California makes the strongest case for passing the SAVE America Act. The state has built one of the most permissive voting systems in the country, with lax safeguards and rules that defy common sense. It has multiplied the pathways for ballots to enter circulation and remain in the counting process while reducing the most important eligibility question to little more than an honor system: Is the voter an American citizen? A recent federal case reveals how easily the state’s rules can be exploited before ballots are cast. Federal prosecutors last month charged Brenda Lee Brown Armstrong, a longtime petition circulator, with paying individuals, including homeless people living on Los Angeles’ Skid Row, to register to vote. She allegedly paid individuals to complete voter registration forms and on several occasions provided homeless individuals with her own former address. Given that California automatically mails a vote-by-mail ballot to every active registered voter, ballots in some of those individuals’ names potentially could have been sent to an address where they did not live or collect mail. Furthermore, state laws allows a voter to authorize another person to return their ballot for them, and eligible voters who miss the registration deadline can conditionally register through Election Day at a county elections office, polling place, or vote center. California law does require voter applicants to affirm under penalty of perjury that they are American citizens. However, when proof of identity or residency is required, the state accepts an unusually broad range of documents, including an employee or student identification card, a public housing identification card, a credit card, an insurance card, or even a gym membership card. These documents may help establish that a person exists or lives in a community, but they do not prove that the person is a U.S. citizen. The debate over voter ID frequently focuses on whether a voter shows identification at the polls. California reveals why that question is not enough. An identification card not issued by the government may establish who a person is, but it does not answer if they can vote in a federal election. Every eligible American citizen, regardless of income, housing status, or access to paperwork, deserves a clear path to the ballot box. They should also be confident that federal elections are reserved for American citizens. Ballot integrity begins with verifying the voter roll. That is why Congress must pass the SAVE America Act. The legislation requires proof of citizenship for registration to vote in federal elections while preserving an alternate process for eligible citizens who need help proving their eligibility, such as seniors, naturalized citizens, and women whose current names differ from their birth certificates. Federal elections are reserved for American citizens, and proof of citizenship, not just any paperwork, should be required by law. As an immigrant who became an American citizen, I understand the significance of that distinction. Citizenship carries rights and responsibilities, with voting among its most sacred privileges. California has spent years removing barriers to the ballot while leaving citizenship verification dependent on little more than an honor system. The Skid Row case exposed the risk before a ballot was ever cast. Congress should close that gap nationwide.

Progressive politicians in Canada and the Islamic terrorist group Al-Shabaab have condemned the United States for denying entry to Omar Artan, a Somali-born FIFA World Cup 2026 referee with alleged ties to the terrorist group. “Denying entry to Omar Artan, who has earned his place on the world stage through hard work and perseverance, is not right,” Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow said in a statement. “Toronto believes in fairness, inclusion, and giving talent the opportunity to shine. He would be welcome to referee here in our city. I will be writing to FIFA to let them know he is welcome to referee here.” Similarly, British Columbia Premier David Eby wrote on X that “Mr. Artan would be welcomed and celebrated in British Columbia for what he’s overcome and where he is today. Let’s have him referee in Vancouver.” While the Department of Homeland Security has not stated the extent of Artan’s ties to the terrorist group, a spokesperson for U.S. Customs and Border Protection told Newsweek that “during processing, the traveler underwent additional inspection, a routine part of CBP’s inspection process when officers need to verify information or determine admissibility,” and after “inspection,” Artan was “determined to be inadmissible due to vetting concerns and was denied entry.” Rob Bluey, executive editor of the Daily Signal, supports DHS’s caution, posting on X, “I’d rather have strong vetting than the alternative.” It’s no easy task to protect our homeland during the World Cup. I’d rather have strong vetting than the alternative. pic.twitter.com/nepogg0t7w— Rob Bluey (@RobertBluey) June 11, 2026 Al-Shabaab has been responsible for attacks on U.S. service members abroad, such as the 2020 terrorist attack on Manda Bay Airfield, which killed two, and the 2013 four-day takeover of a mall in Kenya that took the lives of 67 civilians. Most recently, the group executed major bombings in Somalia, which claimed dozens of lives, and conducted mass shootings against beachgoers. “The case of Omar Artan serves as the latest and most damning proof that American policy extends beyond security concerns to encompass broad ethnic discrimination,” the Islamic terrorist group wrote in a statement Wednesday. The group appeared to have used this as an opportunity to recruit new members to carry out its mission of regaining power and establishing “divine” Sharia law governance in East Africa and abroad. “We issue an urgent call to action to the Somali people, specifically the youth. Let us join hands and build a Somalia that is defined by honor, absolute independence from all forms of foreign occupation, and divine governance by Islamic Sharia.“ The World Cup gets underway this afternoon with Mexico squaring off against South Africa.

