Skip to main content
Axios

Axios

Newspaper | United States | Centre
www.axios.com/

Smart brevity news covering politics, business, technology, and more. Get essential news efficiently.

Engagement Insights

4.32 score
135
Discussions
7
Participants
15
Total Votes
529
Articles

Discussions from Axios

Technology

How should the government manage the use of AI technology in our daily lives?

Like its AI policy, the Trump administration's AI team is taking shape on the fly. Why it matters: Departures among key White House officials, combined with rapid advances in technology, are shaking up who's taking the lead on AI policy in the administration. The big picture: Silicon Valley figures David Sacks and Siriam Krishnan have served as key architects of the administration's AI agenda. But with Sacks stepping back from day-to-day involvement and Krishnan preparing to leave, influence is shifting inside the White House to a broader group of officials and aides. Here's who's running the show — for now. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Lutnick's signature was on the letter that sparked the latest confrontation between Anthropic and the administration, ultimately leading to the takedown of the company's Fable and Mythos models. Last week, Lutnick imposed export controls on Anthropic, effectively creating a licensing regime that could eventually impact other AI labs.He is now leading meetings on the sidelines of the G7 to discuss expanding access to advanced AI models and standing next to President Trump during his summit press conference. While Lutnick brokers abroad, Chris Fall at Commerce's Center for AI Standards and Innovation has been holding technical meetings in D.C. Zoom in: Lutnick was once said to be on the outs for going off message in TV interviews and not having a solid handle over his department's jurisdiction, sources familiar with the matter said. But last week's Anthropic fallout put him back in the game and it's now Lutnick's moment."He's fixing a problem. He's not being a problem. And he's doing a great job," said one senior administration official following the letter imposing export controls. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Bessent does not directly oversee AI testing. Yet he was the point of contact when Amazon raised concerns about Anthropic safety issues and was among the few cabinet members flanking the president during a G7 press co

Global
Join Discussion
Geopolitics

What should be done to reduce tensions between Israel, Hezbollah, and Iran to promote peace in the region?

Israel struck Beirut's southern suburbs Sunday in retaliation to a Hezbollah missile attack on northern Israel, Israeli officials said. Why it matters: Iran threatened last week to launch a missile attack against Israel if it attacks Beirut, while the U.S. has backed Israel's right to self-defence. Such a move could unravel U.S.–Iran negotiations and reignite the war. Israel notified the Trump administration before the strike, a U.S. official and two other sources with knowledge tell Axios."The United States supports Israel's right to self-defense and stands with the legitimate Government of Lebanon as it works to deliver a better future for its citizens," a U.S. official tells Axios. Hezbollah "must stop firing immediately and allow these agreements to take effect." Driving the news: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the strike answered Hezbollah missiles fired at northern Israel earlier Sunday, which the Israeli military says it intercepted. Israeli officials said the Beirut strike targeted a Hezbollah command center in Dahieh — a Shia district known as a Hezbollah stronghold. At least two people were killed and a dozen wounded, according to Lebanon's state news agency. Threat level: Senior Iranian lawmakers publicly threatened retaliation. Ebrahim Rezaei, a member of the Iranian parliament's national security committee, wrote on X that Iran "will give a decisive and painful response to the Zionist regime's attack on Dahieh."He told followers to "watch the skies" over Israel tonight.Iranian speaker of parliament and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf echoed that.Ghalibaf wrote on X: "They neither adhere to the ceasefire nor believe in dialogue, and with the naval blockade and violation of agreements on Lebanon, they showed that they only understand the language of force. The naval blockade against the Iranian nation and today's U.S. green light to the Zionist regime turn American and regime bases and assets in the region into legitimate targets

Israel
Join Discussion
Economy

How might changes in the labor market and oil prices affect our economy and daily lives?

