Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic candidate for governor of Virginia, is trying to position herself as a moderate in a state that often swings between parties. However, her voting record from her time in Congress tells a different story, according to a recent analysis by the Institute for Legislative Analysis. The study suggests that Spanberger’s actions align more closely with the far-left wing of her party, contradicting her current campaign rhetoric.
Spanberger has faced scrutiny for her stance on crime. She opposed a bill that would prevent Washington, D.C., from treating 24-year-old violent criminals as juveniles. This measure had support from police unions who believe it is crucial for reducing violent crime. Additionally, when the D.C. City Council passed reforms that softened penalties for serious crimes, Spanberger voted against congressional efforts to block those changes, putting her at odds with President Biden, who supported the intervention.
During a recent debate, Spanberger claimed she would never allow Virginia to become a sanctuary state, a position that resonates with many voters. However, she was vague about specifics and hinted that local counties might have the final say on immigration policies. This could be problematic since many of Virginia’s largest counties, which have significant immigrant populations, are led by Democrats.
Her immigration voting record in Congress has been labeled as "extreme progressive." For instance, she opposed the Laken Riley Act, which aimed to keep violent illegal immigrants in federal custody, and the "Schools Not Shelters Act," which sought to prevent housing illegal immigrants near schools. Spanberger also voted against a bill that would restrict federal funds from being used to house illegal immigrants, despite some Democrats supporting it.
Spanberger’s campaign comes at a time when Virginia’s legislature is narrowly divided, but Democrats have held control for the last two years. Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin has vetoed numerous bills that would have enacted more left-leaning policies.
In another debate, Spanberger faced criticism for not calling on her fellow Democrat, Jay Jones, to withdraw from the attorney general race after controversial texts surfaced in which he fantasized about violence against a Republican’s family. Her opponent, Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle-Sears, accused Spanberger of lacking courage for not taking a stronger stance on the issue.
The analysis of Spanberger’s congressional voting record shows that she sometimes favored stricter regulations even when more progressive members of Congress like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did not. For example, she opposed an amendment to reduce Pentagon spending on low-priority projects and voted against a bill that would require the government to sell off underused buildings.
On national security, Spanberger supported designating the Houthis as a terrorist organization but took a more left-leaning stance on issues related to China. She opposed measures aimed at curbing Chinese espionage and preventing the Chinese government from establishing outposts in American schools.
In terms of energy policy, Spanberger opposed a bill that would ensure gas stoves could not be banned, reflecting a response to Biden’s initiatives that were later rolled back. She also supported amendments that would restrict oil production on federal lands, which even some progressive Democrats found too extreme.
Overall, the analysis paints a picture of Spanberger as a candidate who may align more with the far-left policies of her party than her campaign suggests. With Virginia’s political landscape being so closely contested, voters will need to consider her record as they head to the polls.
