THE CENTER SQUARE—Georgia is prepared to incur additional administrative fees for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and its high error rate gives the state more time to begin paying part of the benefit costs, according to the Department of Human Services. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, passed by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump on July 4 last year, requires states to shoulder 75% of the program’s burden, an increase of 25%. Gov. Brian Kemp included $5.9 million in the fiscal year 2027 to account for the increase. The legislation also requires states with an error rate of more than 6% to pay part of the benefits, which begin Oct. 1, and could be as high as 15%. Georgia has the fifth-highest error rate in the country at 15.21%, but the bill gives states with rates higher than 13.34% extra time to reduce their rates. As of May 31, the state had 651,073 active SNAP cases tied to 1,319,188 individuals, according to the Department of Human Services. The state distributed $244.8 million in SNAP benefits during May, according to the Department of Human Services. If the state were forced to pay the required 10% of benefit costs as a penalty for its high error rate, it would put taxpayers on the hook for $24.5 million just for one month. The department’s efforts to reduce the error rate include improving the Georgia Gateway eligibility system, the program beneficiaries use to manage their benefits. Case reviews are more rigorous, and staff members are undergoing expanded training, according to the department. “The department has also launched a formal market survey to identify proven technology solutions and has submitted waiver requests to federal regulators seeking authority to automate more of the eligibility process, which would further reduce the staff-level and client-submission mistakes that drive most payment errors,” a department spokeswoman wrote in an email to The Center Square. “Georgia is committed to getting this right for the individuals and families who depend on SNAP, and we will continue pursuing every available tool to improve accuracy and program integrity.” New SNAP error rates released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture on Wednesday show more than $10 billion in improper payments nationwide. Tennessee Republican Rep. Tim Burchett, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency, said in a social media post that he is introducing two bills that would address fraud. One would restrict Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits to U.S. citizens only. The second bill increases fines for what he called retail trafficking of SNAP benefits to up to $500,000.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal senior contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos. Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for the Daily Signal.   There’s been a lot of confusion about this memorandum of understanding, and that’s the 60-day hiatus in the quote-unquote war with Iran that leads us into further negotiations. And a lot of people have rightly pointed out that they seemed a little bit too lenient, given the military defeat of Iran.  And I mentioned in earlier segments that they weren’t strategically defeated because we didn’t really know how to stop absolutely their missile attacks or their ability to stop, ruin the Strait of Hormuz traffic.   It’s getting a lot of criticism. From the Left, of course, we don’t really want to calibrate it because anything Trump did, they would criticize.  If he won the war in one day, they would say it was too long. But from the [Tucker] Carlson Right, as we said earlier, they’ve said it was a forever war, even though there were only 40 days of actual bombing, and it would go on and on and on, and they were not in favor of it.   And the subtext of that Carlson-Right criticism was that Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israelis, due to undue Jewish influence in the United States, brought us into a war that was neither in our interest nor could be won.  I think it is in our interest—well aside from Israel—that Iran not have a bomb or not terrorize an area that the world depends on for oil. And more importantly, I don’t think it’s cooked up by a small number of Jews.   But there’s a new criticism from the supporters of the war who feel that the memorandum of understanding was too generous to Iran and that they’re going to take advantage of it.  And even as I speak, they hit, with a drone, a cargo ship in violation of the memorandum of understanding. So what is going on? In a nutshell, Donald Trump feels—and this is my reading of what he’s said and what people in his administration have said or written—that Republicans must win the midterms or at least keep the Senate.  If they do not, everybody and his brother is going to be called in in a circus of lawsuits, lawfare, investigations—you name it—both before Congress and all over the federal judiciary, and they will paralyze Donald Trump’s final two years in office with nonstop impeachment hearings as well.   I don’t think they can convict him with 60 votes in the Senate, but they will try to do anything.  In addition, the world pressure will rise if the Strait is closed and we had continued kinetic action because the price of oil would ruin the economies of Europe and Asia, so we were told.   And then, in addition, the price of gas in the United States—it had gone down to almost $2 nationwide on average—it went up to $4. It’s down to about $3.20. And that was really the only known driver of inflation.  