They didn’t hold back.

California voters had their first chance to be heard on data centers. They didn’t hold back.

The Monterey Park ballot measure is part of a wave of opposition rising across the country.

By Noah Baustin

California’s first-ever anti-data center ballot measure is shaping up to be an absolute shellacking for the tech industry — part of a wave of opposition rising across the country, as communities and lawmakers grapple with the frenzied push to build AI infrastructure.

Monterey Park, a city of 60,000 people about 10 miles east of downtown Los Angeles, placed a measure on Tuesday’s ballot asking voters if they wanted to prohibit data centers in their city. The response, so far, has been an unequivocal “yes,” with 86 percent of votes counted as of Wednesday afternoon in favor of the proposal.

Local officials and environmental organizers said they hope the drubbing will spur other cities to enact similar bans.

“A lot of the other cities that are facing data center proposals are going to follow suit,” Elizabeth Yang, the city’s mayor, said on Tuesday. “There’s [a] bad reputation across the board, across the country, from other data centers that have been built in neighborhoods.”

California is one of many states experiencing an explosion of developer interest in constructing new data centers, which house the physical infrastructure that make up the backbone of the internet.

Tech companies racing to develop artificial intelligence models need the computing power stored in these facilities. But the seemingly endless rows of servers and other equipment that fill their floors use immense amounts of electricity and water, which has made them controversial, and sparked backlash and protests.

The Monterey Park vote represents an extension of that resistance in California, and serves as a successful test of a new model for anti-data center activists.

The text of the city’s measure stated that its aim was to “protect air quality, drinking water resources and public health” and prevent increases to residents’ electricity and water rates, and it came about in response to community uproar over a now-abandoned proposal to build a data center in the city.

Monterey Park is believed to be only the second city in the nation to pass an anti-data center referendum, following an April vote in a small Milwaukee suburb (the Data Center Coalition, an industry association, is not aware of any other measures, it told POLITICO). The upswell in opposition has been all the more notable coming in Silicon Valley’s own state, which is an important market for data centers.

“The data center industry will continue to work with California residents, communities, and policymakers to support the responsible development of this critical infrastructure and ensure California remains competitive in the modern economy,” Khara Boender, director of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, said in a statement ahead of the vote.

The result in Monterey Park was a rare piece of bright news for environmental advocates in the state, who suffered a series of setbacks during Tuesday’s primary.

Green groups’ gubernatorial favorite, billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer, trailed both establishment Democratic pick Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton in initial results. And a slew of progressive down ballot candidates appeared poised to lose to opponents supported by the fossil fuel industry.

Other organizers across the nation have signaled an eagerness to embrace plans similar to the one in Monterey Park, which aim to counter the breakneck race to build infrastructure to support the artificial intelligence boom. That includes a campaign to put a ban on the ballot statewide in Ohio, and local efforts in Georgia, Maryland and Utah.

“What we’re seeing in Monterey Park can be an early step in this being replicated in other parts of the country,” Andrea Vega, a Southern California organizer with environmental group Food & Water Watch, said in an interview.

But Boender warned that there’s a downside to barring data centers from a community.

The Monterey Park ballot measure would “send a signal that the area is closed for business, both for data centers and for other significant economic development projects,” depriving the region of “jobs and investment,” Boender said ahead of the vote.

But voters split with tech interests during Tuesday’s primary, handing the industry a series of electoral losses.

Meanwhile, other states are grappling with how to respond to the massive AI infrastructure buildout in their own rural communities and cities. On Tuesday, the New York Legislature appeared poised to move forward with a one-year moratorium on new large-scale data centers.

Local activists began pushing for a data center ban in Monterey Park after plans by Australian developer DigiCo Infrastructure REIT surfaced to build one in the city. Opponents voiced concerns about how much electricity and water data centers require, and the potential for diesel backup generators to cause air pollution.

“We don’t want any of them to be built in our area,” Amy J. Wong, a volunteer organizer with the group San Gabriel Valley Progressive Action, said in an interview.

