Will You Call Your Senator about the DHS Shutdown?

Congressional Democrats partially shut down the U.S. government just after midnight on Friday, March 8, 2026. Congress failed to fund departments like the Department of Homeland Security, the Pentagon, the State Department, and the Treasury. The Justice Department, Veterans Affairs, FDA, and the EPA continued operations because they received prior funding.

The shutdown means that nonessential federal employees in the affected agencies are furloughed. However, essential personnel – air traffic controllers, TSA staff, and some law enforcement officers – continue to work but without pay. ICE is not included because they were funded in previously passed legislation.

Congressional Democrats have stalled for 18 days even while negotiating with the White House. However, Democrats finally sent their latest counteroffer around 11:00 p.m. last night, according to an article by Cami Mondeaux in an article posted at the Deseret News. While White House officials are reviewing the details, “top Republicans on Capitol Hill said the latest proposal ‘didn’t change much from where we were.’” 

“There are things that, in my view, have been significant gives on the part of the White House, but the Democrats seem intent on dragging out this political issue,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told reporters on Tuesday.

Democrats have been engaging directly with the White House on funding for DHS for the 2026 fiscal year since early February. Congress was on track to pass a spending bill that had been negotiated between both parties, but Democrats scuttled those plans after a pair of deadly shootings by federal immigration officers in Minneapolis in January.

Since then, Democrats have demanded major reforms to how immigration officers can operate, including body cameras and judicial warrants. But as talks drag on, Democrats say the White House isn’t offering enough while Republicans say the minority party is refusing to compromise….

Federal funding for DHS lapsed at midnight on Feb. 14, leaving the department shuttered for over a month. That’s caused challenges for agencies beyond those that deal with immigration, such as the Transportation Security Administration that has dealt with major airline delays due to staffing shortages.

TSA agents have not been paid since the beginning of the shutdown. Some agents are calling in sick while others have quit their TSA jobs to find steadier work. Even though Democrats want to fund TSA in a stand-alone bill, Republicans fear that such a move “would leave all agencies funded except those that have to do with immigration and border security.”

In his article published at The Blaze, Lance Gooden states that Americans stuck with “longer security lines, missed flights, and mounting frustration” should blame Democrats. 

This marks the third funding lapse in six months. Instead of doing their job, Democrats are using the DHS as leverage to undermine President Trump and stall the work Americans elected him to do.

The consequences are immediate. More than 95% of TSA employees are working without pay during this shutdown. Many have taken second jobs to cover basic bills. At the same time, the TSA has cut staffing, which means fewer screeners and longer lines – even as the security mission stays the same.

With TSA wait times reaching three hours at some airports in Texas, Gooden says this “translates into real costs: lost time, missed flights, and families stranded because Congress can’t pass a basic funding bill.”

And this chaos could end overnight. Congress could fund the government and get the DHS back to work. Instead, Democrats are choosing disruption – and putting national security at risk – to block Trump’s mandate to secure the border, end illegal immigration, and Make America Safe Again.

Is Taxpayer-Funded K-12 Education Incentivizing Illegal Immigration?

It is safe to say that many of the policies of the Biden administration encouraged illegal immigration. Now a “House subcommittee will examine whether the Supreme Court’s decision that states cannot deny the children of illegal aliens access to taxpayer-funded K-12 education incentivized more aliens to come to the U.S. illegally,” according to an article written by Pedro Rodriguez and published in The Daily Signal. 

The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government will hold a hearing Wednesday on the Supreme Court’s decision in Plyler v. Doe (1982), Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, told The Daily Signal Friday. The Supreme Court allowed illegal alien children to enroll in public schools, ruling that state laws preventing their enrollment violated the equal protection clause of the 14^th Amendment.

“Decades ago, the Supreme Court’s erroneous decision in Plyler v. Doe set a misguided precedent by extending taxpayer-funded public education to those in the country illegally,” Roy told The Daily Signal. “As our schools face growing strain, it’s time for Congress and the courts to reexamine this decision and put American students and taxpayers first.”

The hearing will also explore the “policy implications” of “allowing large numbers of illegal aliens to overwhelm public schools, strain resources, teachers, and hinder class learning.”

Witnesses, who have yet to be formally announced, will help the subcommittee identify how Congress could push the Supreme Court to “rectify this judicial and policy gap.” “This serves as an opportunity to examine the federal judiciary’s recent series of questionable decisions, highlighting a history of bad precedent,” the Texas congressmen added.

The committee hopes to use the hearing as an “opportunity” for them “to build from the birthright citizenship hearing” by demonstrating that the Plyler precedent compounds the issue of illegal aliens absorbing public resources.