The 1970s oil-shock playbook needs an update: The inflation costs remain, but the employment risks appear far smaller than they did 50 years ago. Why it matters: As the Iran war continues, there are early signs of renewed strength in the labor market. If energy disruptions pose less of a risk to jobs, the challenge for central banks shifts from managing stagflation risks to guarding against renewed price pressures. That's the takeaway from new Federal Reserve Bank of Boston research that finds an oil shock the size of what the Iran war has produced would push inflation materially higher while having essentially no effect on national employment. What they're saying: "The U.S. economy's vulnerability to oil shocks has not been eliminated, but rather reconfigured," economists wrote in the report. "Oil shocks may now pose less of a challenge for monetary policy, allowing policymakers to focus more on the greater risk to inflation." Driving the news: The researchers estimate that the U.S.-Iran conflict generated a 33% oil price shock — a magnitude that is historically significant, though not unprecedented. The U.S. economy is now structured differently than past energy crises, allowing it to absorb a shock of that magnitude with far less damage to national employment.But with a smaller hit to growth and employment, there is less downward pressure on prices to counteract rising energy costs.The Boston Fed estimates that if an oil disruption like today's hit during the mid-1970s, it would lift the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index by 2.2 percentage points and reduce national employment by 1.8 percentage point. What to watch: The oil shock is estimated to create relative winners and losers across the country, with oil-producing states faring better than oil-importing regions — differences that can leave an economic mark for as long as two years after the initial hit. The Boston Fed estimates that employment growth in Texas would be roughly 1.7 percentage point h

Iran
Join Discussion
Politics

How should political parties balance their interests with fair representation when drawing voting district maps?

Democrats are taking the fight over future House maps down ballot, with the super PAC Forward Majority planning to spend $30 million on two dozen state legislative races this year. Why it matters: They're betting that as few as eight statehouse races could help determine who controls redistricting for six U.S. House seats ahead of 2028. "We're in the Wild West now," said Leslie Martes, the chief executive officer of Forward Majority."There are 7,000 legislative districts across the country. Not all of them are up this year, but you've got to make sure that you're playing in the right places with the resources that you have," she said.The group is eyeing seats such as the Arizona State Senate's 17th District, currently held by a Republican. "Kamala Harris won that district, even though she didn't win Arizona," Martes said. Zoom in: In Texas this year, Republicans showed Democrats that redistricting didn't have to be a decennial affair, pushing through a mid-cycle redistricting that aims to net five new GOP seats. Democrats responded in kind in California, but a state Supreme Court decision blocked Virginia's aggressive redraw. The Supreme Court's Callais ruling weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, giving both parties more room to pursue aggressive redistricting strategies.10 states ended up with new maps for 2026. Other states flirted with redraws, but held back due to tight deadlines or skittish state legislatures. Zoom out: Republicans plan to pad their numbers in states like Georgia and Mississippi ahead of 2028. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is preparing to respond by squeezing more Democratic-friendly seats from blue states.But both parties need the same thing to become creative cartographers: control of the state House, state Senate and governor's mansion.That is especially important ahead of the 2030 census, when all 50 states will redraw their lines. The intrigue: Forward Majority predicts that eight races in five states — Arizona, Michigan, M

United States
Join Discussion
Technology

What are the potential benefits and risks of the government investing in AI companies like OpenAI?

President Trump surprised tech CEOs by suddenly pushing the idea of the U.S. taking a small ownership stake in AI giants, so the American people share in the upside of what will be trillion-dollar companies. "There's something very interesting about it, where it almost becomes a partnership with the American public," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One yesterday. "It's like you make them [partners] in this revolution. It would be a beautiful thing. It would make 'em rich." Why it matters: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has pushed this idea with the Trump administration over the past year. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) reignited the conversation this week when he proposed giving the public a "direct ownership stake" in top AI companies via a one-time 50% tax, paid in stock. Of course, industry advocates of the idea would favor giving up much less for an AI public wealth fund — 1-5% stakes have been kicked around. Between the lines: AI is broadly unpopular in the U.S. Some industry leaders, and now clearly Trump, think the technology's image would improve if all Americans participated in this mind-boggling wealth creation. Ahead of the expected stock offerings by Anthropic, SpaceX and OpenAI, Trump said there's "so much money, and it's so big, that there are concepts where pieces could be given to the American public, where the American public essentially becomes a partner . with the companies." "We'll look into that," Trump said. "We're talking about it, where the American people can benefit from the success of AI. And by doing that, they're gonna like it better . We're leading China. We're leading everybody in the world with AI, and we want to keep it that way." The backstory: Altman has pushed the concept in private conversations with administration officials, then in a proposal for an AI New Deal, then on Capitol Hill this week when he visited Sanders and leaders of both parties. A "Public Wealth Fund" was one of the provocative ideas in OpenAI's "Industrial Policy for

United States
Join Discussion
Politics

How should funding for ICE be decided when there are different views on related programs?