The organizers pressured the city council to implement a data center moratorium and place the referendum on Tuesday’s ballot. Following the city council action, the developer, which did not respond to a request for comment, withdrew its proposal.

Data center opponents in Los Angeles County have scored a series of wins in other small cities around Monterey Park, with city councils enacting their own data center moratoriums in recent months. The nearby City of Industry could be next, according to Wong.

That coming fight is the reason why the Monterey Park vote was significant, she said. “It can send a strong message to neighboring cities and other cities in California, and also across the nation.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Monterey Park vote.

Got spanked

Tech ‘got spanked’ in this week’s primaries. It could be a preview of more to come.

Tech is poised to suffer more electoral defeats this summer in New York, Florida and elsewhere, where industry detractors are frontrunners in their upcoming primaries.

By Christine Mui, Dustin Gardiner, Madison Fernandez and Kimberly Leonard

Silicon Valley’s political brand can’t stop taking a beating.

This week, Californians dealt a series of blows to candidates with backing from the tech industry or roots in it — and similar anti-tech headwinds are building up ahead of contests across the country.

Less than half an hour after polls closed in the Golden State, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan conceded the governor’s race, becoming the most prominent casualty for tech on primary night. The former startup executive rallied Silicon Valley donors to pour tens of millions of dollars into his failed bid, only to land in the low single digits.

Tech challengers are also stumbling in congressional races in the tech-heavy Bay Area. Entrepreneur Ethan Agarwal conceded early Wednesday after coming nowhere close to advancing against Silicon Valley Rep. Ro Khanna, a progressive who’s championed a proposed tax on California billionaires. And wealthy venture capitalist Eric Jones could get boxed out of his challenge to Democratic Rep. Mike Thompson in his Napa County district, as Jones is pulling in at a close third.

“This is a preview of what’s coming in 2026, and it’s a preview of what’s coming in 2028,” Rob Flaherty, a Democratic strategist who was deputy campaign manager for Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, told POLITICO. “Association with tech money is increasingly going to become a problem.”

The anti-tech mood is rising across the U.S., with the California results just the latest demonstration of populist opposition. Voters are angry about water and energy-hungry data centers in their communities, and parents are concerned that chatbots are harming their children. Tech is poised to suffer more electoral defeats this summer in New York, Florida and elsewhere, where detractors challenging the industry are frontrunners in their upcoming primaries.

“People are looking for these avenues to push back on tech,” said Irene Kao, director of Courage California, a progressive advocacy group. “Voters at the end of the day really want to see candidates who reflect who they are. They want candidates who feel less out of touch.”

The losses Tuesday, especially among candidates with tech backgrounds, reflect a level of political naiveté among industry megadonors who’ve only recently sought to emerge as kingmakers in state politics or congressional races, according to a prominent Silicon Valley Democratic fundraiser who was granted anonymity to speak frankly.

“The tech guys that think they know politics, those are the ones that got spanked,” the fundraiser said. “These guys are wannabes, the ones that don’t appreciate that political science is actually a science.”

But it wasn’t just in California. In Iowa, Republican businessman Zach Lahn pulled off a rare victory against a candidate endorsed by President Donald Trump after calling for a data center moratorium and vowing to tax companies five times more to build them. Contenders elsewhere are similarly taking aim at tech billionaires and the artificial intelligence industry, finding political upside in running against Silicon Valley.

New Yorkers will go to the polls June 23 to decide who will replace Manhattan Rep. Jerry Nadler in a race where dueling AI interests have elevated Assemblymember Alex Bores into a symbol of the fight over how AI should be regulated.

Bores, an alum-turned-critic of data analytics company Palantir, was the first target of a super PAC in the Leading the Future super PAC network, funded by donors like OpenAI President Greg Brockman and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. He drew the ire of the PAC for his sponsorship of New York’s RAISE Act, one of the country’s landmark AI safety regulations.