In recent years, Republican lawmakers have continuously championed efforts to stop incentivizing illegal immigration, which they claim includes education.

States, including Florida and Texas, have already banned illegal immigrants from receiving in-state tuition benefits in public higher education.

“I don’t think you should be admitted to college in Florida if you’re here illegally,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said in a 2025 press conference. “To give in-state tuition was just a slap in the face to taxpayers.”

It is a good thing that any part of Congress is looking at how illegal immigration is being incentivized. If all the handouts and other benefits are cut off, America will stop looking like the Promised Land to more residents of foreign nations.

Who Is John Fetterman?

My VIP for this week is Senator John Fetterman (D-PA.). I do not usually consider any Democrat as being a VIP, but Fetterman has caught my attention. During his campaign, I wondered why anyone would vote for a man with obvious brain damage. Yet, he has become THE Democrat who makes the most sense in the vast majority of cases.

Fetterman has ruffled the feathers of his fellow Democrats on numerous occasions. His latest act took place last Saturday, and the topic was his criticism about the Democrats’ “ongoing partial government shutdown and its impacts on federal employees and operations.” Harold Hutchison reports the story in his article published at The Daily Signal.

Multiple agencies, including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), are being subjected to “emergency measures” due to the shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), according to a release by DHS.

Fetterman said he spoke with TSA agents during his frequent travels about the effects of the shutdown.

“I am the only Democrat that has refused to vote in shutting down DHS, literally the only one,” Fetterman said during Saturday’s episode of “The Big Weekend Show.” “And now all agree that this would not have any impact on ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement]. They already have their funding, and it doesn’t push or force ICE to do any of those kinds of reforms that people think are necessary now, too.”

“Why would you want to punish all of these workers that are under DHS? The only thing that it can do is just make us less safe, and that also makes people have to go without getting paid,” Fetterman continued. “I’m at the airport virtually every week of the year, and I ask all those TSA agents, and I said, ‘Hey, do you like not to get paid for your work?’ I haven’t met one saying, ‘No, it’s no problem.’”

Democrats are demanding new restrictions on ICE after federal law enforcement officers were involved in the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good in January during Operation Metro Surge. The separate incidents occurred amid the deployment of hundreds of federal agents to Minnesota in response to reports about welfare fraud involving Somali migrants.

Fetterman also criticized Democrats over their efforts to block the funding.

“It’s not a big deal, you know,” Fetterman said. “I truly don’t understand that, other than it’s just toxic for a Democrat to agree with something that maybe that the Republican side might agree with that. And now I know that, but it’s very easy: more of a country over party, or ‘I’m going to put those union workers over it,’ or America’s security over the base might demand.”

Fetterman appears to be a common-sense type of man. He sees the foolishness that has taken over the Democrat Party. He is solid in his intention to remain a Democrat, but he sounds more like a Republican than my own Senator Lisa Murkowski does!

Why Is Religion Essential for Freedom?

The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday is the need for religion in our constitutional republic. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. President George Washington and President Donald Trump believe religion is essential to freedom.

President Trump believes, according to his State of the Union address on February 24, that the United States could be in the midst of a spiritual revival. However, a recent Gallup survey says that the data is mixed. In his article published at The Daily Signal, Andrew Fowler states: 

Nevertheless, for the nation to prosper and bind together, religiosity is not only a crucial aspect of civil society, but vital to its sustainability. This sentiment was express by none other than the country’s first president, George Washington.

Fowler explained that Washington was “private in his own religious convictions and skeptical of fanaticism.” However, he gave a “prescient warning to contemporary and future Americans – on national and international affairs – definitively emphasized that ‘[o]f all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.’ Moreover, to ‘subvert’ such ‘great pillars of human happiness’ – like the freedom of religious expression – would be considered unpatriotic.” Fowler continued his explanation.

Indeed let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Fowler explained that Washington “was not the only Founding Father to stress religion’s intrinsic importance to the new republic.” He then quoted a famous statement by the future President John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” He quoted a third Founding Father, Benjamin Franklin, as saying: “[God] ought to be worshipped” and “the most acceptable service we render to him is doing good to his other children.”

Fowler continued by quoting “Thomas Jefferson, the most notable deist among the Founding Fathers.” He “warned about the consequences of abandoning religious conviction entirely.” Jefferson advocated for a “wall of separation” between church and state, but he also said: “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?”

