Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., made the following statement Wednesday announcing he will not seek reelection in 2026. Daines and President Donald Trump endorsed U.S. Attorney Kurt Alme. Serving the people of Montana in the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate the past 13 years has been the greatest honor of my professional career. I’m grateful to God for allowing me to serve. But after much careful thought, I’ve decided not to seek reelection. Prior to public service, I spent 28 years in the private sector. While I found those years very rewarding, they didn’t compare to the fulfillment I found in public service. I’m energized, I’m encouraged, and I’m ready for whatever comes next. I’m also very thankful to have served alongside President Trump and my colleagues in the Senate. Together, we built a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. We spearheaded Republican control of the U.S. Senate. We delivered the largest tax cut in U.S. history. We unleashed American energy dominance and secured our southern border. We also enacted the bipartisan Great American Outdoors Act, the most significant conservation achievement in half a century. And we forge stronger ties with critical allies around the world. An announcement? pic.twitter.com/7HCofBTUMA— Steve Daines (@SteveDaines) March 5, 2026 I’m especially indebted to my exceptional staff, who have worked tirelessly each day to serve Montanans. Thank you for creating countless raving fans through your efforts. And finally, I’m most grateful to my sweet wife, Cindy, of 39 years. For the past 13 years, Cindy has selflessly dropped me off at the airport at 5 a.m. on most Mondays for that commute back to D.C. And together, Cindy and I look forward to the next chapter, like cherishing moments with seven grandchildren, spending a bit more time in Montana, and continuing to make a difference. The post ‘Grateful to God’: Montana Senator Steps Aside After 13 Years in Congress appeared first on The Daily Signal.

When it comes to Iran, Americans’ opinions aren’t necessarily reflective of what’s happening on the battlefield—but rather their feelings about President Donald Trump. That’s according to veteran pollster Scott Rasmussen, founder of the Napolitan Institute. As the conflict intensifies in the Middle East, Rasmussen said his polling suggests that Americans’ views on Iran appear to be driven less by U.S. military action and more by their broader opinions of Trump. Trump’s Job Approval vs. Iran Strikes At a Wednesday briefing, Rasmussen said public reaction to the unfolding situation in Iran has remained stable since Saturday—and is similar to Trump’s overall job approval numbers. When voters were asked whether they approve or disapprove of the way the president is handling the situation in Iran, 42% said they approve. That figure is close to Trump’s overall job approval rating of 45% in the same polling. 42% approve of President Trump's handling of the situation in Iran, and 49% do not.40% approve of the attacks on Iran.https://t.co/IFGhT98fZ31,000 RV by @ScottWRasmussen pic.twitter.com/fHdD5wyIS7— Napolitan News Service (@NapolitanNews) March 4, 2026 The consistency in Rasmussen’s surveys indicates that opinions on Iran are tracking closely with existing political opinions of Trump—rather than shifting in response to news headlines. Only 32% of voters say they are following news about Iran “very closely,” underscoring another key finding: most Americans are not immersed in the details of military strategy or regional politics.  As Rasmussen noted, few voters consider themselves military experts, and that reality may help explain why public opinion has shown little change since Saturday’s strikes. Polling Remains Unchanged Polling conducted Saturday afternoon—immediately after news broke of U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran—found that 40% of voters favored the strikes. Days later, after extensive news coverage, that number has not changed.  Support remains at 40%, according to the Napolitan Institute’s latest survey. Opposition also moved only marginally. Initially, 46% said they opposed the attacks. That number has since moved up by just one percentage point. In other words, despite intense media focus, public sentiment has barely shifted. Expectation of Victory One area where Rasmussen did observe some movement was on expectations of success.  On Saturday, 55% of voters said they believed it was likely the mission would succeed in bringing about regime change in Iran. That number has since fallen five percentage points to 50%. Rasmussen, however, emphasized that this shift does not represent a collapse in confidence. Rather than moving from optimism to pessimism, respondents appear to have shifted into a more uncertain category—from believing success is likely to saying they are unsure what will happen next. What This Means The broader picture remains steady. Iran is not reshaping public opinion—it’s reflecting it. Ultimately, Rasmussen argued, public opinion will hinge on outcomes. If the mission produces significant change, removes what many view as a destabilizing regime, and does so with minimal American casualties and limited cost, voters are likely to judge it positively. If not, the political consequences in the midterms could be significant. Rasmussen noted that Trump has only a couple of weeks before he begins to lose support, with 55% of voters opposed to him sending U.S. troops to the ground. If something drastic happens, such as a rise in U.S. casualties, Trump’s support for Iran could lessen even quicker.  