National

With 35 days until the Iowa caucuses, former President Trump has expanded his lead to 51% first-choice support among likely caucusgoers, according to a poll out Monday morning.

Why it matters: Trump's lead is the biggest recorded this close to a competitive Republican caucus in the poll's history, per NBC News, which conducted the survey with the Des Moines Register and Mediacom.

Driving the news: The poll — which surveyed more than 500 likely GOP caucusgoers earlier this month — showed Trump surging by eight percentage points, compared to October. 

Between the lines: Trump's lead is fueled by majorities of evangelical and first-time likely caucusgoers, NBC reports, "as well as by nearly three-quarters of Republicans who believe Trump can defeat President Joe Biden next year despite the legal challenges the former president faces."

By the numbers: The poll also showed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' support rising by three percentage points, bringing him to 19% — a distant second behind Trump.

Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley — who has gained momentum in recent weeks as other candidates have dropped out — was stagnant at 16%.

Reality check: "The field may have shrunk, but it may have made Donald Trump even stronger than he was," J. Ann Selzer, the pollster who has conducted the Iowa poll for the past three decades, told the Des Moines Register.

But she also reminded NBC how unpredictable the Iowa caucuses can be — including in 2012, when former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum notched a narrow upset win.

Go deeper: Trump will no longer testify in his own defense in N.Y. civil fraud case

Trump will no longer testify in his own defense in N.Y. civil fraud case

Trump surges in Iowa, strengthening historic lead, new poll shows

The poll showed Trump surging by eight percentage points compared to October.

Former President Trump arrives at the New York Young Republican Club's 111th annual gala on Dec. 9, 2023. Photo: Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images

2024 elections

Donald Trump

President Biden has made the COVID-19 crisis and a post-Trump return to national unity and traditional democratic ideals his top priorities. From vaccinations to stimulus to schools, Biden is seeking bipartisan compromise while showing a willingness to use executive authority and bare Democratic majorities in the U.S. House and Senate to implement his policies. Republican leaders are navigating deep party divisions over if and how to move beyond former President Trump.

Politics & Policy

Markets

Axios Markets

Data: U.S. Department of Labor; Chart: Axios Visuals

Nearly all of the job growth in the economy in November came from just three sectors: health care, government employment, and leisure and hospitality.

The big picture: "Job growth has pretty much ground to a halt in most of the rest of the economy, and that is mostly by design," said Julia Pollak, chief economist at ZipRecruiter, referring to the way the Fed's rate hiking campaign has cooled things off.

Zoom out: This has been going on all year. These three sectors alone, plus private education employment, are responsible for 81% of all the jobs created in 2023, wrote James Knightley, ING's chief international economist, in a note.

The data may help explain why so many Americans are pessimistic about the economy despite what looks like a strong labor market — they might not work in one of the growing three sectors.

By the numbers: The economy added 199,000 jobs in November, slightly more than forecast.

83% of the jobs created — 166,000 jobs — were in health care, government, and leisure. 

Another 28,000 workers came from the manufacturing sector — mostly autoworkers coming back from strikes.

That leaves just 5,000 new jobs from other sectors.

Just three sectors accounted for almost all the job growth in November

This could help explain why so many Americans are pessimistic about the economy.

Labor economics

Top stories & latest news on the Federal Reserve, real-time data, plus the biggest shifts happening in the U.S. and global economy.

Economy

Whats Next

Axios What's Next

More than two years after President Biden signed legislation allocating $5 billion for a nationwide network of taxpayer-funded electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, the first one finally opened last Friday in Ohio.

Why it matters: Having convenient, reliable fast chargers along major highways is an important confidence-booster for people considering an electric car.

But the government's effort to supply them is moving at typical government speed, while the privately funded buildout of charging stations continues separately.

Threat level: That slow pace is making it harder to achieve Biden's ultimate goal of EVs making up half of all new cars sold by 2030 — let alone proposed regulations that envision even higher sales by 2032.

Catch up fast: The 2021 infrastructure law included $5 billion to establish the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, administered by the Federal Highway Administration.

The intent was to give money to all 50 states to deploy fast chargers near federal highways designated as "alternative fuel corridors."

Once the highway charging network is complete, states can use remaining funds to deploy chargers elsewhere.

Where it stands: Twenty-six states have made an effort to spend their share of the money so far, according to the Biden administration's new Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, which was created to facilitate the EV transition.

Of those, 17 are in the process of soliciting bids, while seven others have issued "conditional awards" for new stations worth $101.5 million.

