House Speaker Mike Johnson cautioned the Senate in a closed door lunch on Tuesday not to make big changes to the reconciliation bill, Axios has learned.
Why it matters: If Johnson can get his conference in line, his problem will soon be Senate Majority Leader John Thune's (R-S.D.)— with an important July deadline looming on the debt ceiling.
Sources tell Axios that Johnson projected a lot of confidence in the meeting.
Johnson told senators "we're going to land this plane" and to expect a vote on Wednesday night, according to one attendee.
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee plans to grill the Department of Justice on its decision to charge Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) with assault on law enforcement, Axios has learned.
Why it matters: Democrats have roundly condemned the charges as an intimidation effort aimed at chilling their oversight of the Trump administration's deportation policies.
What they're saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios he will "definitely" be questioning the Justice Department on the decision-making behind the charges, potentially in the form of a letter.
"It's a terribly troubling situation. It's an absolute assault on congressional powers," he said of the assault charges against McIver.
Security contractors are adapting to the Department of Government Efficiency's brutal cost-cutting regime — by pitching their tech as essential to its mission.
Why it matters: As federal workforce cuts deepen, DOGE is expected to lean more heavily on third-party security vendors to help dismantle longstanding information silos — despite the national security risks that could come from its quest.
Driving the news: In recent weeks, DOGE has quietly begun laying the groundwork for what privacy advocates long feared was its endgame: building a centralized database containing the personal information of millions of U.S. citizens and residents.
Some reports also suggest DOGE is exploring ways to deploy AI agents to replace federal workers across agencies, fueling further alarm about the national security and privacy implications.
Between the lines: Several companies are now marketing their tools directly to agencies as a way to survive DOGE's cost-cutting demands.
ServiceNow CEO Bill McDermott said in an earnings call last month that his company is benefiting from the shift. "In this moment, we're one of the rare companies that will grow 30% year over year in the public sector," he said.
Wired reported this month that OpenAI has met with the Food and Drug Administration about a tool to evaluate new drugs. Two DOGE associates were also in attendance, according to the report.
A source familiar with the matter confirmed the meetings to Axios, noting that OpenAI has shown clear interest in working specifically with the FDA in some capacity. However, no contracts have been signed yet.
The intrigue: Many of these vendors have ramped up their lobbying power in recent months — particularly with Trump-aligned lobbying firms.
So far in 2025, at least nine security and consulting firms, including Zscaler, Accenture, and Booz Allen Hamilton, have registered with Ballard Partners, according to congressional lobbying disclosures.
Zoom in: Axonius, an Israeli cybersecurity startup with growing federal ambitions, told Axios it's started pitching itself to agencies as a tool that can help them dodge the most severe DOGE audits.
The company's platform gives administrators full visibility into devices, software and users, aligning closely with DOGE's stated mission to streamline IT environments.
Tom Kennedy, vice president of Axonius Federal Systems, told Axios that the company's tools can be "part of a great efficiency story" and that its technology usually gets through relevant DOGE audits.
But Brian Meyer, field CTO at Axonius Federal Systems, added that the company's pitch doesn't endorse job cuts.
"Even before the DOGE, there was a problem in the cybersecurity industry for full-time employees — they're already trying to do more with less," he said. "We've been telling that story for years: Based on what we have, you can do more with the resources that you have."
The big picture: The federal cybersecurity ecosystem has been on edge during the early months of the second Trump administration, amid staff cuts in the federal cyber workforce and a pending Department of Justice investigation into former CISA director Chris Krebs.
Several administration officials met with companies on the sidelines of the RSA Conference last month in the hopes of mending some of these relationships.
Still, some executives say federal work has remained consistent. "We have been really privileged to have a strong relationship with every White House administration," Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince told Axios in an interview.
"It feels like everything today is a partisan issue — but cybersecurity is on the less partisan side of that equation," he added.
Yes, but: That hasn't spared vendors from fallout.
Security research government contractor Mitre is laying off 442 employees, or nearly 5% of its workforce, in June due in part to contract cancellations.
Deloitte has also shared plans to lay off staff, and other consulting firms have warned of declining U.S. federal revenues this year.
"It's disruptive, there's no other way to put it," Kennedy said of DOGE's cuts to the federal cybersecurity workforce. "We were hoping that cybersecurity would be sheltered, and it has not been from a human side."
The chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee told Axios the House GOP's campaign arm will stick with its policy of not intervening in Republican primaries if President Trump tries to knock off incumbents.
Why it matters: Trump told reporters on Tuesday that House Republicans who vote against his "big, beautiful bill" could "possibly" face primary challenges, saying they would be "knocked out so fast."
Trump said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a key holdout on the bill who the president tried and failed to primary in 2020, "should be voted out of office."
What they're saying: NRCC chair Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), asked about Trump's comments, told Axios, "I don't want to comment on something I didn't hear."
But, pressed further on whether the NRCC would get engaged to protect GOP incumbents targeted by Trump, he said: "We don't do primaries."
The NRCC has long had a formal policy of not spending in GOP primaries — though Republican leadership has occasionally faced accusations of meddling in primaries to protect incumbents.
A coalition of faith leaders is urging religious organizations to openly show their support for LGBTQ+ people ahead of this year's Pride Month.
Why it matters: The effort comes as corporations are pulling support for Pride events and as GOP-led states are pushing laws banning Pride flags and at least 10 states have introduced bills banning marriage equality.
The big picture: This year's Pride Month comes amid uncertainty after President Trump signed an executive order against diversity, equity, and inclusion, prompting DEI walk-backs from companies.
Driving the news: In a letter with a pledge obtained by Axios, the mostly left-leaning faith leaders said "2025 Pride will test the courage of our nation" and "too often religion is used to attack LGBTQ+ people."
