Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times,

As tensions mount in the high stakes race for California governor, early results show Republicans have returned more than 905,000 ballots ahead of the June 2 primary election—a massive surge compared with the last governor’s race during the 2022 midterms.

Ballots from Republicans made up 37 percent of the early ballot returns—up 11 percent from four years ago at this point in the primary process, while those from Democratic voters have dropped by 13 percent, according to a Political Data (PDI) poll released on May 16.

Most of the ballots submitted so far—54 percent—were cast by voters 65 and older, while about 10 percent of voters ages 18-34 have returned early ballots.

The Real Clear Politics polling average shows Republican Steve Hilton, a political commentator, and Democrat Xavier Becerra, former Health and Human Services secretary, essentially tied, each with about 20 percent of the vote, followed by Democratic billionaire and environmental activist Tom Steyer at 14 percent and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco with 13 percent. The rest of the candidates show less than 10 percent support.

Hilton has publicly pressured Bianco to drop out of the race to avoid splitting the Republican vote, ensuring that at least one GOP candidate—himself—advances to the general election. But at the CBS-hosted televised debate on April 28, Bianco rejected the notion, saying he and Hilton will both be on the Nov. 3 ballot.

‘Break the Glass’ Strategy

Meanwhile, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is terming out, told reporters at his recent state budget presentation he’s confident a Democrat will be on the Nov. 3 ballot.

Newsom alluded to a “break the glass” strategy to prevent a Democrat lockout in the nonpartisan, jungle primary, which allows the possibility of two Republicans—no Democrats—on the general election ballot.

“I don’t anticipate this need to be the case, but there’s a like break-the-glass scenario,” he said. “There’s many people that have a deep understanding of what it would look like if Democrats were locked out, and we’re going to do everything to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

The Democratic Governors Association has recently sent out mailers positioning Hilton as the top GOP threat, which could drive Bianco supporters to Hilton, making it more likely for a Democrat to finish in the top two.

“The Democrats wouldn’t be spending money trying to help Steve if they weren’t scared of me,” Bianco posted on X.

Steve Hilton speaks during a gubernatorial candidate forum in Sacramento on April 14, 2026. Godofredo A. Vásquez/AP Photo

Democratic Strategy Favors Hilton

Rob Pyers, a nonpartisan political analyst and research director for California Target Book, suggested the Democrats prefer to run against Hilton.

“The Democratic Governors Association really wants GOP voters to know that Steve Hilton is ‘Endorsed by Trump’ and ‘Pro MAGA’, and that they would be devastated if he advanced out of California’s top two primary alongside a Democrat,” Rob Pyers wrote on X.

When Amy Reichert, a San Diego based conservative activist, asked if the mailer from the Democrats was only mailed to Republicans to bump Hilton to the top two spot, Pyers said that “appears to be the case.”

Pyers replied that the “attack ads” contain “language tailored to appeal to conservative primary voters and to highlight Hilton’s Trump endorsement.

He noted that a Democrat versus Democrat race “would suck up hundreds of millions of dollars” that could be spent elsewhere.

“A D vs R race, not so much,” he wrote.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco fields questions from reporters and students following the California Governor’s Debate hosted by CBS at Pomona College in Claremont, Calif., on April 28, 2026. Brad Jones/The Epoch Times

Bianco’s Response

Bianco said in a text message to The Epoch Times on May 18 that Californians are voting differently in this election because they’re tired of dishonesty and corruption and “are absolutely sick of politicians rigging the system for their own benefit.”

“Newsom has never said one word in the past when two Democrats have moved on to the general elections,” he said.

“Saying the corrupt part out loud, exposing their plans to again rig the system, is exactly why people are voting different,” he said.

Corruption Scandal

As Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary during the Biden administration, Becerra has come under fire from critics who blamed him for putting migrant children at risk of trafficking when the agency lost track of 85,000 migrant children.

During his tenure at HHS from March 19, 2021, to Jan. 20, 2025, Becerra also faced scrutiny over tenuous ties to a corruption scandal involving his former aide Sean McCluskie, who pleaded guilty to his role in an alleged scheme to skim funds from a dormant campaign account for a “no-show” job for his wife.

A Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) complaint against Becerra over the alleged violation of state campaign finance laws remains open and unresolved. The complaint hinges on Becerra’s dormant state Attorney General campaign funds, which were allegedly used to pay out tens of thousands of dollars to his former adviser’s firm months after Becerra was appointed HHS secretary.