But Bores’ allies are betting that the $4 million spent against him from LTF’s Think Big super PAC will backfire. Much of his campaign has centered around AI regulation efforts, leading to a wide range of support — from progressives to PACs with links to Anthropic, which has taken a friendlier stance to AI guardrails. Pro-Bores PACs, some of which are backed by rival industry forces, have for weeks outspent Think Big in the race, and LTF has accused Bores of being a hypocrite over that support.

Bores’ campaign is casting Think Big as the boogeyman in the final weeks.

Bores has treated the super PAC like a candidate would target a fellow opponent. He recently challenged a representative from Think Big to a debate, and made the organization the main subject of an ad released this week. “I am the AI super PAC ... designed to destroy Alex Bores, because Bores is a threat to our power,” a voice posing as the super PAC says in the ad. “Alex Bores must be taught no one can stop us.”

In Florida, Rep. Byron Donalds, the Republican frontrunner to be the next governor of Florida, has made AI the top issue on which he’s willing to part ways with Trump. While Trump has pushed for a national framework governing AI, Donalds said this week for the first time that he disagreed with Trump on AI policy, arguing states should be allowed to set regulations and pledging to tackle the issue during his first year as governor.

It was a stunning turnaround for Donalds. Not only has he received millions of dollars in backing from the AI industry, he’s been endorsed by Trump in his August primary.

The remarks — and the willingness of GOP politicians in Florida to buck Trump on a major issue — underscore bubbling tensions in the electorate. AI has become a major target in red-state Florida, where GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis frequently attacks the technology as dangerous for minors.

Florida’s Attorney General James Uthmeier piled on in recent days, launching a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman that alleges ChatGPT is harmful and doesn’t adequately warn the public of its risks.

“There has to be oversight,” Uthmeier said Tuesday during an unrelated press conference in Miami, when asked about his approach to AI. “There has to be regulation. These are some of the smartest people in the world. ChatGPT knows how to analyze and manage data, I think better than most. They can certainly step in and protect our kids.”

DeSantis has also raised concerns about how data centers, the sprawling facilities that power AI computation, might increase utility bills and sounded the alarm about AI rendering some jobs obsolete.

Those alarms are ringing out across the U.S. In the Los Angeles County city of Monterey Park, residents are set to overwhelmingly approve California’s first-ever measure to ban data centers.

Tech money is flowing to both sides of many of these fights at the ballot box. Leading the Future pledged to spend around $5 million helping Donalds’ candidacy. While the network is spending against Bores, its rival political group Public First has received $20 million from Anthropic and is supporting the assemblymember, along with another super PAC with $3.5 million from crypto titan and San Francisco billionaire Chris Larsen.

But the biggest setbacks have come in races where candidates were defined by their ties to the tech industry.

In San Francisco’s race for Nancy Pelosi’s seat, centimillionaire and former tech engineer Saikat Chakrabarti put $10 million of his own money into a campaign that took repeated shots at tech billionaires for spending to oppose him. But he was squeezed out by a Pelosi-endorsed rival who accused him of using his tech riches to buy the election.

“You’re seeing candidates who are not kind of hand-picked by tech do a little bit better,” said Cooper Teboe, a Silicon Valley donor adviser who is working with Khanna and Jones. “The issue for both Ethan and Mahan is that they were viewed as the guys — the guys in the pocket of the tech billionaires.”

Leading the Future found success backing incumbents, rather than political newcomers from the industry. The group emerged from Tuesday’s congressional primaries with a perfect 6-0 record, with victories including Democratic Reps. Rob Menendez (N.J.) and Jimmy Panetta (Calif.) and Republican Jay Obernolte (Calif.).

Its remaining wins came in open-seat races, where Republican primary winners Aaron Flint and Kurt Alme in Montana as well as Chris McGowan in Iowa, whose race was uncontested, all carried Trump’s endorsement.

