Gwen Graham, a former one-term congresswoman who oversaw the implementation of transgender bathroom school policies and the dismantlement of school choice initiatives under President Joe Biden, has been announced as the running mate for Florida Democrat gubernatorial candidate David Jolly. Graham, who previously ran for Florida’s governor’s mansion in 2018, and served as Assistant Secretary for Legislation and Congressional Affairs at Biden’s U.S. Department of Education, said she wants to make public education a central issue in the Jolly-Graham campaign for governor. When she was appointed to that position in the previous administration, former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said “no one is better equipped” to serve in the role. However, when in office, Graham oversaw policies such as the implementation of protections for transgender students to be able to use their bathroom of choice, in addition to the usage of pronouns. The policies took effect on August 1 of 2024, as part of a bid by the Biden administration to “extend protections to LGBTQ students.” Policies like these, which were reimplemented by Graham’s DOE after President Donald Trump rolled back an Obama-era initiative, have resulted in lawsuits from traumatized school children who feel unsafe sharing bathrooms with the opposite sex. As reported by The College Fix, a Philadelphia High School student was told to tolerate individuals of the opposite biological sex who identify as a different gender in private areas, such as bathrooms. “The girls’ bathroom had always been the girls’ getaway place—a place for privacy, mostly, but also a little refuge—a place to get away from boys, maybe talk about boys, but not meet boys,” the student wrote in an op-ed reported on by The College Fix. “I do have trouble with a policy that says anyone who’s in an opposite-sex mood today can stroll in and observe me in my intimate moments—and with school officials who value the feelings of a few students more than the dignity and privacy of all those in their care,” she continued. That student joined an already existing lawsuit over a similar incident against the Bayertown Area School District for damages, The College Fix noted. “As a member of Joe Biden’s education regime, Gwen Graham tried to destroy school choice and fought to let boys in girls’ sports and girls’ bathrooms,” Byron Donalds for Governor Communications Director Gates McGavick told the Daily Signal. “The Jolly-Graham ticket’s extremism on education is a clear example of their disconnect with Florida voters.”  Graham has also been a staunch opponent of school choice initiatives, a policy that the state of Florida has long embraced. In Florida, according to the James Madison Institute, a Florida-based think tank that has long advocated for parents’ right to choose their children’s education, over 51% of Florida’s children go to a school outside of their assigned school district. As noted by the James Madison Institute, the organization’s initiative titled the A+ Plan, a school choice initiative championed by the state of Florida, “proved to be an extraordinary success. It transformed K-12 education in our state and turned Florida into a national leader in student outcomes.” “Gwen Graham was a very loyal soldier in Joe Biden’s administration, where her central crusade at the Biden Department of Education was forcing public schools to allow men in girls’ sports and locker rooms,” the Donalds campaign said in a statement. “Graham also tried to annihilate school choice every chance she got,” the campaign added. Graham’s campaign did not respond to the Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Virginians have reason to hope that a new “era of good feelings” has begun for Oak Hill estate in Loudoun County. This year, the General Assembly voted to acquire the estate and turn it into a state park. The iconic property was the retirement home of James Monroe, the fifth president of the United States, and the last member of the founding generation to occupy the White House. Monroe inherited Oak Hill in 1808 and eventually built a mansion on the property, which also included 10 additional buildings. After the former president died in 1831, the property remained in private hands until last year. It had been controlled by the DeLashmutt family for eight decades until it was sold to The Conservation Fund for preservation in 2025. “Oak Hill has the chance to be permanently protected and open to the public, for recreation, for historic preservation, and for future generations,” Heather Richards, vice president and mid-Atlantic regional director at The Conservation Fund, said at the time her organization acquired the property. Now the work of turning the property into a public facility can begin. Brenda Hafera studies history as assistant director and research fellow in the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies. She told the Daily Signal that, as state curators transform the property into a park, they ought to “follow the model of Mount Vernon instead of Monticello or Montpelier. They should seek to comprehensively