The leaders said millions of dollars are being spent "targeting our Trans siblings" and promoting bills like those banning marriage equality.
"We, who are from diverse faith traditions and beliefs, are showing up and refusing to back down. We support the LGBTQ+ community, and we Recommit to Pride," the letter said.
The leader said they would speak out with public prayers, bold statements, and visible acts of support for the LGBTQ+ community and urged other faith leaders to sign the pledge.
Zoom in: Interfaith Alliance is organizing the campaign.
The open pledge to be released Tuesday has already been signed by groups like the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Hindus for Human Rights and Muslims for Progressive Values.
State of play: Trump issued his anti-DEI order, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is rushing to ban transgender troops from the U.S. military under pressure from evangelicals and conservative Catholics.
Both were among Trump's strongest supporters in the 2024 election.
The orders and moves by the administration have resulted in several companies ending DEI programs and stopping supporting Pride events.
Zoom out: Mastercard, Citi, Pepsi, Nissan and PwC pulled sponsorship of NYC Pride. Booz Allen Hamilton and Deloitte pulled out of WorldPride Washington, D.C., Axios' Eleanor Hawkins reports.
Anheuser-Busch, Comcast and Diageo also stopped sponsoring San Francisco Pride.
Meanwhile, Minneapolis' Twin Cities Pride rejected Target's sponsorship dollars citing wishy-washy support of the LGBTQ+ community and its DEI rollbacks.
By the numbers: 39% of corporations are scaling back external Pride Month engagements this year, according to Gravity Research data.
This is a sharp increase from last year when only 9% said they were changing their external Pride engagement.
57% of companies that are federal contractors plan to reduce external engagement, highlighting the risk of federal investigations.
What they're saying: "This Pride, it is more urgent than ever that we lock arms with our neighbors and build a community of solidarity," Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, executive director of GLSEN, an education LGBTQ advocacy organization, said in a statement.
"In a moment when the fundamental rights and physical safety of LGBTQ+ people are under attack...Faith in Public Life joins in honoring Pride and recommitting to our continued advocacy," Jeanné Lewis, CEO of Faith in Public Life, said.
"It's more important than ever for communities of faith to make absolutely clear our solidarity and support," said Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush, president and CEO of Interfaith Alliance.
Friction point: The riskfor engaging around LGBTQ+ issues has increased 42% since this time last year, per Gravity Research's insights.
Roughly 6 in 10companies cite the Trump administration as the top reason for this change, while conservative activists and conservative policymakers come in second and third.
Speaker Mike Johnson is still facing a bloc of persistent right-wing holdouts on his "big, beautiful bill" even after President Trump urged House Republicans to support it in a closed-door meeting.
Why it matters: Johnson (R-La.) and his leadership team are hoping to bring the marquee tax and spending cut legislation to the floor for a vote as soon as Wednesday, but that timeline is at risk of slipping away.
"I don't think the votes are going to be there this week, the margins are very narrow," said House Freedom Caucus chair Andy Harris (R-Md.), adding, "In its current form, I can't support the bill."
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), a former Freedom Caucus chair, told Axios: "I don't know that anything's changed … I need to see text."
Zoom in: Blue-state Republicans pushing for an increased State and Local Tax Deduction signaled they were also unswayed to take the $40,000 cap proposed by GOP leadership.
"As it stands right now, I do not support the bill," Rep Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) told reporters.
Rep. Nick Lalota (R-N.Y.) told Axios: "I remain a 'no' on the bill."
State of play: Johnson is grappling with contradictory demands from various House GOP blocs.
The SALT caucus' demand for an increased tax break for high-income, blue-state residents cuts directly against right-wingers' desire to reduce the bill's deficit impacts as much as possible.
Johnson's right flank is also pushing for Medicaid cuts that many moderates oppose — in part because it would clobber their constituents.
Harris also said Trump's demand that the bill increase the debt ceiling could be a sticking point, saying he could "lose some votes" if it goes beyond $4 or 5 trillion.
What to watch: Most Republicans who still oppose the bill nevertheless said they will continue to participate in negotiations to try to get to yes — even if those talks don't proceed at the pace Trump prefers.
LaLota said he is "eager to have more discussions with my leadership about how we can meet the goal."
Axios' Victoria Knight contributed reporting for this story.
Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional reporting.
Business reputation is eroding due to consumer concerns about rising costs, according to this year's Axios Harris Poll 100, which assigns reputation scores based on seven categories like trust, products and services, vision and culture.
Why it matters: Companies that have kept costs low while standing firm on their corporate values rank highest on this year's list.
State of play: Trader Joe's, the low-cost grocer known for being values-focused, ranks No. 1 on the list and saw a 3.5-point increase in its reputation score since last year.
Costco ranks in the top 5, and Arizona Beverage Co., known for its 99-cent iced tea, joined the list for the first time, coming in at No. 7.
The big picture: Consumer sentiment is in free fall,according to a new University of Michigan report.
Inflation expectations are higher than those reported in 2022, with respondents pointing to tariffs as potentially inflationary and economically damaging.
This comes amid Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's acknowledgement on Sunday that some consumer prices will likely rise due to tariffs.
By the numbers: Spiraling consumer sentiment is likely to impact business reputation and favorability, according to the Harris Poll survey.
78% of Americans have noticed the increasing costs of groceries.
Meanwhile, 4 in 10 Americans say their overall opinion of companies is declining, with most pointing to inflation as the top reason.
However, those surveyed also say that companies with strong values are better protected from reputational damage.
What they're saying: The companies ranking highest on the list are "delivering value through their values," says John Gerzema, CEO of the Harris Poll.