In California, new super PACs funded by Larsen and Big Tech companies are proving more effective during their debut in state legislative contests. They spent millions to take out a handful of progressive, labor-backed Democratic candidates and boost their more moderate opponents.

But where the PACs have been successful, it has hardly come from explicitly embracing their corporate donors. Ads from groups like California Leads, which has $10 million from Google and Meta, do not mention tech, instead focusing on bread-and-butter issues or featuring testimonials from local political leaders.

While bolstered by industry dollars, the difference is “you’re seeing people who have a sense of political acumen and political understanding of what the average person believes in and exists outside of the bubble of just very wealthy people,” said Teboe.

Silicon Valley donors are showing no signs of letting up, with those who backed losing candidates in California saying their foray into state politics is just beginning. Venture capitalist Garry Tan, an ardent supporter of Mahan and Agarwal, said he was undeterred by headwinds this cycle.

“For me, it doesn’t matter if we have to be like water,” he told POLITICO. “Water is just constant and unending, it will wear down rock. It might take decades — we need to measure our plans in centuries here.”

Planetary nebula Tc 1

What is happening inside this unusual nebula? Planetary nebula Tc 1, captured here in exquisite detail by the James Webb Space Telescope, is the celestial site where buckyballs were first identified in 2010. Buckminsterfullerene — as buckyballs are officially called — is a molecule with 60 carbon atoms (C60) arranged in the shape of a soccer ball. The molecule is named for architect Buckminster Fuller because of its resemblance to the geodesic dome he helped popularize. Webb’s new data reveal where the C60 molecules live in this nebula, and the geometry is striking: they populate a thin spherical shell around the central star, visible here as the bright edge of the nebula’s glowing orange central region. Look closely near the nebula’s heart and a more perplexing feature emerges: a delicate structure shaped uncannily like an upside-down question mark, fitting punctuation for the many questions this nebula still poses.

$9 billion liability

The $9 billion liability across the street from the Capitol

The Rayburn House Office Building is 60 years old and desperately in need of renovation. Congress isn’t exactly jumping into action.

By Katherine Tully-McManus

There’s a 2.4-million-square-foot ticking time bomb on Capitol Hill, and lawmakers are dithering over how to deal with it as anxieties rise over the massive costs and disruptions involved.

The Rayburn House Office Building has never undergone a full renovation since it opened in 1965, and as plans for a massive revamp of Congress’s largest office complex keep getting pushed off, key systems are routinely failing and expensive piecemeal repairs are weighing on the legislative branch budget.

Architect of the Capitol Thomas Austin has been warning lawmakers about the risk of “catastrophic system failures” in the hulking Rayburn building — home to nearly 200 member offices, committee hearing rooms, secure information facilities, a police firing range and some 1,600 parking spaces.

“As these facilities age and kind of reach this tipping point, we start having an increasing number of failures as all these systems age out and we start having series of failures on top of each other,” he told the House Administration Committee at a hearing Wednesday.

Austin’s agency is estimating a total overhaul of the building could approach $9 billion and require more than a decade of work — the largest project ever undertaken by the Architect of the Capitol and nearly an order of magnitude bigger than any previous renovation project on the Hill.

House Administration Chair Bryan Steil (R-Wis.) called the cost estimate “eye-popping” as Austin laid out the case for the project. The price tag far outstrips even the cost of the newest NFL stadiums.

The topline number is only one reason why lawmakers involved at this early stage are growing nervous. The renovation would require much of the building to be vacated, and officials insist it can’t be done wing by wing. That’s how the Cannon House Office Building down the block was recently renovated in a nearly $1 billion project that took nearly a decade and upended congressional operations.

Among other things, redoing Rayburn means finding — or building — space for scores of member offices and committees to set up shop. The working timelines for the project are so long — approaching 20 years — that many lawmakers simply assume they won’t be around to enjoy the finished project, or even a groundbreaking.

House appropriators so far are wary of providing the cash needed even for the early planning stages.