And so you put all that together. Donald Trump wanted a timeout of 60 days and then negotiations. But really, let’s be honest, he wanted a four-month timeout until the midterms, in which he could manage the war.  Now, that would be possible if there are two things that he can communicate.   Number one, every time Iran violates the memorandum of understanding by trying to block the Strait of Hormuz or fire missiles into the Gulf states or Israel, we have to reply disproportionately. One missile, we have 10 missiles or 10 days of attack.  If you don’t do that, the natural propensity of Iran to get more and more aggressive will increase, and he’ll lose all support because people who supported the war will then say we defeated them militarily, but we didn’t enforce the peace, and therefore they’re taking advantage of us.  So it’s very critical that, in this lead-up to the midterms, he reacts to these provocations. And of course, they’re going to be provoking us because they want the price of gas to go up and Donald Trump to lose the midterms and the Strait to be affected.  So they have to be very, very careful. They have to reply disproportionately, but not to the extent that it panics markets or shuts down the Strait.  And then we get to the midterms. If the economy is recovering, as it has been the last two years, and as the price of oil during this four-month hiatus goes down, there’s a good chance the economy will not be the issue quite like it is, and some of the things that he has done will kick in. What do I mean?  Deregulation, foreign investment, more energy production, lower taxes—he might have a good shot at the midterms.  There’s another final thing to remember. Once the midterms are over, if he maintains the House and the Senate and he feels that he has been responding disproportionately and still the Iranians are, at times every week, every two weeks, firing missiles or trying to hit cargo ships, there are no restraints on him.  He can start hitting all the dual-use targets he wants.   And here’s the final thought. Even if he loses the midterms and he’s relegated to two years of an executive-order presidency, like Obama warned when he said, well, I lost the Senate and the House, but I do have a phone and I do have a pen, and I can rule that way, then Donald Trump is still unbound.  He can still enforce the military victory and ensure it by hitting them very disproportionately and taking out dual-use targets. Dual-use targets is a fancy Clinton-Serbian term or Obama-Libyan term when you hit things that are vital to the military but also vital for civilians.  And through all this process, of course, another subtext is he can always arm the opposition. Turkey doesn’t want us to, but so what? We can arm the Kurds. We can arm them with enough weapons to spread into the cities of Iran.  We have a lot of choices whether he wins or loses the midterms. It would be preferable that he can contain this for the next four months, stop the Iranian transgressions by disproportionate, one-off deterrent attacks, responses I should say, and then after the midterms, for good or evil, he’s got a whole array of alternatives that can ensure the peace and, more importantly, that Iran is not a nuclear power.  We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

Can Washington state remove parental rights to enable runaway kids to access experimental transgender medical “treatments” without their parents’ knowledge or consent? The Supreme Court announced Monday that it would take up a case on this pivotal issue. In the case, a group of parents represented by International Partners for Ethical Care is challenging the administration of Gov. Bob Ferguson, D-Wash., as it seeks to implement laws that treat parents who refuse to “affirm” their children’s stated gender identity as akin to child abusers. Whenever a youth shelter receives a runaway child, state law requires the shelter to contact the parents within 72 hours, giving parents the location of their child, a description of their child’s physical and emotional condition, and why the child contacted the shelter. Washington law includes one exception: “compelling reasons” not to notify the parent such as cases of “abuse or neglect.” Yet in 2023, Washington’s Legislature passed two laws expanding those “compelling reasons” to include access to “gender-affirming care,” a euphemistic term for experimental medical interventions to make men appear female or vice versa. Advocates of these “treatments” say people who suffer from gender dysphoria (the painful and persistent condition of identifying with a gender opposite your biological sex) will commit suicide without them. Yet the Department of Health and Human Services released a peer-reviewed report finding that there is “extremely weak evidence” for any concrete benefits and a great deal of evidence for harm from these interventions. Washington parents sued, claiming that the state had “passed laws that deliberately target certain parents by supplanting them with the state in the context of gender-confused runaway minors.” The parents claim that, under the new laws, if a child runs away seeking “gender-affirming treatment,” the shelter will refer the child for such interventions without parental notice or consent, the shelter will keep parents in the dark about the child’s location and condition, and reunification with the parents will be delayed—at the government’s discretion. These policies violate parents’ fundamental rights under the Constitution, the lawsuit states. The laws allegedly harm parents by denying their right to consent or refuse their children’s treatment; denying or delaying notice to parents; withholding information