The cost of living has risen to unsustainable levels for millions of working Americans. Delivering immediate relief by lowering these costs and restoring affordability is essential. The first step is using budget reconciliation in the coming weeks to enact targeted spending reforms and structural changes that put money back in the pockets of families. Few Americans realize that a little-known Federal Reserve Bank (Fed) practice has already cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars—and Congress has the power to stop it. For its first 95 years of existence, the Fed  paid no interest to banks for balances held in reserve. Financial institutions were mandated by the reserve requirement ratio to hold a certain percentage of their deposits in reserve at the central bank to ensure liquidity and to control monetary supply. Banks could also park “excess” reserves at the Fed voluntarily beyond the minimum requirement. In 2006, Congress authorized the Fed to pay interest on reserves (IOR), effective 2011. The global financial crisis accelerated its implementation to 2008. The policy was intended to influence short-term interest rates by encouraging banks to hold reserves rather than lend them overnight. In 2020, the Fed eliminated the required reserve ratio entirely, embracing an “ample reserves” floor system. Since September 2022, elevated interest payments on reserves have forced the Fed into operating losses. These shortfalls are recorded as a “deferred asset” on the Fed’s balance sheet, currently totaling roughly $240 billion. The Fed must first repay this amount from its future profitable operations before resuming any remittances back to the U.S. Treasury. As of early June 2026, banks hold just over $3 trillion in reserves at the Fed, approximately 12% of the $25.5 trillion in total commercial bank assets. Annual IOR payments have exploded since the central bank raised rates to combat inflation—$177 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2023, $186 billion in FY 2024, and $148 billion in FY 2025—representing the single largest Fed expense in recent years. Cumulative interest payments since 2008 total $728 billion, with approximately 60% accruing under the Biden administration. The IOR framework is not monetary policy; it is a quiet transfer of wealth from Main Street to Wall Street and foreign capitals. The Foundation for Government Accountability projects that continued interest payments will cost taxpayers $1 trillion in foregone revenue to the Treasury over the next decade. Other independent analyses from the Andersen Institute similarly project cumulative IOR expenses approaching $1.3 trillion. These payments disproportionately benefit the largest banks, which hold the bulk of the reserves. According to an oversight report from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., foreign or foreign-owned banks have received roughly 39% of payments since 2013—totaling $235 billion. Under Chairman Jerome Powell’s mismanagement and persistent losses, the Fed has left taxpayers on the hook for lost revenue to the U.S. Treasury. This directly increases federal deficits and debt, as the government must borrow to replace the foregone revenue. What was once a reliable source of tens of billions annually in Treasury income has vanished. The Federal Reserve’s IOR program functions as a hidden subsidy to banks, especially large domestic and foreign institutions. Eliminating interest on reserve balances would restore the central bank to profitability and redirect billions back to the U.S. Treasury for the benefit of American taxpayers. Sens. Rick Scott, R-Fla., and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, introduced the Fiscal Accountability for Interest on Reserves (FAIR) Act (S. 2499) in July 2025 to repeal the Fed’s authority to make these payments. A companion bill in the House, led by Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, would achieve the same goal. The Federal Reserve Bank has been on welfare, courtesy of American taxpayers, for far too long. While families across America stretch their weekly paychecks to afford groceries, gas, and rent, the Fed has quietly funneled hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars straight into the coffers of the biggest banks—including foreign ones. Congress must stop this hidden tax on Main Street and eliminate interest on reserves through budget reconciliation. Only then can the Federal Reserve return to profitability, remittances to the Treasury resume, federal deficits shrink, and the perverse incentives that discourage lending be removed.