Political consultant Dana Williamson, Newsom’s former chief of staff, has also pleaded guilty in the case, admitting to conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud, subscribing to a false tax return, and making false statements to a federal agent.

California gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra at a campaign event in Los Angeles on April 18, 2026. Jae C. Hong/AP Photo

Becerra has not been charged with any crimes or been accused of any wrongdoing related to the federal investigation, and has repeatedly denied any knowledge of illegal campaign fund transfers.

He also faced scorn over his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Some recent polls, including an Emerson poll, show Becerra with a slight lead while others show Hilton is the frontrunner.

Becerra surged into the lead among Democratic voters when disgraced then-congressman Eric Swalwell dropped out of the governor’s race in April amid sexual assault allegations. Swalwell resigned from Congress about a week later. Swalwell is under investigation but no criminal charges have been filed to date.

Official primary ballots list 61 candidates for governor, including Swalwell and former state controller Betty Yee, who has also dropped out of the race.

Political Predictions

According to Polymarket, an online betting house which claims 90-percent accuracy in predicting event outcomes one month ahead and 94 percent four hours before an event, the odds favor Becerra with a 58 percent chance of winning the election in a Democrat versus Democrat race in the Nov. 3 election followed by Steyer with a 28 percent chance. Hilton is ranked with a 10 percent chance and Bianco at 3 percent as of May 18.

Source: Polymarket

The Cook Political Report shows the California governor race as “Solid D” with partisan voter index score of “D +12,” which means the state, on average , is 12 percentage points more Democratic than the rest of the nation and indicates that statewide Democratic candidates have an entrenched advantage.

Sabato’s Crystal Ball also shows the California governorship as “Safe D.”

Tom Steyer speaks during a gubernatorial candidate forum on Latino and immigrant communities in Sacramento on April 14, 2026. Godofredo A. Vásquez/AP Photo

Campaign Finances

According to Transparency USA, as of May 19, Becerra was running a $3.3 million campaign deficit, taking in about $6.3 million in donations but spending more than $9.6 million. His campaign spending is mainly attributed to aggressive advertising.

A billionaire environmental activist, Steyer has raised about $134 million and spent about $255 million, He is on track to outspend Meg Whitman, a former eBay executive, who set a $159 million campaign spending record in her unsuccessful bid for governor in 2010.

Steyer’s wealth stems mainly from hedge fund investments in fossil fuels and private prisons, which his political opponents have used against him despite his progressive bent.

Steyer is facing an FPPC investigation over allegations his campaign paid social media influencers to post promotional videos without including legally required sponsored content disclosures.

Hilton has raised about $9.8 million and spent about $8.9 million, while Bianco has raised about $5.3 million and spent about $4.2 million.

The Issues

Several lively debates have drawn the national media spotlight on hot-button issues including the high cost of living in California—especially housing, tuition, and state taxes on gasoline—and ongoing problems with homelessness, the drug crisis, crime and public safety, and illegal immigration.

The U.S. is still at least a decade away from meaningfully reducing its dependence on China for the most critical rare earth minerals, despite billions of dollars in new investment and political pledges to move faster, according to a new report from Bloomberg.

While Washington has pushed to build domestic mining, refining, and manufacturing capacity, analysts say China is likely to retain its dominance over heavy rare earths—particularly dysprosium and terbium—until at least the mid-2030s. Those minerals are essential for the high-performance magnets used in fighter jets, submarines, missiles, electric vehicles, wind turbines, and other advanced technologies.

Forecasts from McKinsey & Company, CRU Group, and Benchmark Mineral Intelligence suggest producers outside China will meet less than 20% of global demand for dysprosium and terbium by 2035. The U.S. and its allies may make faster progress in reducing reliance on China for more abundant light rare earths, but the heavier materials remain far harder to replace.

The challenge is not simply digging more minerals out of the ground. Rare earth production involves mining ore, separating it into oxides, and then converting those materials into metals and magnets…a supply chain China dominates at nearly every step.

Heavy rare earths are especially difficult because they are less abundant and far more complex to refine. Producing ultra-pure material can require more than 1,000 chemical separation stages, and even small mistakes can affect magnet performance. Over decades, China built a deep advantage through refining infrastructure, technical expertise, and government-backed industrial policy. It also restricted exports of certain processing technologies, making it harder for competitors to catch up. The U.S., by comparison, has only a small pool of specialists with experience in rare earth separation and processing.

