While the SAVE America Act is being hotly debated within the Senate, well over two-thirds of likely voters across five battleground states support proof of citizenship to register to vote, a core element of the proposal. The Heritage Action poll was done in Alaska, Georgia, Maine, North Carolina, and Ohio, all expected to have competitive Senate races in the 2026 midterm elections among Republican, Democrat, and independent voters.  Across those states, more than 70% of likely voters oppose noncitizen voting, and almost 80% percent support applying the same voter eligibility standard in every state for federal elections. The SAVE America Act, an acronym for the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and require voter ID. The legislation passed the House with an uncertain future in the Senate, facing a Democrat filibuster.  Voter ID has consistently polled well in other surveys across party and demographic lines.  The Heritage Action poll found that voters are about twice as likely to reward a senator for supporting the proposal SAVE America Act than to punish them. The poll found more than 80% agree every legal voter should have confidence their ballot is counted equally and not diluted by ballots from ineligible or illegal votes.  “American voters are smart, and they know that showing an ID to vote is a simple way to protect their ballots,” Tiffany Justice, Heritage Action Executive Vice President, said in a public statement   “Voting is a privilege of American citizenship, and it should be defended by commonsense measures that apply equally to all states,” Justice added. “Allowing non-citizens to cancel out the votes of law-abiding Americans threatens the very foundation of our republic.” The poll found 69% of likely Alaska and Georgia voters support requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. It’s 65% in Maine, 68% in North Carolina, and 71% in Ohio.  The numbers were even stronger in opposition to noncitizens voting in U.S. elections, with 77% of Alaskans, 67% of Georgians, 73% of Maine likely voters, 71% in North Carolina, and 69% in Ohio opposing it. Polling showed that when voters were aware proof of citizenship and voter ID were part of the SAVE America Act, support remained at 64% in Alaska, 65% in Georgia, 63% in Maine, 67% in North Carolina, and 62% in Ohio.  The post What Supermajorities of Likely Voters in Battleground States Say About SAVE America Act appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., has introduced a bill to prohibit federal dollars from funding sexually explicit content in schools. The “Stop Sexualization of Children Act” would amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to prohibit federal funds from promoting inappropriate materials, like books and curriculum featuring sexually explicit conduct or themes of transgenderism and gender dysphoria. “Parents deserve complete confidence that their tax dollars are being used to promote academic excellence—not to expose children to harmful and explicit material that undermines their innocence,” Miller, who chairs the House Family Caucus, told The Daily Signal. “My legislation draws a clear and enforceable line to ensure our schools remain focused on education, not explicit ideological agendas or radical indoctrination.” Miller saw a need for such legislation due to reports of obscene books available to children in school libraries, such as “Gender Queer,” “Lawn Boy,” and “All Boys Aren’t Blue.” Some schools even host events with sexualized content. For example, a school in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, recently hosted a performer who straddled a young girl in front of her minor classmates. New York City recently spent more than $200,000 in taxpayer funds to support a group that sends drag queens into city schools, often with inappropriate clothing and without parental consent. High schoolers in Elk Grove, California, attended a school-based performance that parents say included provocative dancing and stripping. A number of pro-family groups endorse the bill, such as Family Research Council, Independent Women’s Forum, American Principles Project, Eagle Forum, Family Policy Alliance, Parental Rights Foundation, and Moms for America. Bill co-sponsors include Republican Reps. Troy Downing of Montana; Randy Fine of Florida; Greg Steube of Florida; Paul Gosar of Arizona; Andy Ogles of Tennessee; Harriet Hageman of Wyoming; Marlin Stutzman of Indiana; Barry Moore of Alabama; Sheri Biggs of South Carolina; and Julia Letlow of Louisiana. The bill does not prohibit funds from limiting instruction of standard science coursework, texts of major religions, classic works of literature, or classic works of art. The post EXCLUSIVE: Congresswoman Introduces Bill to Defund Explicit Content in Schools appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Trump administration has taken many steps—some of them truly unprecedented—to advance pro-life policies, both domestically and abroad. President Donald Trump could do one thing to protect life and