Fowler explained that the rationale of the above Founding Fathers “was not without historical precedent.” He continued by explaining that Christianity has served for centuries “as the basis for establishing institutions that we take for granted, such as universities, hospitals, economic systems, and – most importantly – the philosophy undergirding the truth that ‘all men are created equal.” It was Alexis de Tocqueville, a 19^th-century political scientist, who observed and then wrote in his “Democracy in America” that “religion is the ‘companion of liberty’ and a ‘safeguard’ in preserving the ‘pledge of freedom.’”

Fowler then shared his thoughts about how religion is doing in America today and the consequences that have followed.

Today, however, American religiosity is struggling – and the consequences borne from this sociological trend have reverberated across civil society and political dynamics.

In the early 1950s, 75% of Americans found religion to be “very important” in their lives. Now, that is 47%. Moreover, the March Gallup survey shows that “in each year since 2022, 28% of Americans have said religion is ‘not very important’ in their lives,” which is the “highest proportion” in this trend and “more than double the rate seen as recently as the early 2000s.” Concurrently, as a recent Pew Research Center survey discovered, the United States is “the only place” where “more adults (ages 18 and older) describe the morality and ethics of others living in the country as bad (53%) than as good (47%).”

The relationship between these trends may not be purely coincidental. Religious affiliation has historically declined since the 21^st century’s outset; meanwhile, the importance of one’s political party affiliation has risen and, in some cases, supplanted not only religion as an identifiable characteristic, but race, culture, and even language.

Additionally, in recent years, Americans have shifted their self-defining characteristics to better align with their politics; in effect, a political platform has increasingly informed one’s values and principles, instead of one’s beliefs being rooted by families, churches, and communities.

Psychologically, this identity shift heightens emotional reactions toward political criticisms since debate – or opposition – now challenges the core of a person’s personality. Even brain activity confirms political conflict has a similar effect as being physically attacked and/or threatened. It should be unsurprising then, as a result, America has seen increased polarization and even violence against political adversaries.

At the same time, American civil society has receded. Fewer opportunities exist for neighbors to gather together, regardless of political affiliation, and pursue a common goal. In the past, religious organizations and charities were cornerstones for such activity; today, however, as religiosity fades – which had been a motivating impulse propelling communal outreach – a void has formed. Indeed, the less religious are less likely to be civically engaged.

This massive disconnect between an individual and society at-large presents an existential crisis in the modern United States. Civilizations cannot survive without a firm foundation. In an American context, morality was not borne from thin air nor from moral relativism – but formed by Western philosophy and the Judeo-Christian religions.

President Trump is launching initiatives like “America Prays” and establishing the White House Faith Office. In addition, there are signs that the rising generations are seeking spiritual guidance. Will this trend continue?

Fowler offers “Washington’s fatherly advice” given in his Farewell Address as being “relevant to modern audiences: “when religiosity disappears from the public square, the moral framework supporting civil society wanes and weakens. A transcendent set of principles, however, unifies and moors the nation in common principles.”

Fowler suggests that this year -- America’s 250^th birthday anniversary – is a good time for Americans to return to what has been called the “indispensable” pillars that hold up society: “prayer, worship, and charity.” He wonders if faith is powerful enough to “reverse every sociological problem.” He suggests that religious commitment must be revived if we are to “renew the civic bonds that sustain, safeguard, and preserve a free society.”

This year is a suitable time for all of us to pray for America and for our political leaders.

 

Why Was the Lord with Joseph?

My Come Follow Me studies took me to Genesis 37-41 in a lesson titled “The Lord Was With Joseph.” The lesson was introduced by the following information. 

We know that God blesses people who trust Him and keep His commandments. But sometimes it doesn’t seem that way. Sometimes the person who trusts God is abused and abandoned by family members. Sometimes the person who bravely refuses to violate the law of chastity gets falsely accused anyway. When things like that happen to us, we might be tempted to become angry with God. We might wonder, “What’s the point of trying to do the right thing if it only seems to make life harder?”

Joseph, the son of Jacob, could have wondered that. At times, this faithful man prospered; at other times, it seemed that the more faithful he was, the more hardship he faced. But Joseph never left the Lord, and the Lord never left Joseph. That doesn’t mean the Lord prevented bad things from happening to Joseph, but through it all, “the Lord was with him” (Genesis 39:3).

This block of scriptures contains numerous principles, including (1) The Lord will be with me in my adversity (Genesis 37:1-28; 39; 41:9-45); (2) If I am faithful, the Lord will guide and inspire me (Genesis 37:5-11; 40; 41:1-38); (3) With the Lord’s help, I can flee temptation (Genesis 39:1-20); (4)  The Lord will help me prepare for possible hardships (Genesis 41:15-57).

This essay will discuss principle #2 about being faithful and receiving guidance and inspiration from God. First, I will share part of the scripture block – Genesis 37:5-11.

