America’s carmakers face an uncertain future in the wake of President Donald Trump’s signing of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) into law on July 4.
The new law ends the $7,500 credit for new electric vehicles ($4,000 for used units) which was enacted as part of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act as of September 30, seven years earlier than originally planned.
The promise of that big credit lasting for a full decade did not just improve finances for Tesla and other pure-play EV companies: It also served as a major motivator for integrated carmakers like Ford, GM, and Stellantis to invest billions of dollars in capital into new, EV-specific plants, equipment, and supply chains, and expand their EV model offerings. But now, with the big subsidy about to expire, the question becomes whether the U.S. EV business can survive in an unsubsidized market? Carmakers across the EV spectrum are about to find out, and the outlook for most will not be rosy.
These carmakers will be entering into a brave new world in which the market for their cars had already turned somewhat sour even with the subsidies in place. Sales of EVs stalled during the fourth quarter of 2024 and then collapsed by more than 18% from December to January. Tesla, already negatively impacted by founder and CEO Elon Musk’s increased political activities in addition to the stagnant market, decided to slash prices in an attempt to maintain sales momentum, forcing its competitors to follow suit.
But the record number of EV-specific incentives now being offered by U.S. dealers has done little to halt the drop in sales, as the Wall Street Journal reports that the most recent data shows EV sales falling in each of the three months from April through June. Ford said its own sales had fallen by more than 30% across those three months, with Hyundai and Kia also reporting big drops. GM was the big winner in the second quarter, overtaking Ford and moving into 2nd place behind Tesla in total sales. But its ability to continue such growth absent the big subsidy edge over traditional ICE cars now falls into doubt.
The removal of the per-unit subsidies also calls into question whether the buildout of new public charging infrastructure, which has accelerated dramatically in the past three years, will continue as the market moves into a time of uncertainty. Recognizing that consumer concern, Ford, Hyundai, BMW and others included free home charging kits as part of their current suites of incentives. But of course, that only works if the buyer owns a home with a garage and is willing to pay the higher cost of insurance that now often comes with parking an EV inside.
Decisions, decisions.
As the year dawned, few really expected the narrow Republican congressional majorities would show the political will and unity to move so aggressively to cancel the big IRA EV subsidies. But, as awareness rose in Congress about the true magnitude of the budgetary cost of those provisions over the next 10 years, the benefit of getting rid of them ultimately subsumed concerns about the possible political cost of doing so.
So now, here we are, with an EV industry that seems largely unprepared to survive in a market with a levelized playing field. Even Tesla, which remains far and away the leader in total EV sales despite its recent struggles, seems caught more than a little off-guard despite Musk’s having been heavily involved in the early months of the second Trump presidency.
Musk’s response to his disapproval of the OBBBA was to announce the creation of a third political party he dubbed the American Party. It seems doubtful this new vanity project was the response to a looming challenge that members of Tesla’s board of directors would have preferred. But it does seem appropriately emblematic of an industry that is undeniably limping into uncharted territory with no clear plan for how to escape from existential danger.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Earlier this week, Republican Congressman Abe Hamadeh’s (R-AZ08) social media team offered words of gratitude and even praise for Laurie Roberts, an opinion columnist for the Arizona Republic. The exhange came in regard to the framing of her recent op-ed entitled “Rep. Abe Hamadeh says no Medicaid cuts? He’s not fooling anyone.” According to Roberts, she incorrectly wrote in a post to X that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act contains cuts to Medicare, rather than reforming Medicaid.
Addressing the erroneous post, Roberts wrote a new post to X and commented, “Deleted my earlier tweet as I mistakenly said the cuts were to Medicare. Don’t want to start a panic, so I deleted it. The cuts are to Medicaid, as the column correctly points out.”
Deleted my earlier tweet as I mistakenly said the cuts were to Medicare. Don't want to start a panic, so I deleted it. The cuts are to Medicaid, as the column correctly points out.