Bloomberg writes that Washington has begun investing heavily to rebuild domestic capacity, including Pentagon support for Lynas Rare Earths Ltd., currently the only commercial refiner of heavy rare earths outside China.

But production remains limited. Lynas produced just eight tons of dysprosium and terbium combined in the first quarter of 2026, while global demand is measured in thousands of tons each year. New projects in the United States, Australia, and Brazil could expand supply, but analysts still expect significant shortages in mining, refining, and magnet manufacturing by 2035.

China’s lower production costs have made the market even harder for rivals; past price swings wiped out many non-Chinese projects before they could scale. That leaves the U.S. facing a long and expensive effort to loosen China’s hold over a supply chain that has become increasingly important to both economic competitiveness and national security.

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Newly confirmed Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh, pledging new tactics to fight inflation, faces an uphill battle to keep rising prices in check.

At his April 21 Senate confirmation hearing, Warsh called for “a regime change in the conduct of policy” at the Fed under former chair Jerome Powell, whose tenure saw annual inflation exceed 8 percent during the Biden administration and has failed since 2021 to keep inflation below its target.

“Once you let inflation take hold in the economy, it’s more expensive and harder to bring it down, and so the fatal policy error going back four or five years is still a legacy that we’re dealing with,” Warsh stated. “Hard-working Americans are no doubt feeling it.”

Americans are suffering as price increases outpace wages. And as of April, the inflation rate of 3.8 percent remains persistently above the 2 percent target set by the Federal Reserve.

What is the new Fed chair’s plan to get inflation under control? Analysts predict that he will bring a different approach, which will include reducing the Fed’s massive $6.8 trillion bond holdings, prioritizing interest-rate actions over quantitative easing, and focusing on the money supply over other metrics.

“Warsh is likely going to pursue a smaller Fed balance sheet and try to use this ‘tightening’ as a bargaining chip to get the Federal Open Market Committee to lower short-term rates,” Chris Whalen, investment banker and former Fed staffer, told The Epoch Times. “His comments on the disaster of quantitative easing are quite clear.”

The Legacy of Cheap Dollars

Except for a brief interlude during President Donald Trump’s first term, the Fed has pursued a cheap-money strategy since the mortgage crisis of 2008–09, keeping its benchmark short-term interest rate—the federal funds rate—near zero, and only raising rates in 2022 when inflation was approaching double digits. Simultaneously, the Fed pursued an experimental policy called quantitative easing (QE), in which it created money to buy bonds from money-center banks, flooding the U.S. economy with dollars.

Between 2008 and 2022, the Fed accumulated $8 trillion in new financial assets on its balance sheet, effectively transforming it into one of the world’s largest asset managers and the largest single owner of U.S. Treasuries. Warsh has been an outspoken critic of quantitative easing, leading many economists to predict he will try to reverse this policy and shrink the Fed’s balance sheet.

During his confirmation hearing, he stated that “the Fed has an interest rate tool and a balance sheet tool … The balance sheet tool disproportionately helps those with financial assets; the interest rate tool hits the entire economy.”

While QE and low interest rates boosted demand in the wake of the mortgage collapse and pandemic lockdowns, they also drove up asset prices—notably stocks, bonds, and houses—to the benefit of wealthier Americans. Simultaneously, living standards fell for many Americans, whose dollars have lost more than 20 percent of their value over the past five years.

“The primary driver of inflation is the Fed’s expansion of the money supply, which the new Fed chair Kevin Warsh has addressed numerous times,” Julia Cartwright, economist with the American Institute for Economic Research, told The Epoch Times.

Between 2020 and 2022, the Fed injected approximately $6.4 trillion in new money into the economy to finance COVID stimulus payments, she said, and about 29 percent of America’s entire money supply today has been created since January 2020.

“Compounding this, the Iran conflict has choked off the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting roughly 20 million barrels of oil per day and a fifth of global LNG trade, driving up energy, fertilizer, plastics, food, and virtually every input price across the economy,” Cartwright said.

Follow the Money Supply

While the Iran war and tariffs have driven up prices, Steve Hanke, professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University who served on President Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers, maintained that inflation is fundamentally a monetary phenomenon, a matter of too much money chasing too few goods.