Austin has only been in the job for a year, but his agency has a long track record of construction projects going over budget. The Cannon renovation went nearly $200 million over its estimated cost, and the post-9/11 construction of the Capitol Visitors’ Center ultimately cost double what was planned.

“We’re not going to go blow $8 or $10 billion of taxpayer money without our own proper understanding of the evidence and making our own conclusion,” Rep. Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), a member of the appropriations subcommittee which oversees funding for the legislative branch, said in a Wednesday interview. ”We won’t be a rubber stamp for the AOC.”

The staggering price tag is driven by a host of factors, including that Rayburn is nearly three times the size of Cannon and there is a need for vast remediation of toxic materials. Austin told lawmakers Wednesday that the postwar era of Rayburn’s initial construction “was kind of that sweet spot where we’re using both asbestos and lead in our buildings.”

But the costs of waiting are also substantial. In the past year 16 major water leaks impacted member offices, committee offices, storage areas and hallways — each costing millions of dollars to remedy. In some cases, the leaks displaced lawmakers and staff for months.

“We all know that the longer you put off those repairs that you need to deal with at your home or your business or anywhere, the more expensive they get and then more profound those problems become,” New York Rep. Joe Morelle, the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, said Wednesday. “Unless Congress acts, we will continue pouring millions of taxpayer dollars into temporary fixes instead of addressing the underlying problem.”

Austin told the panel he was sensitive to the cost concerns but said the five-phase approach to the Cannon renovation was “inefficient and disruptive” and should not be replicated with Rayburn. He also said it should be harder to change renovation plans once the project gets underway, something that plagued the Cannon project.

“We have to use every little bit of experience from Cannon to make sure that the same — I won’t say disaster, but the same cost overruns — don’t occur with Rayburn,” Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.) warned Austin at Wednesday’s hearing.

The Architect of the Capitol’s proposal for displaced Rayburn occupants involves building a new permanent structure that could be used for “swing space” then for other purposes once the renovation is complete.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee provided some funding for planning of the Rayburn renewal project but not for design of “swing space” that will be critical for the project to move forward.

“I think there’s a lot of questions about that, and members don’t feel like they signed off,” House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said in an interview. “I expect to not be in Congress by the time this happens so I’m not terribly worried about it.”

As for where that new building may sit, Austin said he is waiting for its eventual users to weigh in.

“We’ll put it where Congress tells us to put it,” he told the panel Wednesday. “We’re still waiting for Congress’s decision and consensus guidance on that.”

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) made clear Austin shouldn’t hold his breath, saying it “may happen in the next month, maybe the next 250 years, before we get to it.”

Price spikes within weeks

Oil industry warns Trump administration of price spikes within weeks

Industry executives said the loss of oil through the Strait of Hormuz is draining petroleum inventories to dangerously low levels.

By Ben Lefebvre and James Bikales

The oil industry is warning the Trump administration that a Hormuz-sized hole in the world’s petroleum market is steadily draining inventories to levels that are likely to send global energy prices surging in the next several weeks, according to four executives.

Industry executives have flagged the issue to senior White House officials and Cabinet members in recent weeks as part of the Trump administration’s ongoing dialogue with the U.S. energy industry, the people said. The warnings came as recently as late last month as data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and other sources began showing that fuel makers were increasingly relying on oil and fuel from their storage tanks to replace products no longer arriving from the Middle East.

“We’re at dangerously low levels already,” said one industry executive who was granted anonymity to discuss private conversations with the administration. “We have shared those concerns at the highest levels of government about what’s coming in mid-to-late June. … I hope they are paying attention to inventories right now. You’re hitting tank bottom.”

Iran has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz since the U.S. and Israel launched military strikes three months ago, kicking off what has become the biggest disruption in crude oil flows ever. Countries are drawing down supplies in their oil and fuel storage tanks to make up for the shortage of supply coming from the Middle East, but inventories are now running dangerously low and some companies and market analysts are sounding the alarm that a price spike could come later this month.

