Category: The American Spectator
Even Harris Voters Oppose Biological Men in Women’s Sports, New Poll Shows
A new poll shows voters overwhelmingly oppose allowing biological men to compete in women’s sports—including a plurality of Kamala Harris’s 2024 voters—yet nearly all of the Democrats weighing presidential runs in 2028 dodged basic questions on the issue when Axios asked them earlier this month.
The post Even Harris Voters Oppose Biological Men in Women’s Sports, New Poll Shows appeared first on .
Appropriations talk, executive orders walk: The great MAGA budget betrayal
Money talks. Everything else is just BS. That is true in all areas of life, but it’s especially true in politics.
Trump is now repeating the modus operandi of his first term, in which he proclaims bold cuts, reforms, and changes to federal policies, programs, and agency spending levels in the form of executive orders. He summarily ignores his own policies by lobbying Republicans in Congress to pass annual appropriations bills that fund pretty much every spending level and most policies of his predecessor — so much so that most of these bills garner support from all but the most radical Democrats in Congress.
This bill is the crown jewel budget bill of the GOP trifecta at the peak of Trump’s power, and yet Democrats have no concerns voting for it.
Unfortunately, it is the government funding that matters when attempting to secure permanent change to federal agencies, not ephemeral executive orders or press releases.
On Friday, House Republicans passed a minibus bill with all but the 64 most progressive of the 213 Democrats voting yes. The fact that the 24 most conservative Republicans opposed it despite pressure from the administration should tell you that it does not reflect Trump’s campaign promises.
This minibus included Defense, Homeland Security, Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development. Trump has proposed hundreds of policies throughout those departments that are extremely offensive to Democrats, yet they had no problem supporting the budget bill. Why?
They feel they dodged a bullet in this funding bill, especially while being out of power. The statement from Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, says it all:
These bills invest in working people across the country and utterly reject President Trump’s plan to defund our kids’ education, evict millions of families, and slash lifesaving medical research nearly in half. The message to President Trump is: America will continue to fund cancer research, we are going to keep investing in affordable housing and tackling homelessness, Congress will not abolish the Department of Education, and the people’s representatives will have the final say on how taxpayer dollars get spent.
…
While there’s a whole lot more I wish these bills would have addressed, these compromise bills protect critical investments in the American people, reject truly heartless cuts that would have undone decades of progress — and they are a significantly better outcome than another yearlong CR. I look forward to ensuring they get signed into law.
This bill is the crown jewel budget bill of the GOP trifecta at the peak of Trump’s power, and yet Democrats not only have no concerns voting for it but enthusiastically support it. What gives?
The DOGE appears to be a fossil from a hundred years ago. The $1.25 trillion “minibus” bill reversed all the DOGE cuts to agencies like the NIH and CDC. Overall, spending will increase slightly over Biden’s final year — a year that was notorious for biblical levels of spending.
Here are some of the top concerns with the FY 2026 budget bill.
- It fully funds the Department of Education. Even as Trump “abolished” the entire department, this bill funds the department at Biden’s level of $78.7 billion. Worse, Democrats secured a provision prohibiting the administration from transferring Education Department funds to other agencies, which had been a point of contention in negotiations. Once again, appropriations talk, executive orders walk.
- According to a Democrat summary of the bill, the total funding for the Labor-HHS-Education portion of the bill is $224 billion, a slight increase in current levels. This is simply astounding given that Republicans never believed in even having these departments at the federal level. If we can’t cut from these agencies, then where will we cut?
- Section 8 galore! Well, what’s worse than locking in Biden’s education and health spending? Increasing Biden’s HUD spending by nearly $8 billion! If there was ever a department conservatives wanted to abolish, it was always HUD. This is something that should be determined at the local level. Once again, Trump promised to cut the department in half, yet increased spending for every program he planned to trim or eliminate.
The bill provides $38.4 billion in tenant-based Section 8 vouchers and a $2.4 billion increase from fiscal 2025. It also provides $18.5 billion for project-based rental assistance, a $1.7 billion increase from last year.
The bill also provides $1.25 billion for HUD’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program, after the Trump administration budget request and the original Republican House Transportation-HUD appropriations bill promised to eliminate the program. These programs provide grants to state and local governments and local NGOs to essentially seed red states with liberal voters and ruin the character of rural communities.
RELATED: Trump’s primary endorsements are sabotaging his own agenda
Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
The bill also provides nearly $7 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Program and the Economic Development Initiatives for housing-related activities and $86 million for fair housing programs. Trump promised for years to eliminate the program altogether.
The only point of contention in the bill is the DHS portion, which Democrats are now threatening to oppose. But let’s be clear: Before the fatal shooting in Minneapolis, they were even willing to pass Trump’s DHS bill and did not perceive it as much of a threat.
At the time the bill was released, Senator Murray boasted that Democrats “defeated Republicans’ hard-fought push to give ICE an even bigger annual budget, successfully cut ICE’s detention budget and capacity, cut CBP’s budget by over $1 billion, and secured important, although still insufficient, new constraints on DHS.” She also lauded the rejection of “all Republican poison pill riders,” such as defunding sanctuary cities.
Democrats are, of course, forced to play to their base. However, on the specifics, this bill contains some horrendous provisions.
- Cheap foreign labor: It allows the secretary to double H-2B visas, going from 66,000 to 130,000 H-2B visas.