send a powerful pro-life message internationally, simply by enforcing an existing law you may have never heard of. It’s called the Siljander Amendment and dates to 1981. In recent days, Trump expanded the Mexico City Policy exponentially. This is the law that renders entities that promote or provide abortions ineligible for U.S. foreign assistance funding. The new policy goes further by plugging key loopholes in the policy’s earlier iterations and expands its scope to include gender ideology and discriminatory equity ideology as well as abortion. One key addition to the policy is that it now applies to multilateral organizations, which is important both because agencies of the United Nations and the Organizations of American States, or OAS, have a history of receiving generous funding from the U.S. and of promoting abortion. In all its iterations, the Mexico City Policy has been an executive order enacted and reinstated by Republican presidents and rescinded by Democrat presidents since the 1980s. However, it exists as a supplement to a prior law—the Helms Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act which bars U.S. funding from directly promoting or providing abortions abroad. The Mexico City Policy was introduced because money is fungible; it is hard to claim that U.S. taxpayer funding is not complicit in promoting abortion overseas simply because U.S.-funded Planned Parenthood affiliates in foreign countries insists that its abortion work is done with separate funding. The Siljander Amendment plugged yet another hole and that is the lobbying hole. It prohibits U.S. funds from being used to lobby for or against abortion, something U.S. aid recipients do aggressively and globally.  During the first Trump administration, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo defunded two organs of the OAS, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission of Women, because they were lobbying for the legalization of abortion in Latin American and Caribbean countries. At the time, the same approach was not taken with UN agencies, but it should be now, and for the same reason. UN entities frothily lobby and pressure countries on abortion in violation of this amendment.  The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights supports the work of the human rights treaty monitoring bodies and special mandate holders, many of which have explicitly called on countries to decriminalize abortion entirely, legalize it for all grounds, and remove any barriers to access, including by violating the conscience rights of health care providers. Another UN entity with a long track record of lobbying for abortion is the Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. While housed within the World Health Organization, it is a joint program of the United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Population Fund, United Nations Children’s Fund, and the World Bank, all of which have been recipients of U.S. funding in recent years. In 2022 the HRP published its latest guideline on “safe abortion,” which calls for recommend full decriminalization of abortion, which says should be available on the request of the woman (they say “pregnant person”), without restrictions based on grounds or gestational age. A 2025 update to the guideline called for heightened restrictions on conscientious objection. The HRP often posts infographics to social media with messages like “abortion is healthcare,” “abortion should never be criminalized,” and “quality abortion care is part of the universal right to health.” There is no internationally agreed human right to abortion, and UN consensus by member states holds that its legal status is for individual governments to determine. The Siljander Amendment is U.S. law, and it should apply to U.S. taxpayer funding to multilateral institutions, which have historically been generously supported by the U.S. It must be enforced regardless of the policy preferences of whoever inhabits the White House. As it clearly states, it would also apply to any UN agency that lobbies against abortion—although finding one of those might be more difficult than achieving what the UN was established to do, like ending war and poverty. In keeping Trump’s record of defunding agencies that violate our values, he should take a close look at this little-used tool.  We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Trump Could Further His Pro-Life U.S. Foreign Policy by Enforcing Existing Law appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Abraham Lincoln never delivered a public State of the Union address. However, he does know something about drama-loving Democrats spoiling a president’s good night out. On Tuesday night, President Donald Trump will not be at Ford’s Theater. But he will be walking into a theatrical production staged by theater kids wearing congressional pins shouting not Sic Semper Tyrannis but “No More Kings.” One may say my comparison of today’s congressional Democrats to John Wilkes Booth is cheeky and itself overdramatic, but does anyone really believe at this point that the Democrat vitriol toward Trump is any less intense than Booth’s toward Lincoln? Has the assassination porn of recent years, the dogged determination to destroy the man and anyone even associated with him, not shown that? How about the acceleration of violent rhetoric against Trump even in the wake of Butler, Pennsylvania … even in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s public slaying? Do we expect it to slow even in the wake of Sunday’s breach of Mar-a-Lago’s security perimeter by an armed young man? The best we can do is tell ourselves—lie to ourselves?