Ohio and Hawaii are the furthest along, with firm contracts in place, but only the one station in Ohio is up and running.

Zoom in: The first NEVI-funded station, which opened Dec. 8, is located at the Pilot Travel Center along I-70, on the western outskirts of Columbus.

It includes four EVgo fast chargers under an overhead canopy, plus access to restrooms, Wi-Fi, food, beverages and other conveniences.

It's the first of more than two dozen highway charging stations set to open in Ohio by the end of 2024.

The state, which will receive $140 million in NEVI funding over five years, is already planning a second round of 25 additional charging stations.

Reality check: Ohio is an exception. Many other states are just getting started, if they're moving at all.

Between the lines: Bureaucratic challenges have slowed the charger rollout.

The federal government, for example, first had to staff the new Joint Office to support the effort.

It took more than a year for that office to finalize standards ensuring consistent plug types, charging speeds and payment systems with easy access for all. (Automakers' surprise decision to adopt Tesla's plug style complicated matters.)

Another problem: State transportation officials, who are used to overseeing federal road and bridge projects, lack the resources and expertise to plan and manage charging infrastructure, says Loren McDonald, CEO of industry analytics firm EVAdoption.com.

Meanwhile: Utilities have their own challenges, he noted. 

Some of the sites chosen by states require new transformers or switches before chargers can be installed and powered up.

Local construction permitting can take six to 12 months.

In all, it can take up to 18 months for a charging station to be installed once a site is selected, industry experts say.

Yes, and: A "Build America, Buy America" provision in the law requires that charging equipment manufacturers move production lines from Asia to the U.S., Cathy Zoi, newly retired CEO of EVgo, said at a recent industry event.

One supplier, Delta Electronics, got its new plant up and running in Plano, Texas, months ahead of schedule, she noted.

What they're saying: Gabe Klein, executive director of the Joint Office, is satisfied with the pace of development.

"This is exactly the timeline I was expecting," he told Axios. "I think the states are doing a phenomenal job." 

The big picture: The federally funded chargers are just a small slice of a much larger picture.

As of June 2023, private companies had committed about $24 billion to expand charging in the U.S., Klein said.

That was before seven automakers announced plans in July to create a vast new network of 30,000 fast chargers.

Yes, but: The U.S. will need 28 million home and public charging ports to support a potential 33 million plug-in electric vehicles by 2030, per the Energy Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

The bottom line: With 60,000 public chargers — including only 8,560 fast chargers — available today, the country still has a long way to go.

First Biden-funded electric car charging station opens

The slow pace of opening federally funded charging stations is making it harder to accelerate EV adoption.

Electric vehicles

Latest news on Wall Street, Corporate America and financial regulation.

Business

Axios AI+

The European Union's comprehensive AI regulations, finalized Friday after a 36-hour negotiating marathon, come with a catch: The EU is stuck in a legal void until 2025, when the rules come into force. 

Why it matters: As the first global power to pass comprehensive AI legislation, the EU is once again setting what could become worldwide regulatory standards — much as it did on digital privacy rules — but the transition could be bumpy.

Because the law will not be in force until 2025, the EU will urge companies to begin voluntarily following the rules in the interim. But there are no penalties if they don't.

The hiatus leaves plenty of room for the U.S. or others to undercut the EU's plans before they go into effect by, for instance, implementing less restrictive rules before Europe's kick in. 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has expressed concern that EU-style laws enacted by the U.S. would put American firms at a disadvantage competing with China.

The big picture: European policymakers began work on their AI Act before ChatGPT's Nov. 2022 arrival and the explosion in the generative AI market during 2023.

The EU approach categorizes AI uses according to four risk levels, with increasingly stringent restrictions matched to greater potential risks.

Details: The EU law bans several uses of AI, including bulk scraping of facial images and most emotion recognition systems in workplace and educational settings. There are safety exceptions — such as using AI to detect a driver falling asleep.

The new law also bans controversial "social scoring" systems — efforts to evaluate the compliance or trustworthiness of citizens.

It restricts facial recognition technology in law enforcement to a handful of acceptable uses, including identification of victims of terrorism, human trafficking and kidnapping. 

Foundation model providers will need to submit detailed summaries of the training data they used to build their models.

Companies violating the rules could face fines ranging from 1.5% to  7% of global sales.

Operators of systems creating manipulated media will have to disclose that to users.

Providers of other "high-risk" AI, especially in essential public services, will be subject to reporting requirements, including disclosure to public databases and human rights impact assessments.

AI uses covered by those requirements include education, employment, elections, critical infrastructure, and border control.  