Abe Hamadeh War Room, the Rapid Response account for the Congressman’s office, highlighted Roberts’ correction writing, “Thank you for showing integrity. In this case and correcting your mistake, Laurie. Unfortunately, the Democrats have created panic for months now by conflating these two very important issues. The last thing we would want is to scare people.”
Thank you for showing integrity. In this case and correcting your mistake, Laurie.
Unfortunately, the Democrats have created panic for months now by conflating these two very important issues.
As explained by the White House, “Medicare has not been touched in this bill— absolutely nothing in the bill reduces spending on Medicare benefits. This legislation does not make a single cut to welfare programs—it safeguards and protects these programs for all eligible Americans.”
The White House further noted that H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA), does not in fact make cuts to Medicaid either.
“As the President has said numerous times, there will be no cuts to Medicaid. The One Big Beautiful Bill protects and strengthens Medicaid for those who rely on it—pregnant women, children, seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income families—while eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse,” the White House wrote. “The One Big Beautiful Bill removes illegal aliens, enforces work requirements, and protects Medicaid for the truly vulnerable.”
According to the latest congressional summary of the bill, the Medicaid reform in the OBBA falls into four main categories:
Reducing Fraud and Improving Enrollment Processes
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) are to create a centralized system by 2027 for states to detect multi-state Medicaid/CHIP enrollment; states must verify addresses and report Social Security numbers monthly by FY2030; funding provided for system setup and maintenance.
States must check Social Security Administration’s Death Master File quarterly starting 2028 to identify deceased Medicaid enrollees.
States to verify provider termination from Medicare, other state Medicaid, or CHIP during enrollment/reenrollment starting 2028, with monthly checks thereafter.
States to check provider death status via Death Master File during enrollment/reenrollment starting 2028, with quarterly checks thereafter.
States to redetermine Medicaid expansion population eligibility every six months starting December 31, 2026.
10% reduction in enhanced federal matching rate starting FY2028 for states providing comprehensive health benefits to non-lawfully residing individuals (except children/pregnant women).
Preventing Wasteful Spending
CMS to survey pharmacies through FY2033 for Medicaid drug pricing; non-participating pharmacies face penalties; OIG to study survey results with FY2026 funding.
Mandates pass-through pricing and bans spread-pricing for Medicaid pharmacy benefit manager contracts.
Prohibits Medicaid/CHIP federal payments for gender transition procedures, with exceptions for minors with parental consent for specific medical conditions.
Bars federal Medicaid payments for 10 years to nonprofit essential community providers primarily offering family planning/abortions (beyond rape/incest/life-threatening cases) if they received over $1M in Medicaid payments in FY2024.
Stopping Abusive Financing Practices
Non-expansion states as of March 11, 2021, must expand Medicaid by January 1, 2026, to receive enhanced federal matching rate.
Prohibits federal matching for revenue from new or increased Medicaid provider taxes.
Limits state-directed payments under Medicaid managed care to Medicare rates (100% for expansion states, 110% for others) through FY2033.
Increasing Personal Accountability (Work Requirements)
Medicaid expansion population must meet 80-hour monthly work/community service/education requirements starting December 31, 2026; exemptions for medical conditions or dependent children; FY2026 funding for implementation.
Cost-sharing required for Medicaid expansion population with income above poverty line starting FY2029; max $35 per service, 5% of family income; excludes certain services; providers may require payment upfront.
Under the OBB, Medicaid isn’t cut but is in fact mandated to expand for “non-expansion states,” to receive enhanced federally matched funding. The only individuals and families purportedly “cut” from Medicaid would be those who fail to meet the program’s work/community service/education requirements and are not exempted by medical conditions or dependent children or whose income exceeds the program’s limitations and “non-lawfully residing individuals.”
In a critical move to combat the growing threat of drugs and contraband entering county jails, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has deployed advanced LineV X-ray body scanners at its Intake, Transfer, and Release (ITR) Facility.
A total of 10 scanners have been acquired and will be installed across six active jail facilities. This will significantly enhance safety for staff, inmates, and the public.
Chief Mike Dawson of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office emphasized the scanners’ importance.