“To put the inflation genie back in the bottle, the Fed must dump the post-Keynesian economic models it relies on and start paying attention to the quantity theory of money and the money supply, broadly measured,” Hanke told The Epoch Times.

“The Fed should announce that it is going to target the growth rate in the money supply that is consistent with hitting its two-percent-per-year inflation target,” he said. “Based on the quantity theory of money, that would require the rate of growth in M2 to be around 6 percent per year.”

The M2 measurement of the money supply includes cash, bank deposits, and funds that are readily convertible to cash, such as certificates of deposit and money market funds. During America’s low-inflation period, between 2008 and 2020, the annual growth rate in the money supply (M2) was 6.11 percent, Hanke said, and inflation, measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), averaged 1.77 percent.

Indeed, Warsh has indicated that he will focus on different metrics to measure and control inflation, beyond short-term price fluctuations.

“What I’m most interested in is: What is the underlying inflation rate—not what is the one-time change in prices because of a change in geopolitics or change in beef,” Warsh told senators at his confirmation hearing.

The Power of the Supply Side

What can the Trump administration do to help the Fed fight inflation? Economists call for supply-side initiatives, such as continuing deregulation, lowering tariffs, and boosting energy supply, as well as cutting government spending.

“Deficit financing pressures the Fed to expand the money supply and keeps interest rates higher than necessary,” Cartwright said.

She also advocated for a hands-off approach to private industry, despite the recent stakes the Trump administration has taken in companies like Intel.

“In a functioning economy, business compete primarily by bringing prices down—the more competition, the lower the prices and the better off consumers are,” Cartwright said. “The most persistent and under-appreciated source of higher prices is government interference in that competition through subsidies, preferential corporate deals, tariffs, and industrial policy that substitutes Washington’s judgment for the market’s.”

Lastly, economists say, politicians should let the Fed focus on fighting inflation rather than pressuring Fed officials to cut interest rates before inflation is tamed.

“The best course of action for the Trump administration to take would be to go radio silent on monetary policy,” Hanke said. “Do what President Reagan did with [then-Fed chair] Paul Volcker: Reagan gave Volcker the monetary policy reins and left him alone.”

Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A three-judge federal appeals panel is expected to issue a decision by year’s end on a lawsuit challenging Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s May 2025 emergency order that prevented a Michigan utility from closing a 64-year-old coal-fired power plant.

How the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rules in Michigan v. DOE after hearing May 15 oral arguments could prove precedential in deciding three similar cases–including two before the same court. It could also resolve a May 9 lawsuit filed in Seattle’s U.S. District Court by 16 Democratic state attorneys general who claim the emergency that President Donald Trump declared in his January 2025 National Energy Emergency executive order doesn’t exist.

Wright has issued five 2025 emergency orders under Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act mandating that decades-old coal-fired generators in Michigan, Washington, Indiana, and Colorado, slated to be shut down by utilities, must continue operating or, at least, remain operable. This would assure that regional transmission electrical grids have the baseload capacity to provide enough power during extreme winter and summer weather stresses, the orders say.

The secretary maintains he has the authority to do so under the president’s National Energy Emergency declaration and his April 2025 executive orders supporting the coal industry and strengthening the nation’s electrical grid.

Wright, in public comments and in Fiscal Year 2027 budget hearings, maintains that the orders—90-day emergency mandates he’s repeatedly reissued—have prevented the retirement of more than 17 gigawatts of coal-powered generation, enough electricity to power up to 17 million homes. He has said that renewable energies encouraged by the Biden administration and some Democrat-led states are weather-dependent, costly, and reliant on imported materials, including from China.

Had he not issued the emergency orders to keep the Michigan and two Indiana coal-fired plants open through this winter, “People would have died” during January and February storms, he said during an April 21 Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing.

“We pushed the grid to the edge. Coal kept things alive,” Wright said. “If we don’t extend the life of these coal plants, we will continue to have ruinous rises in our electricity prices [and] will not be able to meet the challenge of re-shored manufacturing and winning the AI race against China.”

Congressional Democrats say those orders have cost the nation’s electricity customers more than $500 million, noting the five aging plants are not operating at significant capacity. Among the claims made in lawsuits challenging the mandates—including by Michigan, Illinois, and Minnesota in the case heard May 15—is that the federal government is exceeding its authority by dictating to local utilities which energy source they choose.

