995 law that drastically limits local rent control, and Prop 5, which would make it much easier to build public housing and infrastructure for middle to low income tenants. There is less than a month left to organize toward a huge victory for renters and there are several ways you can get involved.

A Digital Day of Action

On Wednesday, October 16th, California DSA and our members across the state will be engaged in a “digital day of action” where we’ll be reposting content from California DSA and our chapters, as well as sharing our own stories and content with hashtags like #YesOnProp33
, #YesOnProp5, #StopLandlordLies, and #TenantsAgreeYesOn33. It’s one of the easiest things that we can do to spread the word to our friends and followers about the importance of these ballot measures and the transformative effects they would have.

Landlords are well aware that passing Prop 33, in particular, is a first step in shifting power away from the owner class and into the hands of the working class so they are spending well over 100 million dollars to stop it. 

Take a moment today to spread the word and join our day of action!

Join in with the toolkit here!

October 1st Virtual Kickoff

California DSA’s ARCH Campaign is doing our part to generate grassroots enthusiasm. Over 60 people participated in an October 1st virtual organizing meeting and heard San Francisco DSA member Dean Preston, a long-time tenant/rent control advocate running for re-election to the Board of Supervisors, speak powerfully about the history of Costa-Hawkins (the law Prop 33 repeals) and why we need Prop 33 now. Everyone attending participated in small groups to organize activities in their areas.

Chapters running canvasses

Building on that momentum, DSA chapters around the state participated in a Day of Action on October 5th to canvass hundreds of doors. Members hit the doors in North Central Valley, San Diego, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and Richmond.  Chapters expanded their door-knocking this past weekend. Not surprisingly for an initiative campaign at this stage, the latest group contacted was largely undecided. But voters expressing support far exceeded those currently opposed. That’s significant because of the onslaught of anti-33 ads saturating our screens.

Join the ARCH Campaign!

There’s still timeto help win Justice for Renters. Reach out to your local chapter, send an email to statecommittee@californiadsa.org; or check out the California DSA website for more information about our ballot measure campaign. The entire working class will benefit if you do, and you’ll have bragging rights if Props 5 and 33 pass.

In late September and early October Ysabel Jurado, who is endorsed by DSA Los Angeles for LA city council District 14, hosted two massive canvasses, both heavily attended by rank-and-file union members and DSA activists. Jurado’s campaign for Los Angeles City Council is the first to achieve our chapter’s long-time goal of uniting a progressive grassroots with the political might of labor. If this coalition endures and grows, working class power may become a dominant pole in Los Angeles.

From Rivals to Teammates

DSA-LA endorsed Ysabel Jurado early on in the crowded primary. She had been an active member of DSA and she was running on an unabashedly progressive platform. Very quickly she garnered the support of the grassroots of Los Angeles, generating an encouraging amount of earned media. In a race including three long time Democratic politicians she was always framed as a wild card. DSA-LA helped to build a strong canvassing operation, meeting voters at their door and fostering connections. DSA-LA knocked almost nine thousand doors, while her campaign knocked over eighty thousand.

Labor unions, on the other hand, threw their weight behind Miguel Santiago, a state assembly member with a strong record of supporting organized labor. Rather than a robust field operation, his campaign spent heavily on mailers and advertisements. A week after Election Day, it was clear that Ysabel Jurado had come in first place with incumbent Kevin De Leon coming in second. Miguel Santiago placed third, not qualifying for the runoff. 

With a Kevin De Leon vs Ysabel Jurado match up, it was unclear where union support would land. De Leon obviously had history with the LA Federation of Labor (most recently negative due to the leaked tapes scandal, in which he was caught making racist remarks and plotting to break up working-class voting power in LA) so he was unlikely to garner their support. Jurado on the other hand was a political outsider. Unions might very well have refrained from endorsing if not for Ysabel’s own organizing. 

Following the primary she worked for months meeting union leadership and rank and file members, assuring them that not only would she be supportive of workers’ rights, but a champion for the entire working class. Because of this charm offensive Ysabel has become the first progressive challenger in LA to earn the endorsement of LA Federation of Labor and around 20 local unions including SEIU (2015, 721, CIR and more), UAW Region 6, and Public Defenders Local 148.

A vision for the future

Ysabel’s campaign in CD14 has the potential to be a game changer for DSA-LA and the left more broadly in Los Angeles. A sturdy coalition between the progressive grass roots and organized labor has been the dream of socialist organizers since the 20th century. If we succeed in building a movement that supports not just workers in unions but the entire working class, Los Angeles can be transformed into a city of and for workers. 

Nothing is set in stone, however. Building that coalition will take countless hours of work from DSA members, union staff, and rank and file members. More establishment labor unions will also have to continue to take chances on left candidates, not just against historically corrupt incumbents like Kevin De Leon. Of course, we still need to prove the concept and ensure Ysabel Jurado wins in CD14 again! 

Donate to Ysabel Jurado’s campaign. 

Volunteer to work on her campaign here.