"Americans have shifted their attention almost singularly toward inflation and high prices. And so now, corporate reputation is make or break on allyship: Are they looking out for my bottom line or theirs? The companies that are thriving [this] year are intentional, empathic and most of all, dependable."
Zoom in: Clear and consistent corporate values can serve as a safety net, according to the survey.
Costco (No. 5) made headlines for upholding its commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion, while Patagonia (No. 2) is known for its pledge to fight climate change.
Meanwhile, companies that are viewed by consumers as leaning toward one political ideology — like Ben & Jerry's (No. 24) or Chick-fil-A (No. 26) — rank highly.
Zoom out: Potential price increases threaten the reputation of budget-friendly companies like Dollar Tree (No. 75), Dollar General (No. 85) and Spirit Airlines (No. 100), per the rankings.
Both dollar stores anticipate disruptions or added costs brought on by President Trump's tariff policies, while Spirit Airlines has introduced premium fares.
Meanwhile, Chinese e-commerce companies like Temu (No. 90) and Shein (No. 94) are particularly exposed to tariffs, dropping in score to sit in the ranking's bottom 10%.
What to watch: While corporate leaders are signaling potential price increases due to Trump's trade policies, few have publicly opposed the tariffs.
According to the Harris Poll survey, more than half of Americans say their opinion of companies would improve if they spoke out against tariffs.
MAGA ally Elon Musk said on Tuesday that he plans to spend "a lot less" on political donations moving forward after funneling millions into Donald Trump's 2024 presidential campaign.
The big picture: The comment from the richest man in the world could come as a disappointment for Republicans in 2026.
Musk spent more than $250 million in a push to return Trump to the White House.
Driving the news: When asked at the Qatar Economic Forum if he would continue spending at such high levels in future elections, he said he thinks that "in terms of political spending, I'm going to do a lot less in the future."
Pressed on why, Musk replied, "I think I've done enough."
Yes, but: The Tesla CEO, who appeared virtually for the conversation, said if he sees "a reason" to spend, he will. However, he added, "I do not currently see a reason."
Zoom out: Musk endorsed Trump last year after the Butler, Pennsylvania, assassination attempt and later became a key — yet highly controversial — GOP megadonor.
Musk's lottery offering $1 million prizes to registered voters in swing states was scrutinized as legally questionable during the 2024 race, and the eyebrow-raising giveaways made a comeback during the closely watched Wisconsin Supreme Court race earlier this year.
Musk poured millions into the election, only to see the conservative-backed candidate defeated in the most expensive judicial race in U.S. history.
Catch up quick: Musk has led a DOGE-driven crusade against so-called government "waste," directing a massive upheaval of the federal government during Trump's second term that's seen thousands of workers ousted from their jobs and carved out massive spending cuts.
The chaos has left him with a wounded reputation and prompted brand blowback, Axios' Zachary Basu reports.
That's triggered protests and, in some cases, vandalism involving Tesla cars and showrooms. Musk on Tuesday said, "[w]e are coming for those who organized the violence & death threats against Tesla."
President Trump has been frustrated by the ongoing war in Gaza and upset by images of suffering of Palestinian children, and has told his aides to tell Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu he wants him to wrap it up, two White House officials tell Axios.
Why it matters: U.S. and Israeli officials deny that Trump is prepared to "abandon" Israel, or that he is applying intense pressure on Netanyahu. But they admit there are growing policy differences between a president who wants to end the war and a prime minister who is massively expanding it.
"The president is frustrated about what is happening in Gaza. He wants the war to end, he wants the hostages to come home, he wants aid to go in and he wants to start rebuilding Gaza," one White House official said.
Driving the news: In the days since Trump's trip to the region, the U.S. has been pressing both Israel and Hamas to accept a new proposal presented by White House envoy Steve Witkoff for a hostage and ceasefire deal.
Witkoff has been speaking directly with Netanyahu and his top adviser Ron Dermer, and to Hamas leadership through a backchannel facilitated by Palestinian-American businessman Bishara Bahbah.
The negotiations have shown little progress. Meanwhile, the Israel Defense Forces are proceeding with an operation to displace all 2 million Palestinians in Gaza to a "humanitarian zone" and flatten most of the enclave.
The logjam in the talks and the situation on the ground convinced Vice President Vance to scrap plans for a visit to Israel this week. His decision sheds light on how the U.S. feels about the current Israeli policy in Gaza.
The other side: An Israeli official told Axios that at the moment, Netanyahu doesn't feel strong pressure from Trump. "If the president wants a hostage and ceasefire deal in Gaza he needs to put much more pressure on both sides," the official said.
Other leaders are attempting to apply pressure. The leaders of the U.K., France and Canada issued a statement on Monday threatening to take steps against Israel over the war in Gaza.
"We will not stand by while the Netanyahu Government pursues these egregious actions. If Israel does not cease the renewed military offensive and lift its restrictions on humanitarian aid, we will take further concrete actions in response" they said.
Netanyahu rejected their call and accused "the leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris" of "offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities."
The latest: The British government announced on Monday that it is suspending free trade deal negotiations with Israel, imposed new sanctions on Israeli settlers involved in attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank and summoned the Israeli ambassador to the Foreign Office in London.
State of play: One area where Trump has put pressure on Netanyahu over the last two weeks is Israel's total freeze on humanitarian aid deliveries to Gaza.
A White House official told Axios the president was upset by pictures of suffering children and babies in Gaza and pressed the Israelis to reopen the gates.
On Sunday, the Israeli cabinet approved the resumption of aid deliveries to Gaza and on Monday a dozen trucks with baby food and other supplies entered the enclave. The White House official said more needs to be done.
The UN has warned that thousands of children are at risk of starvation if aid does not significantly increase. More than 55,000 Palestinians have been killed during the war, according to the health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza.