EU national governments, with France leading the charge, demanded and won exemptions from some aspects of the law for military or defense uses of AI.

Context:  The main dividing line in negotiations was between national governments demanding national security exemptions and parliamentarians defending civil liberties.

Meanwhile: The EU is taking a softer approach than the U.S. or U.K. in  assessing whether Microsoft's relationship with OpenAI violates antitrust rules. 

A European Commission spokesperson tells Axios that "the Commission has been following very closely the situation of control over OpenAI," but said it would take a "change of control on a lasting basis" to justify a Commission investigation.

What they're saying: EU officials are in a self-congratulatory mode, framing the law as "a launchpad for EU startups and researchers," per European industry commissioner Thierry Breton.

Amnesty International accused the EU of authorizing "dystopian digital surveillance."

Go deeper: Next up for AI in the EU: Liability

fines ranging 1.5 % to  7% of global sales

it's a launchpad for EU startups and researchers to lead the global AI race

There's a big catch in the EU's landmark new AI law

It will take more than a year to go into effect — leaving lots of room for rivals to undermine it.

Illustration of the EU flag with downward facing cursor arrows in place of stars

European Union (EU)

Artificial Intelligence

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

Technology

The biggest economic threat next year comes from geopolitical bad actors "who with one action can upset economic and market assumptions globally," a new survey of 500 institutional investors finds. 

Driving the news: The annual survey from Natixis ranked the threat higher than central bank policy mistakes, consumer pullbacks, or China's sluggish economy.

Why it matters: We're in a post-COVID world now, where relationships and alliances are breaking down.

That was evident last year, too, when war was the top economic risk identified in the Natixis survey.

The year before that, though, as the world was still emerging from COVID-related shutdowns, investors said the biggest economic risk for 2022 was supply chain disruptions. (They didn't anticipate Russia invading Ukraine.)

Other financial firms are also picking up on similar views:

In Bank of America Global Research's fund manager survey, 89% of respondents said geopolitical risk is above normal.

BlackRock Investment Institute wrote in a recent paper that historically, geopolitical events have had short-lived market and economic impacts — but that "has changed in the new, more volatile regime … Today we see geopolitics as a structural market risk."

The big picture: "Geopolitical risk is always there, but there are times when it bubbles up higher," Dave Goodsell, executive director of Natixis' Center for Investor Insight, tells Axios.

"After seeing how the early stages of the Russian invasion of Ukraine drove big price spikes for energy and food in 2022, institutions have good reason for concern as the geopolitical landscape is looking less stable going into 2024," the Natixis report said.

"The survey was fielded just as Hamas unleashed a terror attack on Israel ... and Iran and North Korea tightened alliances with the Kremlin to provide military assistance back to Russia," the report went on.

Zoom in: In the survey, about 70% say they believe a growing alliance between Russia, North Korea, and Iran will lead to greater economic instability.

The U.S. elections next year cast a shadow as well: 72% think a messy US campaign will lead to increased market volatility.

The bottom line: Investors can't plan or position around geopolitical wildcards — that's why they can be so worrisome. 

Biggest economic threat in '24? Geopolitics.

In a Natixis survey, institutional investors said geopolitical bad actors pose a bigger risk to the economy than a central bank mistake of a slowing consumer.

Geopolitics

Stock market

Workers on strike dropped by about a third in November

Labor

U.S. F-16 fighter jet crashes off coast of South Korea

Military

China is becoming the most formidable rival America has faced, and the risk of confrontation with Russia, North Korea or Iran still looms. Authoritarians are rising, the chaotic Afghanistan exit revealed the limits of U.S. power, and the pandemic, climate change and other critical challenges continue to pose grave threats.

World

Countries are on the cusp of history at the COP28 climate summit

COP28

Ominous forecasts about the impact of climate change serve as the backdrop for the world — led by U.S. lawmakers and companies — to debate big action on the problem, which could upend energy systems and our way of life.

Energy & Environment

Honeyguide birds respond to distinct calls of local human honey hunters

Evolution

A look at the scientific breakthroughs changing the world, explorations in space and in worlds beyond our own and the threats posed to us by our own planet, both out of our control and of our own making.

Science

Stanford aims to help policy makers prepare for AI, robotics and more

Artificial intelligence

Axios Science

Honeyguide birds respond differently to the distinct calls of groups of human honey hunters, according to new research.

Why it matters: Humans have a huge impact on other species. Understanding how other animals cope with their presence could provide insights about the potential for humans and other species to coexist.

