Gov. Abigail Spanberger isn’t the only Democratic leader who’s recently blocked legislation supported by unions in their state.

On Friday, Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis vetoed legislation that would have ended a requirement that unions get the support of 75% of workers at a company before they can negotiate with businesses over union dues. That’s even after the workers have voted to unionize.

Below, I report on how a Republican Virginia congresswoman changed up her website to drop mention of gas prices.

And I share an older folk pop song.

Want to get in touch, or have stories you want me to cover? Reply to this email or reach out to me directly at michaeloconnor@couriernewsroom.com.

Michael O’Connor

Reporter, Dogwood

Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va., speaks at a House GOP news conference, March 5, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Allison Robbert, File)

As gas prices rose across Virginia this year, Hampton Roads-area Congresswoman Jen Kiggans (R) removed parts of her campaign site discussing the cost of gas and the economic struggles of Virginians.

Kiggans represents Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District and is up for reelection this year in one of the most competitive races in the country. There are four Democrats vying to challenge Kiggans for her seat, which she has held since 2023.

Like most political candidates, Kiggans has a campaign website with a page that discusses her stances on different issues and her record.

A section on this page called, “The Cost of Living,” was previously called, “Cutting Inflation & The Cost of Living,” according to an April version of the webpage archived on the Wayback Machine, a digital repository.

This section previously began by tying President Joe Biden and Democratic policies to “historic price increases that taxpayers are still struggling to keep up with.”

The section continued: “For Virginians, this means paying more for gas, groceries, meals, cars, houses, and everything in between. High cost of living continues to eliminate wage increases for Americans (including active duty military) who are struggling to make ends meet in Joe Biden’s economy.”

Today, those parts have been cut, even as inflation has surged in the wake of the US and Israel’s war with Iran.

“People are facing the highest inflation in 3 years and having their wage gains wiped out by inflation,” Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, posted on X.

Tyler Englander at WRIC reports that State Del. Paul Krizek (D-Alexandria) and State Sen. Lashrecse Aird (D-Petersburg) want to see language in the state budget to create a legal recreational cannabis market. Krizek and Aird sponsored the legislation that would have done so that Spanberger vetoed. “Krizek and Aird say they haven’t met with the governor’s office, but are willing to compromise on certain provisions,” Englander reports.

Megan Pauly at VPM reports on why members of the United Campus Workers of Virginia, including its former president, left the union to join the American Association of University Professors.

David Paladin-Fernandez, the ousted candidate for president for the Alexandria Education Association, said on Intstagram that the Virginia Education Association has agreed to re-run the local union’s officers election.

Gov. Abigail Spanberger arrives at an event in Richmond on May 27, 2026. (Michael O’Connor/Dogwood)

Something I wish I could ask Spanberger about that I have not seen her comment on has to do with one the biggest complaints about her substitute for the collective bargaining bill.

The legislation that she vetoed last month would have codified the scope of collective bargaining with public employers to include wages, hours, and health benefits in certain cases.

Prior to the veto, Spanberger sent the General Assembly a new version of the legislation with a host of changes that lawmakers ultimately rejected and unions opposed. Among the changes: the scope of collective bargaining.

Under Spanberger’s version of the legislation, the new state board created by the bill would set the scope of what unions and public employers could negotiate over. This version dropped the requirement that wages and hours be included.

Unions feared that such a change would mean the scope of collective bargaining could be narrowed to a point that defeats the purpose of the legislation. This seems like a fair point.

It’s hard to imagine why workers shouldn’t be allowed to make the case for fair pay and better hours at the negotiating table, and it’s easy to imagine how political appointees to a state board would be open to the idea of restricting the rights of workers.

Spanberger has not said why exactly she proposed this specific change. Her defense of her veto has focused on why she wanted to delay full implementation of the legislation.

As the labor rights debate continues, it remains to be seen how far Spanberger moves towards what the unions want and how much unions are willing to accept what she proposed.

There’s also still the possibility collective bargaining shows back up in the wrangling over the state budget.