Lawmaker unveils Riley Gaines-backed bill targeting transgender military academy students
FIRST ON FOX: A key House Republican is introducing a bill to keep military academy sports teams separated based on biological sex, with the backing of activist Riley Gaines.
In an interview with Fox News Digital, Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., said it was important for Congress to act because it holds jurisdiction over those military schools.
"There are important physiological differences between men and women. I think most everybody knows that. And this bill makes sure that our military service academies, that we've got a fair playing field," Johnson said.
"We wanted to make sure we were dealing with something where Congress has some pretty clear authority, and clearly, the management, or the oversight, of the service academies is an important congressional duty."
Gaines, host of OutKick's "Gaines for Girls" podcast, told Fox News Digital in a statement that she is supportive of the legislation, noting her own collegiate sporting experience.
"As someone who has personally experienced the consequences of unfair competition in women's sports, I strongly support the Protection of Women in Sports at Military Academies Act," she said.
"Our nation's military academies should be the gold standard of fairness, discipline, and integrity—not institutions that sacrifice female athletes on the altar of political correctness."
She said the South Dakota Republican's legislation "ensures that protection remains intact for the brave young women training to lead our armed forces."
Johnson, the lone House representative from the Mount Rushmore State, is chair of the Main Street Caucus, a group of economic-minded House GOP pragmatists.
Gaines famously lost to transgender college swimmer Lia Thomas, after which her activism in keeping women's sports restricted to biological sex launched her onto the national stage.
It's not her first time advocating on Capitol Hill either, having formerly appeared with House Republicans in support of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act and testifying before the House Oversight Committee in 2023.
A counterpart to Johnson's legislation is being led in the Senate by Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala.
Tuberville told Fox News Digital, "Our service academies should be focused on preparing the next generation of leaders, not woke indoctrination."
A summary of the legislation said it would "prohibit the participation of males in athletic programs or activities at the military service academies that are designated for women or girls."
In addition to Gaines, the bill is also being backed by the Independent Women's Law Center.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 minutes ago
- The Hill
CHC asks Johnson, Thune to ‘uphold the dignity' of Congress after Padilla handcuffing
The Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) is calling on Republican leadership to 'uphold the dignity and authority of Congress' after Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) was handcuffed when interjecting at a press conference held by Homeland Security Sec. Kristi Noem on Friday. Padilla was blocked by security as he advanced toward the front of the room, identifying himself and saying he had a question. He was then pushed out of the room, forced to the ground and handcuffed. The incident is sparking concern among Democrats who see his treatment as a crackdown on the party's pushback on the administration. More than 180 Democrats signed onto a letter to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) calling the episode 'shocking and deeply troubling mistreatment.' 'Senator Padilla clearly identified himself and was acting within his rights as a Member of Congress. The use of force against a sitting senator—in a federal building, during official business—is a grave breach of protocol. It is also a potential violation of separation of powers and raises alarming questions about the conduct of federal law enforcement agencies, the coordination of protective services, and the administration's posture toward congressional oversight,' the lawmakers wrote in the letter spearheaded by the CHC. 'This unprecedented incident is not simply an affront to security protocol—it is a constitutional issue—as these actions may constitute an assault on a sitting senator. If members of the United States Senate can be physically restrained for seeking answers from executive officials, it sets a dangerous precedent for the independence of the legislative branch.' Thune's office didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Johnson's office pointed to earlier remarks from the Speaker, including his backing censuring Padilla over the move. 'A sitting member of Congress should not act like that. It is beneath a member of Congress. It is beneath a U.S. Senator. They're supposed to lead by example. And that is not a good example. We have to turn the temperature down in this country and not escalate it. The Democrat Party is on the wrong side. They are defending lawbreakers and now they are acting like lawbreakers themselves,' Johnson said last week. Pressed on whether Padilla should face consequences, Johnson initially demurred — 'it's not my decision to make, I'm not in that chamber' — before endorsing censure for the California Democrat. 'I think that that behavior at a minimum rises to the level of a censure,' Johnson told reporters. 'I think there needs to be a message sent by the body as a whole that that is not what we're going to do, that's not what we're going to act.' 'We're not going to have branches fighting physically and having senators charging Cabinet secretaries,' he added. 'We got to do better and I hope that we will.' Thune said he plans to 'gather all the relevant information' about what happened. 'We want to get the full scope of what happened and do what we would do in any incident like this involving a senator and try to gather all the relevant information,' Thune said. Chair Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) last week led a march to Johnson's office shortly after Padilla was handcuffed. 'I feel this amounts to an assault, a felony, and we want a full and complete investigation of this matter immediately,' Espaillat said at the time. 'We have concerns, grave concerns, when the Speaker of the House refers to a sitting member of the US Senate who simply tried to exercise his first amendment rights as acting like a thug.' 'We feel very strongly that there is an intimidation campaign to try to silence dissent, and that's very dangerous,' he added.