“This technology gives our detention deputies another tool in their arsenal to keep contraband out of our jails. Our mission is the care, custody, and control of inmates, which includes keeping them and our staff safe,” said Dawson.
The new LineV scanners are full-body imaging systems that emit less than 0.25 microsieverts of radiation, roughly 1/100th of the exposure of a typical chest X-ray.
Within just 90 minutes of these scanners being live at the ITR Facility, one scanner successfully detected drugs concealed in an inmate’s body cavity, an item that may have gone unnoticed.
The new scanning technology eliminates the need for most manual searches, helping to reduce contraband entry while improving the intake process.
There are three models of LineV scanner being utilized:
Conpass Smart DV, which is a dual-angle, full-body X-ray system designed specifically for correctional environments. It features radiation shutters, real-time dose metering, and strict beam containment for maximum safety.
ClearPass, a high-resolution, rapid-scanning system that produces a full body image in just three seconds, allowing for efficient and effective screening.
Clearpass Ci, a compact, mobile scanner designed for targeted inspections for specific areas such as the torso or groin.
“My goal is to stop contraband from entering the jail system altogether,” said Maricopa County Sheriff Jerry Sheridan. “So let this serve as a warning: if you are caught smuggling drugs into or within our facilities, we will be watching closely, and you will be charged. Possession of contraband drugs will result in a class two felony charge.”
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Sixteen months before the 2026 General Election, Arizona voters already know at least three ballot measures they’ll be weighing come November. Referred to the ballot by state lawmakers during the most recent legislative session, the proposals span issues of taxation, public safety, and individual privacy.
If passed, each measure would amend the Arizona Constitution — changes that can only be undone by future statewide votes. And these early additions may just be the beginning of what’s shaping up to be another crowded ballot.
In 2024, the number of voter questions was so high that some Arizona counties resorted to printing two-sheet ballots, prompting widespread voter complaints about ballot length. With dozens of potential referrals still under consideration, the 2026 ballot may once again test voters’ patience and attention spans.
Here’s a closer look at the three measures already set for the 2026 ballot:
1. Local Food Taxes Face New Restrictions
Sponsored by Rep. Leo Biasiucci (R–LD30), House Concurrent Resolution 2021 seeks to limit the ability of local governments to impose taxes on groceries.
If approved, the measure would require cities, towns, or counties to obtain voter approval before creating or increasing a tax on food. Currently, local governments can make that decision without direct input from the electorate.
The measure would also impose a temporary moratorium on any food tax hikes until June 30, 2027.
Proponents argue the change would make groceries more affordable during a time of rising costs. Local officials, however, warn it could impact critical revenue for municipal services.
The proposal passed with bipartisan support.
2. Ban on Mileage-Based Vehicle Taxes
Senate Concurrent Resolution 1004, sponsored by Sen. Jake Hoffman (R–LD15), would preemptively ban any tax or fee based on the number of miles a vehicle travels on Arizona roadways.
While Arizona does not currently impose such a tax, Hoffman and supporters argue the measure is necessary to protect personal freedom and prevent government overreach.
“There is nothing more insidious than the government trying to limit or control their citizens’ freedom,” Hoffman said earlier this year.
Mileage-based taxes have been explored in other states, like Oregon and Utah, as a way to replace declining fuel tax revenues and reduce pollution. Environmental advocates in Arizona, including the Sierra Club, support such measures as a means of curbing emissions and promoting sustainable transportation.
The resolution passed along party lines, with Republicans in favor and most Democrats opposed or absent.
3. Designating Cartels as Terrorist Organizations
In one of the final acts of the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers approved House Concurrent Resolution 2055, which seeks to classify drug cartels as terrorist organizations under Arizona law.
Introduced by House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R–LD29), the measure would direct the state’s Department of Homeland Security to take all possible actions within its authority to counteract cartel activity.
Supporters say it complements Proposition 314, a 2024 ballot measure that authorized Arizona to enforce its own border security measures — though that law remains on hold pending the outcome of a related Texas lawsuit.