articulate the legacy and contributions of James Monroe, incorporate the story of slavery, adopt a modest tone, and adhere to primary sources.” Historic places often devolve away from celebrating the achievements of their former owners. Hafera has reviewed some of Virginia’s most important historic sites. “Monticello does not provide adequate attention to Thomas Jefferson’s political contributions, nor does it fully explain the meaning and significance of the Declaration of Independence,” she said. “Montpelier boasts no exhibits on James Madison and engages in activism and historical distortions, such as portraying the Constitution as a pro-slavery document. These concerns are not simply about the legacies of the Founding Fathers, but about the principles of the Declaration and the Constitution, and about our collective history as a people.” There is plenty to learn about Monroe, the youngest member of his generation to become president. He served in the Continental Army during the American Revolution and was almost killed when he was shot in the shoulder during General George Washington’s surprise attack at Trenton. After the Revolution, he served in the U.S. Senate and was twice elected governor of Virginia. As a cabinet member, he served as secretary of state and secretary of war. He is perhaps best known for his Monroe Doctrine, unveiled in 1823 during his second term. It warned European nations that the United States would protect smaller nations in the Americas and wouldn’t allow new colonization in the region. It has been invoked many times, right up to today. “We must reassert the Monroe Doctrine, work tirelessly to expunge China (and every other foreign power) from our shores, and become the masters of a hemisphere that is peaceful, prosperous, and free from the tired rivalries and conflicts of the Old World,” Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts wrote last year. The project enjoys wide bipartisan support. Then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin visited Oak Hill in 2025. “After careful consideration and, I have to say, an enormous amount of arm twisting and a site visit with Del. Geary Higgins,” he quipped, “our package of budget amendments includes language to authorize the consideration of establishing Oak Hill, the historic home of Virginia governor and fifth president of the United States James Monroe, as a state park.” Democratic Del. John McAuliff has also worked to move the project forward in the Assembly, while others have been raising funding for the project. Loudoun County put up $27 million, state and federal grants added $18 million, private donors put in $12 million, and the State Parks Acquisition and Development Fund contributed $10 million. Monroe’s presidency is remembered as the “era of good feelings,” a time with little partisan strife and great American prosperity. Hafera told the Daily Signal that, if Oak Hill’s exhibits are handled respectfully, it can “be a center of civic education that stewards the inherent value of the site and a place where families and citizens can gather, rather than an institution that engages in modern activism and provokes visitors.” That’s a goal worth working toward as Oak Hill becomes Loudoun County’s second state park. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

As communities across America debate whether to approve new data centers, some are implementing moratoria based on concerns over water use and noise pollution. Most recently, New York issued an executive order banning data center construction for one year while the state looks to address environmental concerns with more regulation and red tape. Those concerns deserve to be taken seriously, but banning or regulating data centers out of business would needlessly sacrifice economic opportunity and America’s technological leadership. Let’s look first at the water issue. Data centers’ water usage comes primarily from their cooling systems. Most data centers currently use an evaporative cooling system, which uses freshwater to absorb heat and let that water evaporate, carrying the heat away. This can lead to decreasing water supplies, especially in drought-prone areas. However, there are solutions already being put into place. Many developers have heeded community feedback and are rapidly moving toward more water-sustainable methods of their own accord. Microsoft pledged that every data center built after August of 2024 would use chip-level closed loop cooling which uses no additional water for cooling after the system is initially filled. Amazon’s data centers already use air cooling 90% of the time and employ evaporative cooling only during times of extreme heat. In an effort to reduce community water impacts even further, the company has already taken steps to require some of its facilities to use 100% reclaimed water. Google has voluntarily pledged by 2030 to replenish more water than they consume in communities where they operate. Steps like this, taken at the local and individual business level, demonstrate that communities can enjoy the economic benefits of data centers without