Behind the scenes: While Trump felt his Middle East trip was a success, he believes the war in Gaza is holding back his plans for the region, a senior White House official said.
"The President sees a real chance for peace and prosperity in the region, but the war in Gaza is the last hot spot and he wants it to end," the White House official said.
The second White House official described the war as a distraction from other things Trump wants to do. "There is a lot of frustration by this crisis getting dragged on."
The official said Trump's decision to move unilaterally to secure the release of American-Israeli hostage Edan Alexander, rather than waiting for Israel to agree to a broader dael, was a result of this frustration.
What they are saying: "The President may be saying, 'Hey, listen, let's try to end the war,' he might speak strongly… But his support is ironclad," Trump hostage response envoy Adan Boehler told Fox News on Monday. He stressed that a Washington Post report claiming the administration threatened to "abandon" Israel was "fake."
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Monday that Trump had "made it very clear to Hamas that he wanted to see all hostages released" and "made it very clear he wants to see this conflict in the region end."
President Trump warned congressional Republicans on Tuesday not to "f**k around" with Medicaid, a stark pushback to conservative lawmakers demanding steeper cuts to the program in "one big, beautiful bill."
Why it matters: Trump is already floating political retribution for Republican holdouts who don't get in line.
He also tore into Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who has been a firm "no" on the bill throughout the process, blasting him publicly and privately as a "grandstander" and saying he should be "voted out of office."
Trump also warned the GOP's blue state holdouts not to push too hard on the SALT deduction cap.
The big picture: Millions of people could lose health coverage if the current reconciliation bill's Medicaid cuts become law.
"President Trump and Republicans are protecting and preserving Medicaid for the Americans who the program was intended to be a lifeline for: pregnant women, children, disabled individuals, and seniors," White House spokesperson Kush Desai told Axios' Emily Peck.
That White House list of people who need Medicaid doesn't include the poorer working-age adults without kids who gained coverage under the Affordable Care Act's expansion of Medicaid.
This is a breaking news story and will be updated.
House Speaker Mike Johnson offered GOP holdouts a detailed proposal on Monday to set the SALT deduction cap at $40,000 for anyone who makes less than $751,600 a year.
Why it matters: But Johnson (R-La.) also offered the SALT members an entirely different option: Figure out the math yourself, he said, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Johnson offered a crucial caveat: they still need to stay within the fiscal constraints of the Ways and Means framework, which has only has a set amount of money to spend on the SALT portion for the tax portions of the bill.
Johnson needs to resolve the SALT issue this week, but he doesn't have unlimited money to do it with.
"We continue to work on it," Johnson told reporters last night. "It's not a final resolution yet and I think we're getting very close."
Punchbowl News first reported, on X, some of the details in Johnson's offer.
Driving the news: Members of the SALT caucus appeared to be more interested in Johnson's second option.
Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.) told reporters last night that "we have to follow up with Joint Committee on Tax and CBO on" on how much different proposals will cost.
"They hope to have some numbers back to us by the morning."
Zoom out: Johnson wants to signal flexibility to the half-a-dozen members who are threatening to vote against President Trump's one big, beautiful bill if they don't get more relief for their constituents who are hit with high taxes in blue states.
The SALT caucus had been eyeing an additional $200 billion in headspace based on the Ways and Means instructions to authorize a total of $4 trillion in spending.
By the numbers: There are firm income limits and phase-out in Johnson's proposal, according to the person familiar with the matter.
For years 1-4: The deduction would be at $40,000 for anyone making less than $751,600. That includes individual and joint-filers.
For anyone making more than roughly $850,000, the deduction would be $10,000, with a $20,000 deduction at the $800,000 threshold.
Then starting in year five, both the deduction and the income levels drop.
For anyone making less than $400,000 a year, the cap is at $30,000 in state and local taxes.
For anyone in the $400,000 to $450,000 range, the deduction would be $20,000. For $500,000 and up, the deduction is back at the $10,000 level.
Usually, there's at least one big group that stands to benefit from White House economic policy: businesses, workers or consumers.
Why it matters: In this moment, it's not exactly clear who wins from the current administration's triple play of raising tariffs, cutting workplace regulations, and cracking down on immigration.
State of play: President Trump lashed out at Walmart last weekend, after the company said it would be forced to raise prices to handle higher tariff costs.
The retailer is the latest company to run into the buzzsaw of the White House trade agenda.
The big picture: The White House says its agenda spurs investments that benefit consumers and workers, but shifting trade policy, combined with other fast-paced changes, is creating uncertainty that's roiling almost all corners of the economy.
Zoom in: "We've been rocked very hard by the tariffs," says Jonathan Silva, co-owner of WS Game Company, an upscale board-game business that his father started 25 years ago.
Since "Liberation Day" in April, Silva's raised prices for games, halted all shipments from China, taken a pay cut, and paused retirement benefit contributions for the Massachusetts-based company's 22 employees.
Now that the most onerous China tariffs have been lifted, the race is on to ship inventory in the next 90 days before the holiday season. He's worried about shipping companies jacking up costs as demand spikes.
"No matter what happens, the writing's on the wall that with an executive order, things can change on, you know, on just a random Monday."
Workers, meanwhile, haven't caught much of a break either. Small business employees, such as those working for Silva, are in a bad spot. Many more are concerned about holding on to their jobs.
It's not just them. Tens of thousands of federal workers have been fired, with many more on deck. Those in unions are fighting to keep their right to collective bargaining.
The harsher situation for public workers is also trickling down to the private sector, where management is newly emboldened to crack the whip, as Axios and the Wall Street Journal have reported.
Other changes have hurt, too, like weakening agencies critical to worker protections and reducing the minimum wage for federal contractors.