—that they don’t really mean it. That it’s all a show. They’re not Booth with a pistol in the president’s box, but Booth in a production of “Julius Caesar.” Or more accurately, a farce. So let us see it as such.Trump will be at the U.S. Capitol to deliver his State of the Union. Democrats will be there to deliver performative, disruptive stunts for their radical base, fundraising coffers, and social media hits. It’ll be a tacky, disrespectful, trashy display in the hallowed House chamber. After all, these people were weaned not on Robert’s Rules of Order but on Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” … and “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.” What will this year’s production look like? Who will try topping that infamous State of the Union where Nancy Pelosi ripped up Trump’s speech the way Hulk Hogan used to rip off his shirt? Trump’s 2025 speech to Congress starred Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, yelling and screaming and waving his cane like he was desperately trying to hail a taxi in a blizzard. A gaggle of radical congresswomen held up cute little signs near their faces, like actresses in anti-depression medication ads. Who knows what displays we’ll see this year? “Welfare Fraud is a Natural Right,” “I Heart Violent Criminal Illegals” or perhaps Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez holding up a sign asking, “Which Way Is Taiwan?” It is guaranteed we will see signs, buttons, or bellowing evoking ill-fated ICE protester Renee Good. If we’re lucky, members will do an interpretive dance in her honor as protesters did the other day outside the Trump Kennedy Center … a couple days before fellow protesters dumped toxic chemicals on the center’s ice rink.Certainly, we’ll see ICE-related protests. Who knows? Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., may even bring Kilmar Abrego Garcia as his plus-one in the gallery. Last year also featured Democrats staying stone cold silent at every Trump proclamation of good news. They used their hands as booty warmers rather than applaud the families of those slain by illegal immigrants. They couldn’t even bother to move a muscle for a courageous little boy with brain cancer becoming an honorary Secret Service agent. Oh, if they would only try the silent treatment again Tuesday night! Trump will be sharing all the positive things that have happened for the American people this past year. And as each positive thing is met with silence from the Democrat side of the aisle, the president must say, “And the Democrats are not happy for you.” Wages are up. “And the Democrats are not happy for you.”Drug prices are down. “And the Democrats are not happy for you.”Tax refunds are up by four digits. “And the Democrats are not happy for you.”Inflation is way down. “And the Democrats are not happy for you.”Fact Check: They aren’t. Which gets to the three huge problems the Democrats will face showboating this State of the Union: First, the list of accomplishments in Trump’s first year is longer than Mitch McConnell is in the tooth. So many good things have happened, big and small, foreign and domestic, that Democrat petulance will look pathetic. More Lesley Gore than Al Gore. “It’s Trump’s party and I’ll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.” Second, given the speech is against the star-spangled backdrop of America’s 250th birthday, and the warm glow of Olympic gold, not showing love for Team USA … particularly in defense of illegal immigrants … will look, well, un-American. Third, Democrats will never be able to out showboat Donald Trump. It’s like competing in a karaoke competition with Kelly Clarkson, a three-point shooting contest with Caitlin Clark, a pie eating contest with Chris Christie. The State of the Union will be Donald Trump’s show. You can no more upstage Donald Trump than you can find wine at Ilhan Omar’s winery. It’s foolishness to try.But try they will. Which is why we offer a particular prayer for Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger, the falsely billed “moderate” whom Democrats have picked to give the official Democrat Party response. Following Trump is like having to take the stage after KISS. Spanberger will try singing from the Democrat songbook, but nobody would hear and notice amid the smoke, confetti, and ringing ears. The curtain goes up at 9 P.M. Eastern. The post SOTU Preview: Theater Kids Hope to Steal the Show From Trump appeared first on The Daily Signal.