Some of the conversations have been general warnings while others have focused on tight inventories of specific fuel types in particular locations, such as jet fuel on the West Coast, a second person involved in the conversations said.

A White House official denied that any senior members of staff have been warned privately by the industry about inventories. “Politico’s anonymous sources are wrong,” the official said.

An Energy Department official said that while the agency remains in regular dialogue with energy industry leaders, there have been “no such discussions” about inventories.

Executives from Exxon Mobil, Chevron and other oil companies are also raising the alarm publicly, warning last week that fuel prices are poised to jump if inventory levels continue their rapid decline. The U.S. average gasoline price was $4.26 a gallon Wednesday, according to AAA, $1.28 a gallon higher than before the war started, off the levels near $4.50 reached a few weeks ago.

Neil Chapman, Exxon’s senior vice president, told an investor conference last week that dated Brent — the benchmark for physical crude oil prices — could hit $150 or $160 a barrel soon in that scenario.

“You can debate whether that’s going to hit those really low levels in two weeks or three weeks. Once you get to that point, then you’ll see prices shoot up,” Chapman said.

“The administration has already been told that,” a second oil company executive told POLITICO of Chapman’s statement. The recent public pronouncements from industry executives are “a message for the consumer,” this person continued. “Don’t think that an open strait is going to mean your July 4 gasoline bill isn’t going to be higher than what it is today. It’s going to be.”

The White House is closely watching the oil and fuel supply levels, said another person who is in touch with the administration on energy policy and who was granted anonymity to describe private conversations.

U.S. crude stocks held by companies fell by 8 million barrels last week, the eighth straight weekly decrease, and are now 3 percent below the five-year average, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported Wednesday. The government also released 8 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve last week, bringing it near the low hit in July 2023 after the Biden administration tapped the supply in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

The Trump administration has pointed to record-high U.S. oil production — along with new supplies unlocked in Venezuela and through the Jones Act waiver that allows foreign-flagged ships to make deliveries between U.S. ports — as protecting American motorists from spiking prices. It has promised that the eventual opening of the Strait of Hormuz would bring costs back to levels seen in February — or lower.

“President Trump and his energy team anticipated short-term market disruptions, communicated them openly to the American people, and implemented an aggressive plan to mitigate any impacts,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement. “President Trump will never allow Iran to possess a nuclear weapon, and he will continue to advance America’s core national security interests.”

The United States “is in an excellent position. We’re in a position of strength” when it comes to Iran, White House National Energy Dominance Council Executive Director Jarrod Agen said during a webinar with consulting firm Widehall on Wednesday. “We do not have a supply problem, obviously.”

Rich Goldberg, former senior counselor for the National Energy Dominance Council, said the White House is “aware that there is a discussion” about the inventories issue and should be examining closely whether global stocks can outlast Iran’s ability to cope with the ongoing U.S. blockade on its oil exports.

“The whole strategy rides on whose timeline is longer, who has a longer runway, and so therefore, if I were in the White House, I’d be studying this very closely,” said Goldberg, who is now a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Goldberg added that some industry officials disagree that a price shock is imminent and expect markets will be able to adapt through a combination of alternative supplies and reduced demand. “I don’t personally know where the White House comes out on it,” he said.

Many market analysts have expressed surprise that oil prices have not reached even higher levels because of the three-month shipping disruption. Early in the conflict, some forecasters predicted prices would go as high as $200 a barrel given that 20 percent of global oil flows through Hormuz. Iran’s attacks on ships in Hormuz has slowed that flow to a trickle, although some crude is being diverted out of the region using pipelines.

“What’s been remarkable is that prices have not moved higher so far, and a big reason for that is the inventory cushion around the world,” said Jim Burkhard, vice president and global head of crude oil research at S&P Global Energy. “But that can’t go on forever.”

The stoppage has caused other impacts in the U.S. markets: Not only have global crude prices gone up as supply from the Middle East dries up, but countries are also increasingly buying American oil and fuel to make up for the loss.