As for consumers? Tariffs typically mean higher prices. The duties raise input costs for companies, making it more expensive to produce and sell goods, which means higher prices for working people.
Nobody seems to benefit, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers tells Axios, who says the likelihood is that the tariffs "are going to createfewer good-paying jobs."
Looking for winners
Reality check: For all the dire recession warnings, the overall hard data show the economy in good shape.
The unemployment rate is still low, and inflation is easing.
Between the lines: The White House seeks to position itself as both pro-business and pro-worker.
The coming "big beautiful" tax bill is getting positioned as a big win for businesses and working people, who may wind up with some nice new breaks, including no taxes on tips and a higher standard deduction.
And those easier regulations are often a win for businesses. The share of executives who say they're concerned about labor regulations fell to 56% this year, down from 73%, per a recent survey from Littler Mendelson, the employment law firm.
In a recent press release, the White House pointed to a Wall Street Journal story that reports some small and midsize U.S. manufacturers are actually seeing increasedbusiness due to tariffs.
For the record: "The Trump administration is slashing costly regulations, lowering energy prices, cutting Joe Biden's runaway spending that sparked inflation, negotiating better trade deals, and spurring trillions in historic investment commitments, including in sectors critical to our national and economic security," White House spokesman Kush Desai says.
"Any 'economist' who can't understand how this agenda is benefitting American workers and industries, as the data proves is already happening, should find a new profession."
The bottom line: Critics argue the small pockets of victory don't seem to outweigh the downsides.
Some pockets of businesses want certain tariffs in place, acknowledges Heidi Shierholz, the president of the liberal Economic Policy Institute.
But there isn't a big constituency out there who wanted them to this scale.
Opioid abuse is as much an economic problem as a public health one, according to a comprehensive analysis provided first to Axios that concludes the total average annual cost associated with each case is nearly $700,000.
Why it matters: The cost burden falls unevenly, with states in a belt stretching through Appalachia to New England typically having bigger caseloadsand a higher cost per case.
Opioid use disorder cost the U.S. an estimated $4 trillion last year, per the analysis from Avalere, which used 2017 figures to project 2024 net costs.
"While this is a cost to government, it's also a cost to private businesses, and the huge cost, of course, is to the individuals who have OUD," said Margaret Scott, a principal at Avalere and author of the report.
By the numbers: The projected cost of opioid use disorder in 2024 ranged from $419,527 per case in Idaho to more than $2.4 million in D.C. That covers lost productivity, health insurance costs, property lost to crime and other variables.
The cost per case totaled more than $1 million in West Virginia, Rhode Island, Ohio and Maryland.
Some of the regional variation in costs is from lost tax revenue, which varies by state. The local availability of treatment for opioid use disorder may also drive the cost, Scott said.
State of play: Opioid use disorder — defined as frequent opioid use and unsuccessful efforts to quit — is estimated to affect more than 6 million people in the United States.
The cumulative economic burden on patients, including years of life lost and reduced quality of life, exceeded $3 trillion in 2024, Avalere estimated.
Private businesses absorbed more than $467 billion in costs from lost productivity and health insurance costs while the federal government bore about $118 billion in Medicare and other federal insurance costs, lost taxes and criminal justice expenses.
It cost state and local governments more than $94 billion, with about $42 billion of that going toward criminal justice costs.
The Trump administration in March released its own analysis that estimated illicit opioids cost the U.S. about $2.7 trillion in 2023.
Where it stands: Treatment can defray the costs by more than 40% in some instances, the analysis found.
Behavioral therapy alongside long-acting injectable buprenorphine —a treatment that reduces the risk of future overdoses — generated an estimated $295,000 savings per case, the biggest cost-saver of the options Avalere analyzed.
Therapy plus methadone and therapy plus buprenorphine administered through mucous membranes like the mouth each save about $271,000. Behavioral therapy alone saves a project $144,000 per case.
The treatment savings estimates assume that patients fully adhere to the regimen for a year.
Yes, but: Federal data from 2022 showed that only one-quarter of adults who needed medication treatment for OUD actually got it.
Less than half of adults who received any OUD care that year got medication treatment.
However, buprenorphine distribution increased significantly between 2019 and 2022 as policy changes during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed people to start treatment via telehealth.
Between the lines: Overdose deaths in the U.S. fell to the lowest level since 2019 last year, partly due to expanded availability of the overdose reversal drug naloxone. An estimated 80,391 people died from drug overdoses in 2024, down nearly 27% from the previous year, per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data.
But some addiction experts say cuts to federal grant funding and other program changes led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could hurt addiction recovery programs.
The fine print: Indivior, a pharmaceutical company specializing in treatments for opioid use disorder, funded the Avalere analysis.
Editor's note: The story has been corrected to reflect that the total average annual costs associated with each case reflects the full economic burden (not just the cost of treatment).
Hot, dry and windy weather that helps wildfires spread is becoming more common across much of the U.S. amid climate change, a new analysis finds.
Why it matters: What used to be several months of "fire season" is stretching in some places into a yearlong phenomenon, straining fire departments and others tasked with controlling or containing wild blazes.
Driving the news: The number of "fire weather" days rose by 37 in the Southwest and 21 in the West on average between 1973 and 2024, per an analysis from Climate Central, a climate research group.
Some areas, including parts of Texas, California and New Mexico, now experience "around two more months of fire weather per year compared to a half century ago," the group says.
Zoom in: Fire weather is also getting more frequent in some eastern and northeastern parts of the country, like New Jersey and New York's Long Island.
Yes, but: Fire weather days decreased in a handful of areas, such as central North Dakota (-12) and northern Maine (-8).