Some research suggests "the growing footprint of humanity and the transformation of the landscape is selecting for certain traits in other species," says Brian Wood, an evolutionary anthropologist at University of California Los Angeles and a co-author of the new study. 

"One of them is a heightened ability for learning," he adds.

The new findings suggests honeyguide birds, through learning, are capable of adjusting to differences in human culture. 

How it works: Human honey hunters use different calls to communicate with honeyguide birds (Indicator indicator) that then lead humans to bees' nests. The hunters open the nests to collect honey while the honeyguides get a meal of beeswax.

In Tanazania, the Hadza cultural group uses a whistle to communicate with honeyguides.

The Yao cultural group in Mozambique instead uses a loud trill followed by a grunt to find the birds.

What they found: Honeyguides respond more readily to the calls of their local human partners, researchers recently reported in the journal Science. 

Wood and Claire Spottiswoode, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Cambridge, followed honey hunters in both locations and played recordings of the signals of each group as well as the sound of a honey hunter just calling their name as a control for the study.

In Tanzania, honeyguides responded about 80% of the time to the local Hazda hunters' whistle and only 24% of the time to the call of hunters in the Yao group.

Honeyguides in Mozambique responded to the trill call of the local Yao group about 73% of the time and to the call of the Hazda about 26% of the time.  

The intrigue: That suggests honeyguides learn the sounds of local humans, the researchers write.

Humans learn socially — knowledge is passed from person to person.

It's unclear if honeyguides learn the same way. But they "aggregate in big groups to feed on wax and have ample opportunities for them to observe what other honeyguides are doing," Wood says.

If they do learn socially, it would suggest elements of each species' culture are evolving together.

The bottom line: "Interspecies relationships are very complex and it takes quite a bit of work to piece together the script of this dance between species," Wood says.

The new findings suggests honeyguide birds, through learning, are capable of adjusting to differences in human culture.

Greater Honeyguide (male) in Niassa Special Reserve, Mozambique. Photo: Claire Spottiswoode/University of Cambridge

A new project from Stanford University aims to help policymakers get their heads around a range of fast-developing new technologies, from AI and cryptography to robotics and synthetic biology.

Why it matters: A similar effort by an earlier generation brought policy experts together with scientists to navigate the dangers of the nuclear era, Hoover Institution director and former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters at Stanford.

Today's explosion of new technology challenges means "we need to have that kind of teaming of people who come from these very different worlds," added Rice, who is co-chair of the new project. 

Driving the news: In a daylong meeting with a handful of journalists on Friday, leaders from across the university outlined the thinking behind the recently launched Stanford Emerging Technology Review (SETR), which has already published a 150-page report that focuses on 10 areas regulators will have to address.

While the journal won't provide specific policy recommendations, the school's Hoover Institution, the mainstream-conservative think tank leading the effort, has a clear view that it's important for the U.S. and its allies to lead.

"If an authoritarian regime like China wins  the transformative technologies race, what kind of world [will] we live in?" Rice asked. 

Regulation, she said, has a role to play — but she cautioned against efforts to regulate too soon and put limits on technologies that adversaries won't.

The day was a mix of theoretical discussion and visits to labs and conversations with professors across campus designed to show the types of issues that are likely to demand attention from regulators.

AI professor Fei-Fei Li, along with her students and researchers, demonstrated how brainwave-detecting sensors placed atop a person's head can be used to control a robot to cook a dish — in this case, the Japanese dish sukiyaki. 

"No monkeys were harmed," Li said — contrasting her researchers' non-invasive approach with efforts that rely on implants and involve controversial animal testing, such as Elon Musk's Neuralink.

Although the private sector has tons of resources, Li said universities like Stanford play a critical role in both bringing together researchers across disciplines and offering the creative freedom to explore areas that may not provide immediate commercial return. "There are things money can't buy," Li said.

Space: There is a vast need for global coordination to deal with growing congestion. Professor Simone D'Amico, whose work involves designing and launching constellations of small satellites, highlighted how a lack of global rules to govern increasingly crowded orbital pathways could lead to collisions that litter space with dangerous debris.

Robotics: Stanford showed off a mix of traditional robots learning to perform, special-purpose robots that can be used in surgery and the less well-known realm of soft robotics. In one example of that last area, pneumatics and motors control an extending hose-like robot that could snake through pipes in a nuclear reactor.

Synthetic biology: New research offers hope for revolutionizing food production at a time when the world needs to feed more people amid harsher conditions, noted Hoover Institution senior fellow Amy Zegart, one of SETR's co-chairs. Yet those same advances, Zegart noted, could allow people to design "viruses at will from the comfort of your laptop."