devastating environmental impacts. Water withdrawals are not the only environmental concern critics raise. Some wonder about thermal and chemical pollution of water deposited back into the local water supply from data centers after cooling using a non-closed loop system. Data centers, just like other industrial facilities, must obtain a special permit that governs wastewater discharges into public waterways, ensuring public health and safety are protected. Further, most companies send their wastewater to wastewater reclamation facilities that remove any pollutants before depositing it back into local water supply. In the future, data centers may even produce more freshwater than they will use. Research is also being done to use data center waste heat to help desalinate seawater, where the system would cool the chips and produce needed freshwater simultaneously. This technology would provide data centers with an essential feature for operation while simultaneously replenishing community water supplies where needed. Regardless, the issue must be put into perspective. Data centers are projected to consume less than a 0.5% of the total national water supply per day by 2030. That number will likely be lower as developers continue to innovate, become more efficient, and respond to community concerns. On a national level, data centers are not destroying America’s water supply, and innovations that reduce water usage help alleviate strain on local rivers, reservoirs, or aquifers should be encouraged. Then there is the noise. Some local communities have complained that the noise emanating from data centers is a problem. Understandably, no one wants a noisy industrial facility down the road. It is a legitimate concern and data center owners are already responding to this issue to reduce noise by using quieter cooling systems or fan silencers, soundproofing materials in construction, and better site planning. In Mäntsälä, Finland, local officials reportedly described Nebius’ data center as a good community investment with no noise complaints, helped by a design that relies on free cooling, which uses cool outside air to remove heat. With technological innovations already underway to address community concerns, blanket data center moratoria are not the only solution. The fact is that data center developers are already responding to each of these challenges. The market is forcing them to innovate in response to what people want. Regulation will just get in the way of this process by replacing the demand of those who live near and work at data centers with that of politicians and bureaucrats.   Free enterprise rewards companies that meet the needs of the people as efficiently as possible. This means not only innovating to stay ahead of their competitors, but also working to maintain good community relations. Businesses have repeatedly innovated to reduce water and electricity use because doing so lowers costs while minimizing their environmental footprint. Further, companies that ignore legitimate concerns over water use or noise risk damaging their reputations, facing local opposition, and losing future business opportunities. Those market incentives, combined with narrowly tailored environmental protections, encourage continuous improvement without resorting to blanket moratoria or one-size-fits-all mandates. America needs more, not fewer, data centers. Blanket moratoria are a solution in search of a problem. Policy solutions should encourage innovation and development that enables both local communities and these critical facilities to thrive.

When people think of the rights and responsibilities of a legislator, they typically first imagine lawmaking: the slow and arduous task of crafting laws and policies. Thankfully, some members of Congress are moving beyond a passive view of lawmaking and are recovering a fuller picture of what it means to exercise their duties as elected representatives, namely by fighting fraud in federal grants. This week, 34 members of the House and the Senate submitted a comment letter to the White House Office of Management and Budget on a proposed rule to strengthen accountability and oversight of federal grantmaking.   Led by Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., and Rep. Michael Cloud, R-Texas, these members are taking an active role in highlighting how the Trump administration’s actions to encourage oversight and accountability over public funds align with congressional intent set forth in federal law. “It is vital that recipients of government assistance comply with federal law,” the members wrote in a comment letter submitted to OMB. “As members of the United States Congress, we have an interest in ensuring that federal funds do not flow to projects or recipients that violate laws passed by our institution—or constitutional provisions passed by Congress and ratified by the States. And as representatives of the American people, we have an interest in stopping these funds from advancing peripheral and experimental ideologies that seek to destabilize the American project and harm the American people.” Letter