How it works: Climate Central's analysis is based on data from 476 nationwide weather stations and is broken down by 245 climate divisions across the continental U.S.
The group defined a "fire weather day" as one with temperatures of at least 45°-55°F (depending on the season), relative humidity within 5% of regional thresholds, and sustained wind speeds of 15mph or more — all happening together during at least two hourly measurements on a given day.
Stunning stat: Human activities (unattended campfires, sparks from power lines, etc.) start a whopping 87% of wildfires, Climate Central says, citing the National Interagency Fire Center.
Regardless of how a fire starts, "fire weather" can give them the push they need to spread and grow.
The big picture: Extreme wildfire events more than doubled in frequency and magnitude globally over the past two decades, a recent study found.
What's next: States like California and Idaho are preparing for what could be a challenging fire season as higher temperatures and faster winds risk turning even the smallest sparks into massive conflagrations.
Tesla Motors and SpaceX saw their brand reputations crater in the past year, according to new Axios Harris Poll 100 survey results.
Why it matters: Elon Musk's polarizing political activism appears to have come at the expense of his largest companies, as Republicans expressed more favorable opinions than did Democrats.
By the numbers: Tesla was in 8th place in the 2021 reputation ranking of America's 100 most visible companies, but last year tumbled to 63rd and now is near the very bottom at 95th.
It placed dead last in "character," while placing near the bottom in areas like "ethics" and "citizenship."
Six other automakers place higher, with the highest being Toyota at No. 4 and the lowest being Ford at No. 60.
Tesla did not immediately respond to an email for comment.
Zoom in: SpaceX experienced a similar reputation quotient score decline between 2024 and 2025.
On the one hand, SpaceX may care less than Tesla does, because it's not consumer-facing.
On the other, the 28.7% difference between Republicans and Democrats could foretell procurement problems were there to be a political power shift.
Last, but not least: The company formerly known as Twitter also scored poorly, although that's been true since even before Musk's ownership.
Go deeper: The Axios Harris Poll 100's methodology
Editor's Note: This story has been corrected to note Toyota ranked 4 (not 6) and Ford 60 (not 62).
Ukrainian President Zelensky and five other European leaders joined a conference call with President Trump immediately after his call with Vladimir Putin on Monday hoping to hear that Putin had agreed to a ceasefire — or the U.S. would impose penalties on him for refusing to do so.
Instead, Trump said Putin had agreed to negotiate, stressed the U.S. wouldn't be involved in those negotiations, and pushed back against the idea of imposing sanctions on Putin at the current time, two sources who were on the call and a third source briefed on the call told Axios.
Why it matters: Trump gave the impression he was getting closer to withdrawing from the issue altogether.Some leaders on the call seemed "surprised" or "shocked," the sources said.
"I think something's going to happen. And if it doesn't, I just back away and they're going to have to keep going. Again, this was a European situation, and should have remained a European situation," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office several hours after his calls.
How it happened: Trump and Zelensky had a brief call Monday morning, and Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart what he should tell Putin, the sources said.
Zelensky was happy Trump called him to consult. He requested that Trump demand an immediate ceasefire, threaten new sanctions against Russia, and offer no concessions to Putin without consulting Ukraine, the sources say.
Behind the scenes: When the call with Putin ended, Trump called Zelensky again. This time the leaders of Germany, France, Italy, Finland and the European Commission were also on the line.
"The second call was longer and of a different character than the first one," Zelensky said later.
While a European source on the call told Axios it was "constructive," another source said Zelensky felt it was "bad."
Trump told the leaders that Putin agreed to start direct negotiations on a ceasefire immediately. A source on the call said there were a few seconds of puzzled silence.
Zelensky then pointed out that Putin had previously agreed to negotiate, and the first round of ceasefire talks took place on Friday in Istanbul. Trump didn't directly respond, the sources said.
The sources said Zelensky and several other leaders on the call told Trump it had been his idea to start the peace talks with an immediate 30-day ceasefire.
A White House official told Axios Trump "never agreed" that a ceasefire should be a prerequisite for negotiations and never said Zelensky can decide what the conditions for negotiations will be.
Friction point: Other European leaders on the call asked about the possibility of U.S. sanctions against Russia, but Trump said he didn't think was a good idea and stressed that he thought Putin wanted a deal.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni jumped in to ask why there couldn't be a ceasefire for at least two weeks heading into the talks, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz asked what concessions Russia was willing to make, the sources said.
Trump told the group Putin would present a "peace memo" with his terms for a ceasefire and for ending the war. A source on the call said Trump told Zelensky and the European leaders he asked Putin to present "something people can agree to" and not a proposal that will be rejected immediately.
Zelensky said previous rounds of negotiations with Putin, including last week, didn't produce anything and stressed that if Trump doesn't push, Putin won't move, the sources said.
The White House official said that for months Russia had refused to present a document with its vision of how to end the war and the fact Putin agreed to do it was a significant step forward.
Between the lines: Leaders on the call seemed surprised that Trump seemed relatively content with what he heard from Putin, and presented it as a new development, even though the Russian leader did not seem to have changed his position at all, the sources said.
What to watch: Trump told the group that Russia and Ukraine should conduct bilateral direct negotiations without any third party mediators because the parties best understand all the details of the conflict.
Meloni and Merz said the U.S. and European countries need to be involved in the negotiations. "Someone needs to be a judge," Meloni said. Merz proposed holding a meeting with all the parties present.
Where it stands: On the call, Finland President Alexander Stubb asked Trump what the next steps were. "I don't know. Someone has to come out and say whether the negotiations are going well or badly, and then we'll decide what to do," Trump said.
This story was updated with comments from a White House official.
Former President Biden's disclosure that he had Stage 4 prostate cancer was quickly met with sympathy late Sunday. By Monday morning, the questions — from Democrats and Republicans alike — had begun.