- Prohibits ICE from deporting illegal aliens who sponsor unaccompanied minors based on any information provided by HHS. So HHS is supposed to vet the sponsors, but if it determines they are here illegally and tells ICE that, ICE is prohibited from deporting them.
Why would we double foreign worker visas and make it harder to remove those literally engaged in trafficking children over the border by hiring cartel smugglers?
Well, despite all the rhetoric, press releases, tweets, and executive orders, good ol’ Joe Biden had it right when he proclaimed, “Don’t tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I’ll tell you what you value.” Evidently, we are now valuing almost everything all that he funded in his budget when he made that comment.
AI in education: Innovation or a predator’s playground?
For years, parents have been warned to monitor their children’s online activity, limit social media, and guard against predatory digital spaces. That guidance is now colliding with a very different message from policymakers and technology leaders: Artificial intelligence must be introduced earlier and more broadly in schools.
When risky platforms enter through schools, they inherit an unearned legitimacy, conditioning parents to trust tools they would never allow at home.
On its face, this goal sounds reasonable. But what began as a policy push has quickly turned into something far more concerning — a rush by major tech companies to brand themselves as “AI Education Partners,” gaining access to public education under the banner of innovation, often without parents being fully informed or given the ability to opt out. When risky platforms enter through schools, they inherit an unearned legitimacy, conditioning parents to trust tools they would never allow at home.
AI in education is being sold as inevitable and benevolent. Behind the buzzwords lies a harder truth: AI is becoming a back door for Big Tech to access children and sidestep parental authority.
Platforms already under fire for child safety
At the center of this debate are three companies — Meta, Snap, and Roblox — all now positioning themselves as AI education partners while facing active litigation and investigations tied to child exploitation, predatory behavior, and failures to protect minors.
Meta is facing lawsuits and regulatory actions related to child exploitation, unsafe platform design, and illegal data practices. Internal company documents revealed that Meta’s AI chatbots were permitted to engage minors in flirtatious, intimate, and even health-related conversations — policies the company only revised after media exposure.
European consumer watchdogs have also accused Meta of sweeping data collection practices that go far beyond what users reasonably expect, using behavioral data to profile emotional state, sexual identity, and vulnerability to addiction. Regulators argue that meaningful consent is impossible at such a scale. Meta has also claimed in U.S. courts that publicly available content can be used to train AI under “fair use,” raising serious questions about how student classroom work could be treated once ingested by AI systems.
Snapchat is facing lawsuits from multiple states, including Kansas, New Mexico, Utah, and others, alleging that its platform exposes minors to drug and weapons dealing, sexual exploitation, and severe mental health harm. In January 2025, federal regulators escalated concerns by referring a complaint involving Snapchat’s AI chatbot to the Department of Justice.
Despite this record, Snap signed on as an AI education partner, promising “in-app educational programming directed toward teens to raise awareness on safe and responsible use of AI technologies.”
Roblox, long flagged by parents for safety concerns, is being sued by multiple states, including Iowa, Louisiana, Texas, Tennessee, and Kentucky, over allegations that it enabled predators to groom and exploit children. Yet Roblox now seeks classroom access as an “AI learning” platform.
If these platforms are too dangerous for children at home, they are too dangerous to normalize at school. Allowing companies with a history of child-safety failures to integrate themselves into classrooms is negligent and dangerous.
The contradiction no one wants to address
The danger becomes clearer when you step outside the classroom.
Across the country, states including Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Connecticut are restricting minors’ access to social media through age verification, parental consent, and limits on addictive features. At the federal level, the bipartisan Kids Off Social Media Act seeks to bar social media access for children under 13 and restrict algorithmic targeting of teens.
For more than a century, the Supreme Court has recognized that parents — not the state and not corporations — hold the fundamental right to direct their children’s education.
When Big Tech gains access to classrooms without transparency or consent, that authority is eroded. Parents are told to restrict social media at home while schools integrate the same platforms through AI. The result is families being sidelined while Big Tech reduces their children to data sources.
RELATED: Why every conservative parent should be watching California right now
Photo by AaronP/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images/Getty Images
This dangerous escalation must meet a clear boundary. Some platforms endanger children, others monetize them, and some expose their data. None of them belong in classrooms without strict, enforceable guardrails.
Parents do not need more promises. They need enforceable limits, transparency, and the unquestioned right to say no. The Constitution has long recognized that the right to direct a child’s education belongs to parents, not Silicon Valley. That authority does not stop at the classroom door.
If artificial intelligence is going to enter our classrooms, it must do so on the terms of families,not tech companies.
The Spectator P.M. Ep. 188: Transgender Girl Scouts Sell Over 71,000 Cookie Boxes
Erin Reed, who self-identifies as a transgender journalist, helped transgender Girl Scouts sell over 71,000 boxes of cookies that fund…
Gavin Newsom’s ‘Self-Puffery’ Gets Him in Trouble With David Axelrod
Are even Democrats starting to get sick of Gavin Newsom’s constant self-aggrandizement? If longtime Obama adviser David Axelrod is (again)…
The Data Is In — and the Narrative Is Wrong
It would appear that most mainstream economists and legacy journalists either don’t believe the “numbers” or don’t like what they…
Zhang Youxia’s Arrest: Xi Jinping’s Paranoia Leaves CCP Elites in Fear
The sudden arrest of Zhang Youxia, holder of the highest military position in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), is a…
Peaceful Protest
“Peaceful Protest,” editorial cartoon by Tom Stiglich for The American Spectator on Jan. 27, 2026.