For now, however, the numbers suggest that Americans are viewing events in Iran largely through a domestic political lens—and the perception of the president himself continues to shape reactions more than developments in the headlines. The post Why the Iran Poll Numbers Aren’t Really About Iran appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Firebrand Rep. Shri Thanedar, D-Mich., claimed a House subcommittee hearing was “demonizing hard-working immigrants” by drawing attention to a tragedy caused by an illegal immigrant with a commercial driver’s license, or CDL’s for short. On Wednesday, the House Homeland Security Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability held a hearing that examined the effects of illegal immigrants in the commercial truck driving industry. The hearing drew attention to the story of five-year old Dalilah Coleman, who was in attendance. Coleman was almost killed by an 18-wheeler driven by an illegal immigrant in California. Thanedar, the ranking member on the committee, tried to shift the focus of the hearing away from Coleman and CDLs to issues such as the military escalations with Iran and Jeffrey Epstein. “This weekend, a convicted felon with bone spurs illegally attacked Iran,” Thanedar said during his opening remarks. “This subcommittee is now holding another hearing on demonizing hard-working immigrants.”  “Republicans are also taking flights on luxury private jets, instead,” he added.  Thanedar also argued that this issue should be discussed by the committee overseeing the Department of Transportation instead. The subcommittee’s hearings on illegal immigrants obtaining CDLs follows President Donald Trump’s call during the State of the Union for Congress to push legislation that prevents illegals from obtaining commercial driver’s licenses. During his address, the president said that those who do not “speak English and cannot read even the most basic road signs as to direction, speed, danger, or location,” should not be operating commercial trucks. Chairman Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., believes these vehicles, in the wrong hands, can be turned into weapons. “I want to say how excited I am that the Trump administration is taking this issue very seriously,” Breechan added. “You can weaponize an 80,000-pound rig. There’s a heightened safety element that needs to be adhered to.”  Brecheen then opened the hearing to expert testimonies from Commissioner of the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety Tim Tipton, St. Lucie County, Florida, Sheriff Richard R. Del Toro, Jr., and Attorney for Public Citizen Litigation Group Wendy Liu, who have first-hand experience with illegal immigrant truck drivers. “I think it’s ridiculous to say that someone who can’t read and speak English can understand the rules of the road,” Tipton said. “When people like Dalilah are struck by an illegal immigrant operating a motor vehicle, it isn’t an accident. That is people intentionally getting in a vehicle, who don’t understand how to operate it, and are dangerous. It’s dangerous. It’s avoidable.” Tipton added that last September, the Ohio Highway Patrol and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement conducted a joint operation where, 79 commercial truck drivers were taken into custody over immigration violations. “Since then, almost 50% of OHP encounters with commercial truck operators have resulted in arrests for immigration violations,” Tipton mentioned.  Tipton also called on Congress to shut down driving schools that certify those who “can’t read english and don’t know the rules of the road.” Brecheen told The Daily Signal after the hearing that he thinks “it’s incredible that [Democrats] are fighting for illegals, and all the harm that they cause. “You got to wonder, who are they really representing?” he added. Heritage Action, who has supported Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., and Rep. Erin Houchin’s, R-Ind., legislative efforts to remove illegal immigrants and non-English speakers from the trucking industry, echoed the chairman’s remarks. “Every CDL that is given to an illegal alien makes our roads and highways more dangerous for Americans. I am glad that Chairman Brecheen highlighted the threats posed by this concerning practice that Congress should end immediately,” Government Relations Director of Heritage Action Daniel West told The Daily Signal. The post Thanedar Claims GOP ‘Demonizing’ Illegal Immigrants With Trucking Ban Push appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Trump administration will pay interest on refunds for global tariffs if ordered to do so, according to a court filing on Wednesday. U.S. officials have not committed to full refunds on the money collected from tariffs, as President Donald Trump has said he would find other laws to continue his tariffs. However, litigation and negotiations are continuing on multiple fronts.  