Why it matters: The timing of Biden's announcement, coupled with the way his handlers tried to cover up his health issues in the past, fueled speculation about how long he'd known about the cancer.
People in both parties, whether they love Joe Biden or despise him, wondered whether the announcement was timed to change the subject after a week of reports about his physical and mental deterioration when he was president.
Those reports included recordings, first posted Friday by Axios, of Biden being interviewed by prosecutors in 2023 about his handling of classified documents. Biden had such difficulty recalling events that prosecutor Robert Hur later described him as a "well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."
Zoom in: On Monday, medical experts didn't exactly calm the suspicions about Biden's cancer diagnosis — even as they said it was treatable and that he could live several years with the disease.
"He's had this for many years, maybe even a decade, growing there and spreading," Ezekiel Emanuel, an oncologist who was a Biden White House COVID adviser, told the stunned hosts of MSNBC's "Morning Joe."
Emanuel later told CNN that the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test used to detect prostate cancer isn't always reliable. Emanuel and other doctors noted that Biden, 82, is well beyond the 55-70 recommended age range for prostate cancer screening.
But given how thoroughly presidents' health is scrutinized, it would be surprising if Biden hadn't been tested before his recent symptoms appeared, Emanuel said on "Morning Joe": "It's a little strange."
Zoom out: Several former Biden White House aides acknowledged they were perplexed.
"I love Joe Biden," a former campaign and White House aide told Axios. "But I don't feel the same about some of the people around him. So I feel terrible saying this: I just don't know what to believe."
President Trump and the White House initially offered sympathy for Biden and did not engage in speculation on Sunday.
But on Monday, Trump told reporters: "I'm surprised the public wasn't notified a long time ago ... I think if you take a look, it's the same doctor who said Joe was cognitively fine."
Some of Trump's MAGA loyalists struck a similar chord on social media, sending a mix of prayers and I-told-you-so messages about Biden's health — an issue they'd been harping on for years.
Vice President Vance questioned the care Biden received and whether his advisers were honest, telling reporters: "We can pray for good health — but also recognize that if you're not in good enough health to do the job, you shouldn't be doing the job."
Donald Trump Jr. asked on X whether former First Lady Jill Biden was part of "another coverup."
Flashback: The Bidens have been silent about cancer in the family before, according to "Original Sin," a book by Axios' Alex Thompson and CNN's Jake Tapper that's being released today.
When the Bidens' son Beau was attorney general of Delaware in 2013, he had brain surgery to remove a tumor and was diagnosed with Stage 4 glioblastoma — one of the deadliest forms of brain cancer.
Beau and then-Vice President Biden's teams deliberated whether to explain his situation publicly, but decided to say nothing for months, according to "Original Sin."
In February 2014, Dr. Wai-Kwan Alfred Yung released a statement that Beau had a "clean bill of health."
Beau Biden died 15 months later, soon after he left office.
The book says that for the last year of his life, as he had difficulties with speech and other everyday tasks, Beau Biden was quietly flown around the country for experimental treatments and usually admitted into hospitals under an alias: George Lincoln.
Even some members of the Biden family didn't understand the lack of transparency.
According to "Original Sin," Beau's wife, Hallie, expressed frustration about concealing the disease rather than telling people. The public would rally around Beau, she argued to friends. But Joe and Beau Biden opposed going public.
What they're saying: A Biden spokesperson declined to comment.
Many young people are more willing than their parents to share personal data, giving companies deeper insight into their lives.
Why it matters: Selling data is becoming the new selling plasma.
Case in point: Generation Lab, a youth polling company, is launching a new product, Verb.AI, today — betting that buying this data is the future of polling.
"We think corporations have extracted user data without fairly compensating people for their own data," says Cyrus Beschloss, CEO of Generation Lab. "We think users should know exactly what data they're giving us and should feel good about what they're receiving in return."
How it works: Generation Lab offers people cash — $50 or more per month, depending on use and other factors — to download a tracker onto their phones.
The product takes about 90 seconds to download, and once it’s on your phone, it tracks things like what you browse, what you buy, which streaming apps you use — all anonymously. There are also things it doesn't track, like activity on your bank account.
Verb then uses that data to create a digital twin of you that lives in a central database and knows your preferences.
Say a political advocacy group wants to know where women under 30 get their news, they can use Verb to query one or all the twins who fit that demographic in an interface that feels like ChatGPT.
If a venture capital firm wants to figure out which apps are trending among young people, they can ask.
Screenshot via Verb.AI
The intrigue: Generation Lab says this method of polling will give companies, nonprofits, and news organizations more accurate information about how young people really think by tracking their behavior instead of asking them about it.
"For decades, market research has been the equivalent of a doctor asking a patient to describe their symptoms. VERB is an MRI machine," Generation Lab's pitch deck says.
The polling company is aiming to get to 5,000 users of the tracker by the end of September.
Between the lines: Many younger Americans consider sharing data the tradeoff for being online. They're already giving away their data for free, and are even more willing to share it for cash.
88% of Gen Z is open to sharing personal information with social media companies, 20 points higher than older generations, eMarketer notes.
33% of Gen Z agrees or strongly agrees with the statement “I don’t mind being tracked by websites or apps,” compared with 22% of older adults, according to a 2023 survey from the cybersecurity company Malwarebytes.
Gen Z-ers and millennials are also more likely to expect incentives or rewards for sharing data — whether that's money or a personalized social media algorithm, a 2022 Euromonitor International study found.
Reality check: Despite their relative comfort with sharing data, Gen Z-ers and millennials are also likelier to pay for increased security or delete data after they're done using a service, McKinsey notes.