As Americans tune in to President Donald Trump’s fourth official State of the Union address Tuesday, they may expect Democrats to make a scene of one sort or another. Twelve Democrats have announced they will boycott the speech and instead attend the “People’s State of the Union,” an event organized by the leftist group MoveOn.org. About 60 Democrats boycotted Trump’s first inauguration in 2017, and Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., boycotted his address to a joint session of Congress that year (Trump’s speeches in 2017 and 2025 did not count as official State of the Union addresses). Eleven Democrats said they would boycott the State of the Union in 2018, and others boycotted the 2020 speech (including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Al Green, D-Texas). Many Democrats, however, stayed and disrupted the speeches—as many likely will on Tuesday. 1. Laughter In Feb. 2017, when Trump said, “We have begun to drain the swamp of government corruption,” Democrats laughed and booed. 1?2017 LaughterWhen President Trump said, "We have begun to drain the swamp of government corruption," Democrats laughed and booed. ?2/10 pic.twitter.com/yrGlyR27A5— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 23, 2026 2. Not Clapping for Low Unemployment “Something I’m very proud of, African-American unemployment stands at the lowest rate ever recorded,” Trump said in the January 2018 State of the Union. Most Democrats refused to stand—and most appear not to have even clapped—for that news. 2?Not cheering low black unemployment"Something I'm very proud of, African-American unemployment stands at the lowest rate ever recorded," Trump said.Most Democrats refused to stand—and most appear not to have even clapped—for that news.?3/10 pic.twitter.com/B5q6y4FJgh— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 23, 2026 3. Russiagate Groans Democrats groaned in the February 2019 State of the Union when Trump condemned “ridiculous partisan investigations,” a nod to the probe into alleged ties between Trump and Russia. 3?Russiagate groansDemocrats groaned when President Trump condemned "ridiculous partisan investigations," a nod to the probe into alleged ties between Trump and Russia.?4/10 pic.twitter.com/eKE5CyzsrZ— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 23, 2026 4. Pelosi Tears Up the Speech House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tore up the text of Trump’s State of the Union address in February 2020. About a week later, she explained that she ripped up the speech as a ploy for attention. Pelosi hadn’t planned to rip up the speech, but when she “realized most every page had something in it that was objectionable,” she thought it would be a good idea to get some attention. Speaking to CNN, she lamented that her legislative agenda received “very little press,” and she said, “If you want to get press, you have to get attention.” “So, I thought, well, let’s get attention on the fact that what he said here today was not true,” she explained. Pelosi later explained the stunt was a ploy for attention.??6/10 pic.twitter.com/471lgm9LXO— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 23, 2026 5. Booing Rush Limbaugh Trump awarded the Congressional Medal of Freedom to radio host Rush Limbaugh in the 2020 State of the Union address. When the president made the announcement, Democrats booed and said, “No.” Ocasio-Cortez released a video condemning Limbaugh as a “virulent racist.” AOC released a video condemning Limbaugh as a "virulent racist."?8/10 pic.twitter.com/c0HuCj5sSb— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 23, 2026 6. Al Green Escorted Out Green raised his cane, repeatedly shouting at Trump during the joint address last year. House Speaker Mike Johnson eventually ordered the sergeant at arms to remove Green. 6?AL GREEN DISRUPTIONRep. Al Green raised his cane, repeatedly shouting at Trump, during the joint address last year. House Speaker Mike Johnson eventually ordered the Sergeant at Arms to remove Green. ?9/10 pic.twitter.com/OyFJVYVjaQ— Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) February 23, 2026 7. Signs Also last year, many Democrats held signs protesting Trump. Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., held a sign reading, “This is not normal.” Stansbury used the attention from her “protest” to fundraise for her reelection campaign. Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., reportedly held a sign reading, “Cut Elon, NOT Social Security.” This referred to Tesla co-founder Elon Musk, who was heading the Department of Government Efficiency at the time. Hi that's me. We will not be silent. Join me in the fight.https://t.co/YZTwbSvIIR— Melanie Stansbury (@MelanieforNM) March 5, 2025 The Daily Signal will be covering the speech in real time, so if Democrats pull off any other disruptions, you can find them here. The post 7 Times Democrats Had a Meltdown Over Trump’s State of the Union Speeches appeared first on The Daily Signal.