about their child’s location from parents; and delaying a child’s return to his or her parents. ‘Protecting’ Kids From Their Own Parents Lower courts dismissed the lawsuit, finding that parents lacked standing to bring the challenge in court. A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that they lacked standing because the undermining of parental rights came about through a “self-inflicted injury,” because the laws do not directly regulate the parents’ speech, and because standing due to probable harm requires immediate injury, and the court found no injury to the parents. The 9th Circuit refused to grant the parents a rehearing before the full court, but Judge Eric Tung, an appointee of President Donald Trump, dissented. “In the legislature’s view, a child suffering from gender dysphoria must be ‘protected’ from parents who do not seek ‘gender-affirming treatment’ for their child and do not ‘affirm the child’s gender identity,” Tung wrote. Washington law “thus places parents who wish to raise their child in accordance with the child’s biological sex in the same category as parents who are abusive or neglectful.” The parents asked the Supreme Court to reconsider, and the court took up the case Monday. Cert Petition PEC v. FergusonDownload ‘Hostility From Their Family’ In their Supreme Court petition, parents cited Washington legislators, such as State Sen. Marko Liias, who stated their intention to prioritize “gender-affirming care” above parental rights. Liias stated that the bill addresses “when a young person is … seeking gender-affirming care in the face of opposition and hostility from their family.” “In those cases where that reunification process would separate that vulnerable young person from the health care that they’re entitled to, … when a family is standing between their young person and essential health care services, we need to focus on the essential needs of a young person—ensure they’re getting the care they deserve.” The case, International Partners for Ethical Care v. Ferguson, considers “whether parents have standing to challenge a law or policy that deliberately displaces their decisionmaking role as to ‘gender transitions’ of their children, and in doing so creates present and likely future impediments to their ability to parent their children as they deem best for them.” The Supreme Court has upheld parental rights in recent cases. In Mahmoud v. Taylor (2025), the court upheld Maryland parents’ right to opt out of a school LGBTQ program, while in Mirabelli v. Bonta (2026), it upheld an injunction protecting parents from a policy hiding childrens’ stated gender identities from parents.

Drivers in the commonwealth will pay more for gas beginning on Wednesday. This isn’t because of the recent legislative budget deal. It isn’t because of a war in the Middle East. It isn’t because of a pipeline shutdown. It’s because lawmakers put tax policy on cruise control years ago, and prices just keep climbing. It is a tenet of American governance that a previous legislature may not bind a future one. In simple terms, that means that today’s lawmakers can’t make spending and taxation decisions for their successors. That’s why Virginia’s budget lasts for two years, not 10 or 20, and even the second year is subject to change if circumstances change. Today’s General Assembly, however, is allowing a House elected in 2019, three governors ago, to bind its hands. In 2020, lawmakers tied fuel taxes to the Consumer Price Index, so as overall prices increase, so does the gas tax. Lawmakers started from what today looks like a very low rate. On Jan. 1, 2020, the retail tax was 16 and two-tenth cents per gallon of gas. That jumped to 21.2 cents in July 2020, when the next fiscal year started, and has been soaring along with inflation ever since. It reached 28 cents in 2023, 9.8 cents in 2024, and 30.8 cents in 2025 before the next jump this year. This year, the retail tax per gallon will increase from 31.7 cents now to 32.6 cents on July 1. Prices will actually go even higher, because lawmakers also imposed a wholesale tax. As energy policy analyst Steve Haner of the Thomas Jefferson Institute wrote, “The wholesale tax gets ignored almost every time, even though it adds about dime a gallon and moves Virginia much higher in the tax rankings.” All told, taxes will boost fuel costs by 42.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 43.5 cents per gallon on diesel. That ranks Virginia among the top 10 states. Republicans have pushed back a bit over the years. In 2022, Gov. Glenn Youngkin proposed suspending the tax for three months. Senate Democrats blocked that idea. “I think the real problem is inflation,” then Democrat state Sen. Chap Petersen told WRIC at the time. “We can’t stop inflation by having a tax holiday.” Of course, if you index the tax increase to inflation then you can’t stop price increases, such as the ones the commonwealth has seen since 2020. Youngkin managed to delay one increase, from July 1, 2022, until July 1, 2023, but the upward march has continued since then. The GOP also proposed a 90-day suspension of the state’s gas tax this spring, when the war in Iran caused prices to soar. Democrat House Speaker Don Scott shot down that idea, releasing a statement that noted that when the gas tax is cut, “savings aren’t always passed on to consumers they can be pocketed by the businesses.” That idea never got traction in the Legislature. Today’s state lawmakers could change the law and eliminate the latest tax increase, but they aren’t doing so. Drivers will feel the hit at the pump and are likely to remember when they return to the voting booth.