5 ¶ And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it his brethren: and they hated him yet the more.

6 And he said unto them, Hear, I pray you, this dream which I have dreamed:

7 For, behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and, behold, your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance to my sheaf.

8 And his brethren said to him, Shalt thou indeed reign over us? or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us? And they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words.

9 ¶ And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.

10 And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?

11 And his brethren envied him; but his father observed the saying.

The Lord spoke to Joseph through dreams, and Joseph had a gift for discerning the messages sent from the Lord. God speaks to other people through dreams. I know this is true because the Lord send important messages to me in dreams for numerous years. However, I did not always understand the message. For example, I received information about my son through dreams while he was serving a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In one dream, I saw my son go flying through the air. I assumed that he had been hit by a car. When I received his weekly letter, I learned that he had indeed gone flying through the air. He and his companion were riding bikes, and he did not see a 2x4 board that was lying across the bike path. He hit it and went flying.

The dreams that I received during those two years were sent to me so that I could “see” my son while we were separated. I believe that they were blessings sent to me for being obedient about maintaining a positive attitude about physical separation from my son. I stopped having such dreams soon after my son returned from his mission.

 

 

Do Children Have First Amendment Rights?

Families are stronger when parents teach their children to treat all people with dignity and all lives matter. Strong families strengthen their communities, states, and nations.

An elementary school student understood the value of all life. Her actions led to court actions. She saw a picture of “Black Lives Matter” and added the words “any life” to the picture. Somehow, this first-grade student understood that all lives matter, and an Appeals Court upheld her First Amendment rights. Fred Lucas reported on the situation in his article published at The Daily Signal. 

The 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of an elementary school student’s First Amendment rights after she was punished for adding the words “any life” to a picture of “Black Lives Matter.”’

The student, with the initials B.B., said she added the message while in first grade in 2021, inspired by a lesson on Martin Luther King Jr. She shared the drawing with a friend.

The school principal told her the drawing was inappropriate and punished her, according to the Pacific Legal Foundation, which represented the family in the case. The principal forced her to apologize, banned her from giving drawings to classmates, and excluded her from recess for two weeks.

The parents, who didn’t find out about the punishment until a year later, sued the Capistrano Unified School District in San Juan Capistrano, California.

“Today’s ruling affirms what should be obvious: Students don’t lose their constitutional rights just because they’re young,” Caleb Trotter, senior attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, said in a public statement Tuesday.

“The Constitution protects every student’s right to free expression. No child should be punished for expressing a well-intentioned message to a friend.”

A district court ruled in favor of the school district. But the three-judge panel of the 9^th Circuit vacated the lower court’s ruling and sent it back for further proceedings. The appeals court held that schools bear the burden of proving when a restriction on students’ speech is necessary.

The two sides in the case disagreed with the extent of the Supreme Court’s 1969 ruling in Tinker v. Des Moines, which says that schools may restrict speech only in cases of significant disruption.

“We hold that elementary students’ speech is protected by the First Amendment, the age of the students is a relevant factor under Tinker, and schools may restrict students’ speech only when the restriction is reasonably necessary to protect the safety and well-being of its students,” the 25-page opinion says.

The court later added, “Consistent with our sister circuits, we hold that the age of the students is a relevant factor in evaluating the school’s restriction on a student’s speech. But age is not dispositive.”

 

What Will the FBI Find in Election Records?

The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday concerns election integrity – only eligible citizens vote and only one vote per citizen. Liberals say that there is no cheating in elections. Yet they shut down part of the government because they did not like the SAVE America Act, a bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and proof of identification to vote.

FBI convinced a judge that there were enough questions to allow an investigation into election records in Fulton County, Georgia, and the FBI took many boxes of records back to Washington. Now, the FBI took election records from Maricopa County in Arizona, “a contentious jurisdiction for elections….” Fred Lucas reported the following at The Daily Signal. 

The state Senate conducted a forensic audit of the 2020 election returns in Maricopa County.

State Senate President Warren Petersen, a Republican, confirmed the Senate complied with a federal subpoena for records related to the audit.

“President Trump is 100% correct,” Petersen posted on X.

“Late last week I received and complied with a federal grand jury subpoena for records relating to the Arizona State Senate’s 2020 audit of Maricopa County. The FBI has the records. Any other report is fake news.”

Just the News first reported Monday that an anonymous source said FBI agents are receiving terabytes of electronic election data from Maricopa County, based on a federal grand jury subpoena.

In a response to an inquiry from The Daily Signal, the Maricopa County Elections Department said in an email that it did not receive a subpoena….

Just the News reported that the election data in question covered multiple elections, including 2020 and 2024….