Gasoline stocks are 5 percent lower than the five-year average, and diesel and jet fuel are 3 percent under that mark, according to EIA data. Overall, total U.S. commercial petroleum inventories — including crude oil and finished fuel — are down 52 million barrels from when the war began.

The U.S. SPR release is part of a 400-million barrel effort by members of the International Energy Agency to prevent prices from skyrocketing.

Even with those barrels coming into the market, global petroleum inventories have been falling by roughly 5.8 million barrels a day since the war began, according to Burkhard.

Worldwide stocks now hold around 7.5 billion barrels — a decline of about 500 million barrels from the start of the war. But most of that oil already has buyers and is not being held in reserve, Burkhard said, and inventories in some regions may be hitting or soon to hit operational minimums, he said.

“I’ve never seen inventory numbers fall so much so quickly,” he said. “It is stunning.”

The oil markets have been sensitive to comments from President Donald Trump and retreated last week after he said that a peace deal with Tehran was near that would return shipping traffic to prewar levels. But his remarks Wednesday that the U.S. blockade of the Hormuz could last until Labor Day have raised questions about whether oil tanker traffic out of the Middle East will approach anything near normal levels this summer.

Drained storage tanks are an “iceberg under the water,” Helima Croft, global head of commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets, said during a Council on Foreign Relations event Wednesday.

“You may not see immediately on the horizon the actual economic challenges that will be coming, because you look at the flat price and you say, ‘OK, we can muddle through this and Iran will come to terms eventually,’” Croft said. “But if we get in a situation where we have this strait effectively closed, or the strait status quo, and we’re sitting in September or October, then you’re going to be looking at industrial shortages.”

Going "very well"

Trump suggests ceasefire still in place and negotiations going "very well"

By Betsy Klein

President Donald Trump suggested that a ceasefire between the US and Iran remains in place despite recent strikes in the region, while adding that negotiations have gone “very well.”

“A ceasefire there is much different than a ceasefire in other parts of the world,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Wednesday when asked if the fragile truce was holding.

He painted a rosy picture of negotiations to end the war and suggested that a potential advancement could happen as soon as this weekend.

Going very well....

“The negotiation itself has gone very well — actually, very well — even if it happens, and it might not happen, but if it happens, it could happen like over the weekend,” he said.

Trump said there was “a reason” behind the US strikes and suggested Iran was “reciprocating” with its attacks.

CNN has reported that Iran said it targeted US bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, as well as a vessel near the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s foreign minister said they were “self-defense strikes” after the US military fired a missile to disable a Botswana-flagged oil tanker heading toward an Iranian port.

We all know that this war is not over

Rubio doubles down on claim Iran war is “over,” says US achieved “victory”

By Jennifer Hansler

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio doubled down Wednesday on his claim that the war with Iran is “over” and said the United States has achieved “victory.”

In a heated exchange with Democratic Rep. Sara Jacobs, Rubio was pressed on his assessment that Operation Epic Fury has ended.

“If the war is over, who won?” the California Democrat asked.

Rubio, who would not describe the US military assault as a “war,” said it was a “fact” that the military operation is over.

“We’re no longer conducting sustained strikes inside of Iran to degrade their military, because Epic Fury is over,” he said. “The second point, as on the question of who won, I can tell you this: We define victory. We define victory as destroying their defense industrial base, significantly reducing the number of missile launchers that they possess, significantly reducing their stockpile of drones, and we achieved all those, in addition to destroying what they had left of an air force and wiping out their entire conventional navy.”

“Those are all gone,” he claimed. “So, I consider that victory, and we did, too. And that was the purpose of Epic Fury.”

Rubio was questioned on reported intelligence assessments that Iran is more rapidly reconstituting its military-industrial base than expected, as well as the loss of US service members and the survival of the Iranian regime.

“Does this actually look like winning or losing to you?” Jacobs asked.