President Donald J. Trump used Wednesday’s Senate GOP policy lunch to spank Republicans for stalling the SAVE America Act. What later transpired helps explain this failure. “Late Wednesday night, the Senate held another Iran War Powers vote,” Punchbowl News reported. “The Senate then left town until July 13.” GOP leaders John Thune of South Dakota and John Cornyn of Texas claim that the Senate is too busy with budget bills, judicial nominations, and national-security matters to consider SAVE and its election-integrity reforms. Thune and Cornyn’s credibility evaporated when the Senate bailed for an 18-day hiatus—and on a Wednesday, no less. “The Senate sucks,” an exasperated Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., told journalists Thursday on Capitol Hill. “Eighty percent of the American people want the SAVE America Act to pass. Not 80% of Republicans — 80% of the American people. And the only organization that refuses to act is the United States Senate.” Donalds added: “What is happening in the U.S. Senate is laziness. And, quite frankly, it’s disgusting.” To his credit, Thune kept the Senate hopping early in Trump 47. It met for 70 days without a recess and confirmed Trump’s entire Cabinet. But since then, Thune and the Senate have relapsed. SAVE and other top legislative priorities routinely yield to Job One: rest and relaxation. “When I came up here, I thought I would fly up on Sunday night and leave Friday night,” Sen. Rick Scott, R–Fla., lamented to Fox Business Network anchor Maria Bartiromo. “We only work two-and-a-half days a week. … So, we can do it, but it might require us to stay up there and lose some of our recess and work five days a week.” On March 17, Senate Republicans forced Democrats to stand up and explain why they hate SAVE. This talking filibuster let Democrats beclown themselves by screaming their exhausted excuse for opposing clean voter rolls, limits on mail-in ballots, proof of U.S. citizenship to register, and photo ID to vote: “Racism!” Just as Republicans began to gain traction and Democrats’ lust for voter fraud became increasingly undeniable, Thune set Democrats free. He dismissed the Senate for a two-week Easter vacation. Between honestelections and chocolate bunnies, Thune chose chocolate bunnies. Compare Thune’s lassitude with the iron rule of former Democrat leader Harry Reid of Nevada. Hellbent on approving ObamaCare, Reid kept senators in session until Democrats adopted it on a party-line vote on Christmas Eve 2009. The GOP Senate needs such true grit. Alas, John Thune offers talcum powder. “Anybody who follows this process closely knows that we don’t have the votes,” Thune whined earlier this month.  Well, John, that’s your job. Thune is like a regional sales manager who moans to headquarters, “I don’t have any sales.”  Well, kid, go close some sales! If SAVE lacks the votes, get the votes! Four GOP senators have resisted SAVE. Thune should deploy carrots and sticks, as appropriate. Rename the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing room after Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell. Schedule an imminent vote on any pet bill sponsored by North Carolina’s Thom Tillis. Pledge to barnstorm Maine with Susan Collins and fly her to South Dakota for fundraisers with Thune’s top donors. Hand Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski a fresh survey showing her losing a 2028 GOP primary to Gov. Mike Dunleavy. Lean on her: “Wouldn’t it be sad if something happened to that little Senate seat of yours?” Thune and conservative PACs should run broadcast and digital ads to pressure McConnell, Tillis, Collins, and Murkowski to support SAVE. Would passing SAVE be easy? No, but enacting ObamaCare was hard. Rather than nap, Democrats persevered and prevailed. ObamaCare was rotten legislation authorized via a relentless strategy that Republicans should emulate. The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday morning created yet another urgent reason to pass the SAVE America Act. In a 5-4 decision that crushed clean-vote advocates, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett hardened a major hurdle to honest elections. Her majority opinion in Watson v. Republican National Committee frees Mississippi to keep accepting mail-in ballots in federal races, even after Election Day. So, if they are postmarked by Election Day, the magic ballots may stream in for days or even weeks after polls close in Alaska, California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, Washington state, and West Virginia. As the National Conference of State Legislatures observes, Olympia lets the Evergreen State’s mail-in ballots cascade for “21 days after a general election.” Lest GOP candidates in close races on Election Night drown in a subsequent tsunami of magic ballots, the Senate must approve SAVE and its restrictions on such votes, namely ensuring that they come from citizens who are in the Armed Forces, sick, infirm, or absent on Election Day. John Thune ached to lead Senate Republicans. So, lead! Keep the Senate in session, skip the endless vacations, and work as tirelessly as the American people.  The SAVE America Act—and the voters—deserve nothing less. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.