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Opportunity Zones have quietly become America's most effective housing program
America is facing a major housing shortage. Experts say we're short about 7 million homes. While many government programs try to help by offering rent subsidies or putting limits on rent increases, the real problem is that we aren't building enough housing to meet demand. Opportunity Zones weren't originally designed to solve this specific problem. They were created in 2017 as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to encourage broad private investment in struggling communities. But over time, they've become one of the most effective ways to add new housing across the country. Here's how the program works: If investors put money from capital gains into projects in low-income areas and keep their investment for ten years, they receive a major tax advantage in return. Now, as Congress decides whether to renew or expand the program, we should look at the results. So far, the results are promising. Opportunity Zones have helped create new housing in places that don't usually get much attention or funding — and they've done it at a much lower cost to taxpayers. Today, 23 percent of all new housing under development is in an Opportunity Zone. These investments are happening in all kinds of places. In fast-growing cities like Austin, Texas, new housing is helping relieve pressure on sky-high rents. In Rust Belt communities like Erie, Pa., more than $100 million in Opportunity Zones investment has helped revive the downtown. In mountain ski towns in Colorado, where workers struggle to afford to live, Opportunity Zone projects have brought enough workforce residents into the area that formerly budget-strapped schools can now afford to keep open for five-day weeks. Of course, not everyone supports the program. In a recent op-ed for The New York Times, Kevin Corinth and Naomi Feldman argued that the money is going to neighborhoods that were already improving. But even they admit that Opportunity Zones have helped speed up housing construction — it just was, in their words, 'the wrong neighborhoods,' or places that 'didn't really need it.' And yes, many Opportunity Zone investments were made in low-income neighborhoods showing signs of growth or revitalization. But it is not a failure to catalyze investment in those places — rather, it is a sign the program is working. It is smart to invest in neighborhoods just as they start to improve, so they don't slip backward. Also, the criticism that this housing 'would have been built anyway' usually isn't true. A 2024 report by the Economic Innovation Group found that Opportunity Zone designations led to 313,000 new homes between 2019 and 2024 — almost half of all new homes built in those neighborhoods during that time. Opportunity Zones also save money. Unlike other government programs that require big subsidies and long approval processes, Opportunity Zones rely on private capital. That makes them a faster and cheaper tool to build housing. One study found that Opportunity Zone housing costs taxpayers about $26,000 per unit, compared to up to $1 million per unit government-subsidized affordable housing. A recent Washington Post article highlighted a government-funded housing development that cost $1.2 million per unit and didn't even include in-room washer-dryers. For every dollar the government gives up in tax revenue, nearly $9 of private money is invested in these communities. That's a much better return than other major housing programs, which usually achieve one private dollar for each government dollar at best. Finally, the idea that Opportunity Zone investors is a 'tax giveaway' is not financially true. Investors only get a tax advantage if their project succeeds. Unlike major government programs that spend significant taxpayer money regardless of success or failure, if an Opportunity Zone project fails, taxpayers don't lose money — the investors do. For example, a Ritz-Carlton hotel project in Portland, Ore., was criticized for being too upscale for the Opportunity Zone program's intent. But when the project ran into trouble, the investors lost everything. That's how the system is supposed to work. There's still room to make the program better. Stronger reporting rules and an updated map of eligible areas are two areas of bipartisan consensus, and Congress has been working for years on improvements. The House included an extension in its recent budget bill, and Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) is leading efforts in the Senate to make the program stronger and more transparent. An updated and improved Opportunity Zone program must pass as a part of the final reconciliation bill if we have a shot at addressing America's housing crisis. Leaders from government, business, philanthropy and universities all agree: Poor communities almost never turn around on their own without investment. Opportunity Zones aren't perfect, and they're not the only answer — but they're one of the few tools that are getting real results. As Congress works on the next budget, it should keep what's working — and make it even better. Ross Baird is the CEO of Blueprint Local, a real estate investment firm which has invested over $200 million in distressed communities in the U.S. through the Opportunity Zone program.
Washington Post
40 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Watchdog: Trump administration violated Impoundment Act a second time
The Government Accountability Office said Monday that the Trump administration had violated the Impoundment Act by withholding congressionally appropriated funds to the agency responsible for supporting libraries and museums across the country. The congressional watchdog found that funds were withheld by Institute of Museum and Library Services, with the GAO calling the act a violation of a law that blocks presidents from withholding funding Congress has approved. This is the second time the GAO has told Congress that the administration unlawfully withheld funds after the administration froze funds for electric vehicles, which the White House previously denied. When asked about the latest GAO finding, the White House Office of Management and Budget referred The Washington Post to its previous response to the GAO's finding about cuts to electric vehicle funding. 'All of OMB's actions have been consistent with the President's authorities under the Constitution and laws,' OMB general counsel Mark Paoletta wrote in a letter last month to GAO. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are feuding with the administration over whether the president can cancel spending without the approval of the legislative branch. The White House has maintained that spending cuts have been in 'full compliance' with federal budget law as it reshaped federal spending through the U.S. DOGE Service changes and executive actions — including halting investments in green energy, aid to foreign nations and grants to promote diversity, equity and inclusion. When asked about investigating the Trump administration's efforts to withhold funding, GAO leader Gene L. Dodaro told senators in April that his office had opened nearly 40 separate inquiries. Staff from the Institute of Museum and Library Services were placed on administrative leave in April after Trump issued an executive order March 14 to make cuts to the agency. The American Library Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees sued the administration in a case that is playing out in a U.S. District Court in D.C. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, an independent government agency, was created in 1996 by an act of Congress and submitted a budget request of $280 million for fiscal 2025. New York, one of the states that opposed the executive order, received $8 million through the institute last year to fund literacy programs for children and adults, improve internet access in libraries and train library employees and pay for the salaries of two-thirds of state library staff, according to the state. GAO investigators found that the agency's spending has been slashed by more than half in the first five months of this year, according to federal spending data. The finding came from publicly available data because the investigators said the agency has been unresponsive to questions since May. Democrats have sought to stop the cuts, arguing that grants awarded through agencies such as the Institute of Museum and Library Services have benefited communities directly that might not otherwise have the resources to support their own library and museum programs. Nearly a dozen attorneys general had asked a court to halt Trump's initial executive order on the dismantling of the institute and other independent agencies, arguing that the cuts are unlawful. Jeff Stein, Carolyn Y. Johnson and Niha Masih contributed to this report.