Rubio claimed he was not aware of the reported intelligence assessments and argued that “people manipulate intelligence and analysis for purposes of furthering a narrative.” He said the regime was “deeply fractured” and that the Iranian economy is faltering.

“The American people are not stupid, Mr. Secretary. We all know that this war is not over,” Jacobs countered.

This is what a shitshow looks like......

The status of US-Iran talks remains unclear as fresh strikes test ceasefire

By Maureen Chowdhury

Following fresh strikes across the Middle East, there’s still no clarity on whether indirect negotiations between the United States and Iran are active or making progress. President Donald Trump has said talks are ongoing.

In an interview with the New York Post, Trump said Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei was involved in the negotiations to end the war and that he hoped to meet him. Iranian media by contrast have played down suggestions that any progress is being made.

Meanwhile, Iran’s military has kept up a belligerent tone. Reporting on attacks against Kuwait and Bahrain early Wednesday, it said that “any aggression would be met with a different and heavier response, and that is exactly how we acted. These responses should serve as a lesson.”

If you’re just joining us now, here’s the latest from across the Middle East:

• Iran said it targeted US bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, as well as a vessel near the Strait of Hormuz in its latest wave of strikes. Kuwait’s Health Ministry said 63 people were injured and one killed in a strike that damaged the country’s international airport.
• Kuwait ordered the expulsion of two members of the Iranian diplomatic mission in response to the strikes, according to Kuwait’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
• Several countries in the Middle East have condemned Iran’s overnight attacks on Bahrain and Kuwait, including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen and Lebanon.
• Meanwhile, Trump said the US does not “need” its forces to operate on the ground in Iran because of the success of its months-long bombing campaigns in the country.
• The US president also said he and Iran’s supreme leader “seem to be getting along quite well” — even though the ayatollah has not been seen in public since the start of the US war in Iran.
• Trump said he was “perturbed” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over Israel’s plans for military operations in Lebanon.
• At this moment, US-mediated talks between Israel and Lebanon are underway at the US State Department for the second day, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said. Rubio is testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Oil inventories drop...

US oil inventories drop for sixth week in a row

By Matt Egan

The oil market’s shock absorbers continue to shrink as the Strait of Hormuz remains paralyzed.

Crude oil stockpiles in commercial storage declined by an additional 8 million barrels last week, marking the sixth straight weekly drop, according to federal data released Wednesday.

Oil executives, analysts and traders have warned that these stockpiles are falling at an alarming pace to cushion the blow from the war with Iran.

According to the Energy Information Administration, total crude oil inventories, including emergency storage at the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), are now at their lowest level since February 2024. Demand tends to be much lower during the winter as people drive less.

Stockpiles at Cushing, Oklahoma, fell again last week, edging closer to what analysts warn are operationally low levels. The market pays particular attention to this metric because Cushing is where West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil futures are priced.

The good news is that due to a surge of imports along the East Coast, gasoline stockpiles increased for the first time in 16 weeks. Stockpiles of diesel and other distillates rebounded, too.

However, Matt Smith, director of commodity research at Kpler, blamed the higher stockpiles on a demand “hangover” following the Memorial Day weekend period.

Tom Kloza, an energy adviser to Gulf Oil, told CNN the recent drop in gasoline prices is likely over because demand is expected to rebound and supplies are shrinking.

Kloza expects that in the coming days the amount of oil in the SPR will decline below the Biden-era lows and that gas prices could hit fresh four-year highs later this summer.

“I still think there’s great cause for concern,” he said.

Winning!!!!!!!!

Video shows extensive damage at Kuwait's international airport

By CNN staff

Kuwait’s Interior Ministry published a video showing First Deputy Prime Minister and Interior Minister Sheikh Fahd Yusuf Saud al-Sabah assessing the damage at Kuwait International Airport following Iranian strikes early Wednesday.

The video shows the extensive damage to the airport’s passenger building at Terminal 1, as well as Saud al-Sabah speaking to first responders at the scene.