to OMB re Grantmaking Changes (1)Download Legislators take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and “faithfully discharge the duties of the office.” These are “duties,” plural, in recognition of the multiple functions of a legislator. Over time, members of Congress overpromised and underdelivered, leading citizens to expect less of their elected representatives in Washington, D.C. In some ways, this is good; the federal government should not be the first stop to solve societal problems. But it can also cause problems, as our Republic cannot function if those elected to serve lose the public’s trust. The 34 members of Congress highlight this at the end of their letter: “We commend OMB for seeking to ensure that all assistance disbursed by the federal government aligns with the Constitution and with federal law. The American people deserve no less.” At a time when the American people are frustrated with Congress being more talk than action, it is refreshing to see representatives work with the administration to take back the reins from unelected bureaucrats in the administrative state. The OMB’s proposed rule makes commonsense changes such as connecting the dots between government agencies to ensure fraudsters can no longer scam one agency, get flagged, then scam a different one. As one example, Minnesota saw scams targeting federal child nutrition programs, then housing support programs, and finally taking advantage of programs to aid children with autism. By expanding the U.S. Treasury’s “Do Not Pay” tool the opportunities for fraud plummet, as proven by the recovered $11.7 billion in fiscal year 2025. Another simple but effective tool would require grantees to submit certification of services rendered before the government authorizes payment. No more pay first, chase fraud later. These rule changes are the executive branch working to faithfully execute the law as Congress intended. While it is easy to be cynical, most laws are crafted by Congress not to produce loopholes for fraud. Thus, Congress has a responsibility to see that the executive carries out these functions with maximum integrity. We should all encourage more of this inter-branch cooperation to secure public funds. The way the federal government stewards taxpayer dollars is a direct reflection of its respect for those it represents. Socialists spend like drunken sailors because they have little respect for those whom they are supposed to serve. Conservatives have long sought to ensure an efficient and effective government that promotes subsidiarity, which means this cleanup of federal financial management could not come at a better time. As Americans reflect on 250 years since the Declaration of Independence, we should all recommit to upholding our rights and duties as citizens, starting with restoring trust in the stewardship of public funds.

The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, a Los Angeles-based immigration nonprofit that receives millions in government funding, is accused of establishing an immigration-to-elections pipeline across three entities, according to one state watchdog. CHIRLA maintains that the entities are separate. A CHIRLA organization in Mexico trains migrants planning to come to the U.S., while CHIRLA provides legal and naturalization services to immigrants in California, and its action arm endorses Democrat candidates. Meanwhile, CHIRLA and its action arm, CHIRLA Action Fund, partner on an “Immigrant Political Power Project” that seeks to build a voter base. According to its website, the Immigrant Political Power Project “targets new citizens, Latinos, and English learners to build a voter base from scratch, with enough power to sway state politics.” The project, staffed by “five immigrant women of color,” utilizes “teams of paid/volunteer canvassers/phone bankers, ranging in status from undocumented to legal permanent residents.” The project spreads the message that “immigrants must participate in EVERY election.” All the while, CHIRLA received more than two-thirds of its revenue from government grants in a four-year period from June 2021 through June 2025. Jenny Rae Le Roux, director of the CAL DOGE project established by Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton, cried foul. “It defies common sense that taxpayers would fund an organization that converts taxpayer funds into a political activist network for California Democrats, for the explicit benefit of [Los Angeles Mayor] Karen Bass and [Democrat governor nominee] Xavier Becerra,” Le Roux, who is also a Republican candidate for Congress in California’s 47th Congressional District, told the Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday. “The millions of dollars in public funding should be cut off, and a full investigation into the blurred 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) lines as well as the use of undocumented workers for political organizing is in order,” she added. A spokesperson for CHIRLA said that the various entities are separate. “CHIRLA Action Fund, CHIRLA, and CHIRLA Mexico are all distinct legal entities,” Jorge-Mario