These early measures may just scratch the surface. Dozens of proposed ballot referrals were introduced during this year’s session, and lawmakers still have the 2026 legislative calendar to revive stalled proposals or introduce new ones.
As Arizona continues its tradition of robust direct democracy, election officials may once again find themselves preparing for a complex and lengthy ballot — and voters will need to prepare for an equally complex decision-making process at the polls.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Joining KFYI’s Conservative Circus host James T. Harris on Monday, Arizona House Majority Leader Michael Carbone doubled down on comments he made to the Arizona Daily Independent (ADI) on Saturday. Carbone offered the outlet a sound condemnation of Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes for her lawsuit against the Trump administration’s efforts to end discriminatory marketing of affordable housing.
As reported by ADI, Mayes and a coalition of 21 Democrat attorneys general have launched their legal action after Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner announced that HUD is “examining ways to slash burdensome regulations that stifle the private sector’s ability to innovate and build much-needed housing supply.”
Among the reforms Mayes and her fellow leftist AG’s voiced opposition to is a proposed rule that would end fair housing regulations that required targeted marketing of affordable housing based on race.
“We’re never going to fix the affordable housing crisis by pushing radical left-wing identity politics,” Carbone told the Daily Independent. “Taxpayer-funded programs should serve all Americans fairly—not pick winners and losers based on race, ethnicity, or national origin. The Trump administration is right to stand up for equal treatment under the law. It’s shameful that Attorney General Mayes would rather play politics and protect discrimination than fight for real solutions that help everyone.”
Speaking with James T. Harris on Monday, Carbone explained, “It’s really a leftist idea what they’re doing. You know, when we create rules, they create behaviors. And all what Trump is trying to do is look at these bad rules. We should let the free market take place, do what it does fast, and then you know… then everything will work itself out, right? No other country in the world can show that, but the America can show that.”
When asked why Mayes is campaigning to keep the affordable housing marketing mandates in place, the Majority Leader answered that Mayes is “flaky to her base #1″ and “these leftists always want to create rules to change the behaviors. And they actually go backwards. They take us backwards.”
He added, “And I said, you go anywhere in the world. When you see the free market here in America, it works the best. We have the best results to show that compared to any country in the world…There’s a reason why President Trump won by a landslide victory, right? He won every class, every race, every group…he killed it. Because people, I think, are getting wind and are tired of the same old crap that the Democrats are playing.”
Carbone, a Chicago-native went on to elaborate on his statement that AG Mayes would “rather protect discrimination” by HUD, explaining, “Look, I grew up in Chicago. I grew up in a three flat with my mom, a single mom with me, my two brothers. And, and you know, we weren’t… we didn’t have a lot of money.
“But I’ll tell you right now where I looked, I was one of the fewest white people around. And you know, when you look at projects, that was a… that was created by the government, by local and federal government projects. And you have to ask the question. I mean, go back, why do you have to create these things? Why do we have to get $30,000, Governor Hobbs’ $30,000 down payment assistance to people?
“And when you fill out that application, it asks you, not who you are, what do you do and who are you? Ethnicity, what group or background you have? Why is that important? And I think people realize we all want to be treated equally. We do. When you do this, you go into a pivot of focusing on certain classifications. And this is what the democratic mantra has been for the last 40 years. They’ve been very good at it. And I think the American people are now woken up and are tired of it.”
Harris replied, saying of Mayes, “It’s like she’s weaponizing taxpayers, wag(ing) a political war against the Trump administration. I mean, is this becoming a pattern with her?”
To which Carbone answered, “OK, this is not only a pattern with her, JT, it’s a pattern with the Democratic machine. Let’s go back to Obama. Obama did this. If people remember, Obama tried doing this, this pilot program where if you had wealthy neighborhoods and you had rent that was probably five times higher than the average rent down the street, which might have been a lower class of income, that those people should have a right to live in those and our tax dollars should pay for that. I’m going back about 15 years. I don’t know if you remember that, but that was a pilot program. I don’t know if it still exists. But the thing is: that’s not how, that’s not how the world works. That’s socialism. That’s a different class of government, different types of economics.”