AI makers are flooding the market with a new wave of coding agents promising to relieve human programmers of busy work.
The big picture: Automating the routine aspects of technical labor will almost certainly transform and downsize the tech industry workforce — but there's no guarantee it will alleviate software development's biggest headaches.
Driving the news: Microsoft Monday announced a new AI coding agent for Github Copilot that's good for "time-consuming but boring tasks."
"The agent excels at low-to-medium complexity tasks in well-tested codebases, from adding features and fixing bugs to extending tests, refactoring code, and improving documentation," Microsoft's post says.
Github's move follows Friday's announcement by OpenAI of Codex, a "research preview" of a new coding agent that can "work on many tasks in parallel."
Notably, the Github Copilot agent is powered not by Codex or any other tool from Microsoft partner OpenAI, but instead by Anthropic Claude 3.7 Sonnet, per Microsoft.
The intrigue: Tech leaders have sent mixed messages on just how much work they see ahead for programmers.
Amazon Web Services' then-boss Matt Garman caused a stir last year when he suggested the need for human coding could disappear within two years, However, he later told Axios that his comments were taken out of context.
"I think it's incredibly exciting time for developers," he told us last year. "There's a whole bunch of work that developers do today that's not fun."
"If you think about documenting your code, if you think about upgrading Java versions, if you think about looking for bugs, that's that's not what developers love doing. They love thinking about, 'How do I go solve problems?' "
Why it matters: Business transformations that start in Silicon Valley usually make their way into the wider economy.
Silicon Valley's "dogfooding" tradition ensures that it will avidly apply new technologies to its own business first.
Both Microsoft and Google are now claiming that roughly 30% of the code they produce is AI-written.
Coding agents, like other generative AI tools, continue to "hallucinate," or make stuff up.
But programs, unlike other kinds of language products, have a built-in pass-fail test: Either they run or they don't.
That gives programmers one early checkpoint to guard against bad code.
Yes, but: AI-generated code likely also contains tons of other errors that don't show up today.
That will cause nightmares in the future as programs age, get used more widely, or face unexpected tests from unpredictable users.
Zoom out: The software industry's assumption that what works inside tech will work everywhere else could be sorely tested when these techniques get pushed out beyond Silicon Valley.
AI's usefulness in writing code may not easily transfer to other kinds of work that are less abstract and more rooted in physical reality — witness the many setbacks and challenges the autonomous vehicle industry has faced.
Between the lines: Nobody doubts that AI means tech firms will write more code using fewer employees. But no one yet knows exactly where these companies will continue to find competitive advantage.
AI models are much more likely to be interchangeable than human organizations and cultures.
What's next: As coding agents shoulder routine labor, product designers and creative engineers will use "vibe coding" — improvisational rough drafting via "throw it at the wall and see what works" AI prompting — to do fast prototyping of new ideas.
The bottom line: The biggest challenges in creating software tend to arise from poorly conceived specifications and misinterpretations of data, both of which are often rooted in confusion over human needs.
Today's large language models are ill-equipped to tackle those problems.
But software developers who excel at navigating the boundaries between human desire and machine capability should continue to find themselves in demand.
The MAGA masses are growing disillusioned with Justice Department officials who are failing to deliver damning information on a laundry list of hot-button issues — especially Jeffrey Epstein's suicide.
Why it matters: The movement's back-against-the-wall mentality is kicking up fresh suspicions that nefarious government actors are out to stall President Trump's agenda.
Drumbeat calls for repercussions in the Epstein case — among others — are not going anywhere, and the administration will likely have to answer to the base until some handcuffs click.
Driving the news: Kash Patel and Dan Bongino — the FBI's No. 1 and No. 2 officials — insisted in a Fox News interview Sunday that Epstein killed himself. Those comments contradicted a popular conspiracy theory that he was killed to protect high-profile clients of his sex trafficking network.
MAGA podcasters were delighted and later outraged when they were invited to the White House earlier this year to get supposedly new documents on Epstein's death from Attorney General Pam Bondi, only to learn that little new information was included in their beefy binders.
Prominent voices in the movement like Laura Loomer have also demanded arrests of Biden administration officials who, in their telling, weaponized the justice system against then-candidate Trump.
The other side: The administration has offered some overtures to the base, including Trump posting Monday that Democrats "HAVE A LOT OF EXPLAINING TO DO" for celebrity endorsements last year that he claims were paid for and amount to "AN ILLEGAL ELECTION SCAM."
But it's not enough for MAGA.
What they're saying: After Bongino reiterated that Epstein killed himself, he was flooded with responses of disbelief.
"WHO has bought the both of you?" one X user asked of Bongino and Patel, referencing the Fox News interview.
"We are months into the Trump administration, past the 100-day mark, and Pam Blondi has failed to bring any real charges against anyone," Loomer, a right-wing provocateur with ties to Trump, added on "War Room" Monday, using a nickname for Bondi.
Between the lines: MAGA followers are feeling emboldened after extensive reporting about former President Biden's mental acuity and newly revealed cancer diagnosis, viewing the developments as confirmation of their suspicions and rebuttal to claims they're merely conspiracy theorists.
Reality check: Not everyone is ready to flip the table. While some people like Bondi are still building up their MAGA bona fides, others like Patel and Bongino have longstanding credibility with conspiracy-minded Trump fans — in part by echoing claims about Epstein.
"The MAGA base's frustration is understandable, but if they think people like Bongino or Patel have 'gone native' then they've gone nuts. Pam Bondi's early Epstein flub was a symptom of trying to do too much at once, and toss some meat to the base to keep them sated. That was silly," The National Pulse's Raheem Kassam texted Axios.
"But the underlying point remains, Kash and Dan are bad-asses at the height of their efficacy. They deserve more time and more trust."