Cabrera, CHIRLA’s director of communications, told the Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday. “While they share a mission of a just, inclusive society where immigrants are fully embraced, they are legally distinct entities with separate funding sources and activities. These different entities are fully compliant with rules set by the Internal Revenue Service and relevant election laws.” What Is CHIRLA? CHIRLA, an immigration group founded in 1986, aims to “advance the human and civil rights of immigrants and refugees.” Cabrera said CHIRLA, which is exempt from taxes under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, “does not engage in partisan political or electoral activities.” CHIRLA Action Fund, a separate 501(c)(4) entity, can engage in partisan electoral activity, and Cabrera said it endorses candidates and legislation that aim to “create a just society, fully inclusive of immigrants.” CHIRLA and CHIRLA Action Fund launched a “joint initiative” called the Immigrant Political Power Project, which Cabrera said aims “to educate voters and promote democratic civic participation.” CHIRLA’s website also has a page dedicated to efforts in Mexico. Cabrera told the Daily Signal that CHIRLA Mexico “is a nonprofit, non-governmental organization established in Mexico operating under Mexican law.” The web page for CHIRLA Mexico mentions offices in Tapachula, Mexico City, and Tijuana. It states that the group’s effort involves organizing seminars to prepare migrants for an opportunity to enter the U.S. legally. California DOGE claims this involves a “civic pipeline” from immigration legal services to naturalization to voter registration to political mobilization. Cabrera told the Daily Signal that “CHIRLA does not assist non-citizens in voting in state or federal elections as they are prohibited from participating by law.” “CHIRLA does provide resources and support to all immigrants, regardless of their legal status, ensuring they have access to necessary information, legal assistance, and community support,” he added. Taxpayer Funding CHIRLA has received more than two-thirds of its revenue from government grants, according to IRS filings covering the period from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2025. The $80.7 million it reported receiving from taxpayers amounted to 67.9% of its $118.8 million in revenue for those four years. CHIRLA’s website states that Gov. Gavin Newsom designated CHIRLA as one of 12 organizations to administer a program designating $175 million in COVID-19 relief aid for “undocumented immigrants.” The Department of Homeland Security awarded CHIRLA $950,000 across three grants under President Joe Biden. Two of the grants, awarded in October 2022 and October 2023, involved “citizenship education and training.” The Los Angeles City Council District 13 Public Benefit Trust gave CHIRLA $195,626 on May 5 for “supplies & other services.” Hugo Soto-Martínez, who represents District 13 in the Los Angeles City Council and who has been endorsed by CHIRLA Action Fund, told the Daily Signal he is “proud” to support CHIRLA. “Our office is proud to support CHIRLA’s work assisting Los Angeles families being torn apart by inhumane federal immigration policies, and any suggestion that supporting those families constitutes anything other than representing the interests of our constituents is false and unsupported by any facts or evidence,” Councilmember Soto-Martínez said in a statement Tuesday. “CHIRLA undergoes regular, independent audits of our private and public funding,” Cabrera, the organization’s communications director, told the Daily Signal. He mentioned that CHIRLA received California grants to fund naturalization services, renewals of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, visa services, family reunification services, and more. He also mentioned funding for “education and outreach programs on anti-hate campaigns, water and heat advisories, and COVID-19 vaccine access and education.” “Most of the funds that CHIRLA has received were subcontracted to 88 nonprofit organizations in LA County,” Cabrera added. Becerra Endorsement CHIRLA Action Fund endorsed Xavier Becerra, the Democrat candidate for governor, on April 13, and it endorsed Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass for reelection six days later. CHIRLA Action Fund endorsed Gavin Newsom for governor in 2018 and 2022. Newsom oversaw the state government, which awarded CHIRLA millions. Diana Crofts-Pelayo, deputy director of communications for the governor’s office, told the Daily Signal that any suggestion that CHIRLA Action Fund’s endorsement of Newsom had any connection to the grants later awarded to CHIRLA is “false.” “California awards grants to qualified organizations to provide specific public services—not to support political activity or campaign work,” Crofts-Pelayo said. “Organizations that receive state funded grants must comply with all applicable federal and state laws, and the terms of their grants.” The campaigns for Becerra and Bass did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.