This comes less than two weeks after the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Trump could not use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a national emergency law, to impose tariffs. Brandon Lord, executive director of the trade programs at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, wrote in the filing with the U.S. Court of International Trade, “In accordance with applicable law, any validated refund of IEEPA duties would include interest.” Since Trump imposed the tariffs in a “liberation day” announcement, the U.S. government has collected about $170 billion in tariffs, according to Bloomberg News.  The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, determined that the Trump administration could owe about $700 million to foreign companies exporting goods into the United States. The post After Supreme Court Ruling, Tariff Refund Battle Just Beginning appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., joined 52 Senate Republicans in voting against a War Powers Resolution in response to Operation Epic Fury against Iran. The resolution, introduced by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., sought to limit President Donald Trump’s ability to use military action in Iran. Forty-six Democrats and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., voted in favor of Kaine’s resolution. “Every President since Truman hasn’t used an authorization of war to exercise military action,” Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., told The Daily Signal ahead of the votes. “This is just a political exercise. I’m going to support the president; I’m not going to limit his authority.” Scott added that he does not believe this would lead into a prolonged military campaign. “Trump hates war, I think the plan is to just make sure Iran doesn’t have access to nuclear missiles,” the senator added. While the president would have vetoed the legislation, the vote was seen as a barometer for Congress’s support for the campaign and portends what future votes on additional funding for the operation could look like. Senate Republicans voted to shoot down the resolution because they believe limiting the president’s “authority” on decisive action could place Americans in harm’s way. “I think the President has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters on Tuesday. “I think the President is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests by ensuring that he’s protecting Americans and American bases and installations in that region, as well as those of our allies,” Thune added. On the senate floor before the vote, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said that, “this weekend’s events are not the beginning of a war, but an attempt to end one that spanned nearly half a century.” “President Trump made a bold and tough decision, one that could transform the region for the better literally for generations to come,” the outgoing senator added. On X, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., added that the resolution is not necessary, because Democrats did not introduce one under previous war time presidents. “Barack Obama dropped 26,000 bombs in at least 7 countries in 2016 without a word from Congress. I won’t hamstring President Trump,” he wrote. Kaine first introduced the resolution in June of 2025 around Operation Midnight Hammer. In the lead up to Wednesday afternoon’s vote, Kaine’s measure earned the support of high-profile Senate Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif. The resolution “ensures this administration cannot sleepwalk this country into an endless and costly war,” Schumer wrote in a press release. Kaine, Schumer, and Schiff did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. Despite the Senate vote, the House is still expected to vote on it’s own resolution aimed at Trump’s action against Iran, the office of the resolution’s lead, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., told The Daily Signal. Massie and Rep. Rho Kanna, D-Calif., have worked together to push the resolution in the lower chamber since June 2025. It aims to prevent the “executive branch to unilaterally committing an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn’t attacked the United States.” “The Constitution requires a vote, and your Representative needs to be on record as opposing or supporting this war,” Massie told The Daily Signal. Khanna did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. However, House Republicans and Senior Administration officials have since refuted the claim, stating that Iran’s regime has been planning to build nuclear capabilities to use against the United States and its allies. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., told reporters on Wednesday that the resolution “would put the country in serious harm and it would certainly jeopardize the lives of our troops.” “Well, they [Iran] want to kill us, so I think it was pretty much in self-defense,” Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., told The Daily Signal of the operation on Tuesday. The post Fetterman Joins GOP to Block Iran War Powers Effort  appeared first on The Daily Signal.