Between the lines: The fields intersect, too. For example, AI could fuel advances in fields such as material science, which in turn could help give AI the faster chips and computers it needs to move forward.

"It doesn't get the sexy headlines but it's really important," said SETR director Herbert Lin. And the AI field knows it, too: "They would be screwed without the advances from from Nvidia and so on."

Similarly, Stanford is trying to bring all of its disciplines to bear, working across the campus in ways that it hasn't always been able to. The project began with Rice gathering professors from across campus, first in a series of lunches and then for a dinner at her house.

Yes, but: These emerging technologies are moving at very different paces, as was made clear by both the discussions and demonstrations. While AI technology seems to improve by the week, advances in areas from nuclear fusion to robotics have been far slower.

"It's easier to deal with bits than atoms" was a refrain heard multiple times during the day.

What's next: Cautioned by former Stanford president and project advisor John Hennessy that an annual report won't be sufficient for policymakers to keep up with these dynamic technologies, SETR plans a series of reports, podcasts and events in Washington D.C. to further its work.

Condoleezza Rice, Hoover Institution aim to clarify policy around AI, robotics, synthetic biology and more.

Condoleezza Rice at Stanford, Dec. 7. Photo courtesy Hoover Institution

U.S. officials demanded the Chinese coast guard on Sunday "desist from its dangerous and destabilizing conduct" in the South China Sea following clashes with Philippine vessels.

Driving the news: State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller in a statement condemned what he said were "reckless maneuvers" on Saturday and Sunday against the Filipino crews on supply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal, where Philippine service members are stationed.

This included the use of water cannons and the "forcing" of a collision, "causing damage to Philippine vessels undertaking official supply missions to those locations, and jeopardizing the safety" of the Filipino crew, he said.

"Obstructing supply lines to this longstanding outpost and interfering with lawful Philippines maritime operations undermines regional stability."

Why it matters: The comments are likely to anger Chinese officials, who claim territorial sovereignty over the region despite an international court ruling that it has no basis in law. 

President Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jingping raised hopes that U.S.-China relations were improving after years of tension when they announced at last month's APEC summit in San Francisco the resumption of military-to-military communications between the two countries.

Go deeper: Biden admin rejects Beijing's claims to territory in South China Sea

Biden admin rejects Beijing's claims to territory in South China Sea

U.S. accuses Beijing of undermining regional security in South China Sea

State Department official demands Beijing "desist from its dangerous and destabilizing conduct."

This photo taken on December 10, 2023 shows a Chinese coast guard ship shadowing a Philippine vessel (L) loaded with provisions for Filipino fishermen and troops in disputed waters of the South China Sea.

A Chinese coast guard ship shadowing a Philippine vessel (left) loaded with provisions for Filipino fishing crews and troops in disputed waters of the South China Sea on Sunday. Photo: Ted  Aljibe/AFP via Getty Images

South China Sea

China

Prosecutors urged a judge in former President Trump's 2020 election interference federal case on Sunday to deny his request to pause proceedings while he appeals her ruling rejecting that he has presidential immunity.

Why it matters: Appeal proceedings could delay Trump's trial, which is due to begin the day before Super Tuesday, and its outcome could impact this and the other three criminal cases that the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner faces.

Driving the news: "During the pendency of the appeal, any number of matters could arise in this case that are not involved in the appeal; the Court should not enter an order preventing it from handling them," wrote the prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith's team in the court filing seeking to keep the trial start date on March 4.

"[I]n light of the public's strong interest in a prompt trial, the Government will seek to ensure that trial proceeds as scheduled," added senior assistant special counsels Molly Gaston and Thomas Windom in the filing to D.C.-based U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.

Of note: Lawyers for Trump, who has pleaded not guilty in all four of his criminal cases, have argued that he should "not be required to endure 'the burdens of litigation'" as president and while his appeal is pending.

Federal prosecutors urge judge to keep March 4 trial in Trump election case

Appeal proceedings could delay Trump's trial, and its outcome could impact this and the other 3 criminal cases he faces.

5 big things

Latest stories

All top stories

Countries are on the cusp of history at the COP28 climate summit

Honeyguide birds respond to distinct calls of local human honey hunters

Stanford aims to help policy makers prepare for AI, robotics and more

U.S. accuses Beijing of undermining regional security in South China Sea

Federal prosecutors urge judge to keep March 4 trial in Trump election case

Macy's reportedly receives $5.8 billion buyout offer