$72 billion in funding for ICE and Border Patrol is now in limbo after GOP senators revolted against President Trump's $1.776B "anti-weaponization fund" on Thursday. Why it matters: The fund was dropped like "a bomb in the middle of a pretty well planned out reconciliation bill," Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) told reporters. Zoom in: The package for ICE and Border Patrol funding was on track to pass by the weekend. But senators left town without voting on Thursday after a heated two-hour meeting with acting Attorney General Todd Blanche."[T]hey need to help with this issue, because we have a lot of members who are concerned," Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told Punchbowl News about the White House and the fund. "Somebody described it as a galactic blunder, and I think that's probably true," Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) told CNN. Between the lines: The Senate spent the first few days of the week trying to decide what to do about the $1 billion for security upgrades related to the White House ballroom. As of Wednesday that funding had been stripped, Axios reported. But the Senate has yet to release text of the budget bill ahead of a vote-a-rama. The bottom line: I'm not sure the fund should exist," said Sen. Bill Cassidy, who lost his Louisiana GOP primary on Saturday as part of Trump's revenge tour

United States
Join Discussion
Politics

How could the outcomes of California's congressional primaries affect the future of the Democratic Party?

House Democrats are looking to Tuesday's primaries in California as a major test of the anti-incumbency sentiment among their voters. Why it matters: This will be the first time in the 2026 election when multiple House Democrats in their 70s and 80s face off against primary insurgents who have hammered them for their lengthy tenures. California Democratic Reps. Mike Thompson, Doris Matsui and Brad Sherman — all 70 or older — are among those facing tough primary fights with younger Democratic challengers.Their Democratic colleagues are watching "all of them closely," one senior House Democrat said, as well as the LA mayor's race and the state's gubernatorial election."Just to see the anti-incumbent sentiment," another senior House Democrat told Axios. State of play: June 2 is California's jungle primary, in which all candidates for a given office run in one contest and the top two vote-getters — regardless of party — advance to a runoff in November. Often, that dynamic matches up the top-performing Democrat and Republican. However, in several deeply blue House districts, the incumbent is more likely to face another Democrat in the fall.This year, an unusually large number of incumbents are facing well-funded challengers who are going after their lengthy tenures and arguing that it is time for a new generation of Democratic leaders. These are the House races that Democrats have their eyes on: California's 4th District: Thompson, a 75-year-old member of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition first elected in 1998, is trying to fend off 35-year-old venture capitalist Eric Jones. Both Democrats have raised huge sums, with Thompson bringing in just under $3 million as of March 31 and Jones raising over $3.2 million over the same period, including a $364,000 personal loan.Jones has tried to harness anti-incumbency sentiment, with ads declaring that "too many Democrats have been in Washington so long, they're not up to the fight," and hitting Thompson as "corrupt" and "ineffective

United States
Join Discussion
Economy

How should we ensure the Federal Reserve remains independent and credible in its decisions?

In his first public remarks since the conclusion of his time as Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell has issued a blunt warning that the central bank is undergoing a "stress test" and its credibility is on the line. The big picture: While Powell's remarks Sunday evening, in accepting the John F. Kennedy "Profiles in Courage" award, do not mention the Trump administration's attempts to undermine Fed independence specifically, the meaning of his words is plain. Those include a criminal investigation of the Fed's over-budget building renovation and the attempted firing of governor Lisa Cook.Powell framed attempts to weaken the Fed's independence from politics as endangering an institution that is crucial in sustaining American greatness. State of play: Powell's term as Fed chair ended May 15, but he is remaining in place indefinitely as one of seven Fed governors pending resolution of the president's threats to Fed independence, denying President Trump a vacancy on the powerful board. He has said he will keep a low profile in his new role as an ex-chairman serving the Fed board, a situation not seen in 75 years. What they're saying: "Like many other institutions, the Fed has been undergoing a stress test," Powell said, according to a prepared text to be delivered at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum in Boston. "Congress wisely chose to insulate monetary policy decisions from political pressure," Powell said. "These protections have served the public well, and administrations from both parties have respected them.""If any administration finds a way to remove Fed officials over policy differences, then future administrations will do so as well. The public would lose faith that the central bank will make decisions based only on what's best for all Americans.""The Fed's credibility would be lost. That credibility enables the Fed to support a strong and stable economy for the benefit of American families and businesses. Our credibility has been built and s

United States
Join Discussion
Technology

What are the benefits and risks of creating AI platforms that operate without human involvement?

A new social media platform called Moltbook, designed for AI agents only, is raising concerns online, including from tech billionaire Elon Musk. Moltbook, a project from Peter Steinberger, allows for AI agents to interact with each other without any human prompting. The machines can create posts, comment, and interact with one another, while humans can only

Global
Join Discussion