The State Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia is meeting Saturday morning in Fredericksburg to consider whether to oppose or remain neutral on three highly controversial proposed Democratic amendments to the Virginia Constitution. The amendments cover abortion, same-sex marriage and gender identity, and voting rights for those convicted of felonies. The abortion amendment would expand the already existing right to abortion in Virginia and allow nonmedical personnel to perform them. It would also allow minors to seek abortions without parental knowledge or approval. Same-sex marriage is already legal across the nation because of the Supreme Court Obergefell decision, but the Democratic amendment in Virginia would place same sex marriage in the Virginia Constitution. This would ensure that if Obergefell were ever overturned—as was Roe V. Wade—same-sex marriage would still be the law in Virginia. Additionally, the proposed amendment would insert gender ideology into the constitution. This would mean boys in girls’ sports, boys in girls locker rooms, and mutilating surgery for gender-confused kids. The third amendment would allow those convicted of felony crimes to vote. A mainstay of American jurisprudence has been the removal of this right from those who commit serious or violent crimes. The Democrats, it seems, speculate that their numbers increase when convicted criminals are added to the voter rolls. These Democratic amendments have flummoxed some Republican leaders. A month ago, the issue arose in the Fairfax GOP when former Attorney General Jason Miyares intervened in the local Fairfax meeting and urged members to vote neutral. It was reported that this was the wish of the new chairman of the state party, Jeff Ryer, though this is now disputed. The Fairfax GOP voted nearly unanimously to oppose the amendments. The next battlefield on these issues in the Virginia GOP was a recent meeting of the State Central Committee, where a motion was made to oppose the amendments. However, the motion was sidetracked by a motion to put the issue into a secret meeting of the state party’s resolutions committee that would not report until August—too late for the GOP to have much of an effect on voting against the amendments. It was clear in that meeting that a bare majority of the Central Committee wants to publicly oppose the amendments. A small group of GOP activists in Fairfax County has been campaigning with state party leaders and with members of the State Central Committee. The issue pits those in the party who want a so-called big tent—those who argue that the GOP must become more liberal on foundational issues like abortion and marriage—against those social conservatives and Christians who insist the party must stand on principle on core issues. This Saturday morning the State Central Committee will meet in Fredericksburg, and it is reported that the Democratic amendments will be discussed and could be voted on. An informal poll in recent days shows 20 members on the record opposing the amendments. Eleven are on record that they will vote for neutrality. There are roughly 79 members of the State Central Committee. Hats off to the sneaky Democrats for putting some lily-livered Republicans in a tough spot. A neutral vote by the Central Committee will spell huge trouble for the Republican Party of Virginia. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—The Daughters of the American Revolution currently allows men who identify as women to join, but the group will vote on a resolution to reverse that policy and formally define “woman,” the Daily Signal has learned. “Members of the Daughters of the American Revolution will take an historic vote to define the word ‘woman’ on Friday June 26, 2026, at Memorial Continental Hall in Washington, D.C.,” Laura McDonald, founder and president of Daughters Advocating for Restoration and a member of Daughters of the American Revolution since 2018, told the Daily Signal. “Daughters all across the country have relentlessly pursued all avenues and have succeeded in their demand for this historic vote,” she added. The Daughters of the American Revolution Resolution The resolution, provided to the Daily Signal, argues that the bylaws, which state that eligibility only applies to women, “should be interpreted in accordance with the intention of the society at the time the bylaw was adopted.” There is no question that DAR’s founders in 1890 did not envision men identifying as women as eligible for membership. In relevant part, the resolution states: Resolved, That in Article III, Section 1 of the Bylaws, the term ‘woman’ shall be understood to clearly mean a woman who was born female, and therefore, individuals who were born male shall not be eligible for membership; transgender women shall not be eligible for membership; and men who have their birth certificates changed from male to female shall not be eligible for membership. The DAR bylaws require the organization’s president general to call a special meeting at the request of at least 30 chapters in 10 states. At least 68 chapters in 27 states signed this resolution. CON-5525Download On April 21, DAR Recording Secretary General Colleen Rafferty Joyce signed a letter announcing that the society would vote on the resolution at the Continental Congress, held from June 24 to June 28. NBM ResolutionDownload The announcement frames the resolution as “restricting the interpretation of ‘woman’ in the National Bylaws based on sex assigned at birth,” echoing transgender activist language. Vikki Grieshaber, regent of the Letitia Coxe Shelby chapter in La Mesa, Calif., confirmed to the Daily Signal that her chapter called for the special meeting. “We requested the Call to a Special Meeting where we will vote on the bylaw amendment,” she said, confirming the date of June 26. “The Letitia Coxe Shelby Chapter supports a bylaw change,” Grieshaber added. “We believe the term ‘woman’ refers to biological women only.” “Our founders would never have anticipated men believing they are women would join a women’s only organization,” she explained. “The current membership application has us attest to the fact that we are biological women. We hope to restore our Society to what our founding daughters intended.” The DAR did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the Daily Signal. Sons Becoming Daughters? Organizers of the DAR changed the organization’s bylaws in 2023, barring local chapters of the group from discriminating on the basis of gender, religion, or sexual orientation. The group’s president general said the new policy would require chapters to admit men who claimed to identify as women, so long as they changed their birth certificates. Many members reportedly resigned following the new policy. Here's President General Pamela Edwards Rouse Wright saying during the DAR's Continental Congress: "If [a biological male's] birth certificate says they are a female, and you vote against them based on their protected class, it’s discrimination.” pic.twitter.com/0ffhmePs62— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) July 26, 2023 A New Jersey chapter had reportedly accepted a transgender member in 2022, inspiring backlash. The DAR’s transgender move is rather ironic. The women who founded the organization did so after the Sons of the American Revolution refused to admit women. Recent polls have found Americans souring on transgender identity. A New York Times/Ipsos poll last year found that 79% of Americans say men should be barred from women’s sports. A majority of Americans also support banning experimental transgender medical procedures on children. McDonald emphasized the importance of the vote and expressed confidence in victory, echoing the closing of the Declaration of Independence. “We believe restoring and preserving the DAR for future generations is essential to winning the culture war,” she told the Daily Signal. “With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we believe we will win.”