While each plant and closure is different, they share similarities, and the fallout from the rulings could boost or derail the Trump administration’s campaign to revive the nation’s coal industry.

Michigan: J.H. Campbell

The J.H. Campbell power plant in West Olive, Michigan, operated by Consumers Energy, a subsidiary of CMS Energy, opened in 1962. It was scheduled to shut down on May 31, 2025, and be replaced by a plant fueled with a combination of natural gas, renewable energies, and battery storage in Covert, Michigan.

Eight days before the closure, Wright issued an emergency order directing Consumers Energy and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), which provides electricity for 223 utilities serving 45 million people across 15 states, to keep the plant open for 90 days. It was the first of a succession of 90-day orders that have kept the three-unit plant open since.

Wright’s order said that keeping the plant open was necessary “to minimize risk of blackouts and address critical grid security issues in the Midwestern region of the United States ahead of the high electricity demand expected this summer.”

The 2,000-acre coal-fired plant was being shuttered 15 years before the end of its “scheduled design life,” the order stated, citing a North American Electric Reliability Corporation 2025 Summer Reliability Assessment warning that MISO’s grid was at “elevated risk” of shortfalls during summer peaks. It also cited MISO’s own forecast that acknowledged “potential for elevated risk during extreme weather.”

The Michigan Public Service Commission and Michigan Attorney General’s office, along with national environmental groups and local consumer advocates, maintain that the aging plant is unnecessary and imposes higher costs on utility customers. The state and consumer organizations, along with Illinois and Minnesota, faced off with federal regulators in the May 15 hearing in Washington.

According to CMS Energy’s regulatory filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company maintains that between June 1 and Dec. 31, 2025, it cost $290 million to pay for coal shipped from Wyoming’s Powder River Basin, along with maintenance and salaries to keep the plant open, often at single-digit capacity.

That expense was offset by selling $155 million in electricity to utilities across 11 states within MISO’s grid. Overall, CMS Energy tabulates that it has incurred $180 million in operating losses—about $631,000 per day.

Consumers Energy has petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for permission to recoup $135 million from MISO ratepayers and is seeking to recover $43 million from the Department of Energy in costs incurred to comply with the federal order.

Wright maintains that the costs of keeping Campbell and other coal-fired plants open are outweighed by the risks, including potential loss of life, when electricity goes out, especially in winter.

He said Campbell “was integral in stabilizing the grid,” providing 650 megawatts a day of electricity—enough power for 600,000 homes—during Winter Storm Fern, from Jan. 21 to Feb. 1.

“Beautiful, clean coal was the MVP of recent winter storms,” he said in a February statement. “Hundreds of American lives have likely been saved because of President Trump’s actions saving America’s coal plants, including this Michigan coal plant, which ran daily during Winter Storm Fern.”

Washington: Centralia

Wright issued an emergency order on Dec. 16, 2025, mandating that TransAlta keep its coal-fired Centralia Generating Station Unit 2 operating beyond its planned Dec. 31 closure.

The Centralia plant is “essential” for the Northwest’s grid stability, he said in the order, referring to the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s 2025-26 Winter Reliability Assessment, which determined that the region was at “elevated risk” of power shortages during extreme weather, including cold snaps. Wright extended the order in March by another 90 days through June 14.

Canada-based TransAlta in April filed a cost recovery application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, claiming it cost between $20 million and $23 million to purchase and ship coal from Peabody Energy’s Spring Creek Mine in Montana and Rawhide Mine in Wyoming to keep the 53-year-old plant operating during the 87 days before March 16.

The company said the order derailed its plan with Puget Sound Energy to convert the plant to natural gas by 2028.

Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, in March, asked the U.S. Ninth Circuit of Appeals to reject Wright’s order while also filing a lawsuit in Seattle’s U.S. District Court challenging the legality of the action and claiming no grid emergency in the region.

Also in March, Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson signed House Bill 2367, which eliminates “preferential treatment related to coal-fired electric generating plants,” revokes cap-and-invest exemptions for coal plants, and ends tax exemptions on coal used at the Centralia plant.

Indiana: Schahfer, Culley

On Dec. 23, 2025, Wright issued an order preventing the planned Dec. 31, 2025, closures of two coal-fired units at the R.M. Schahfer power plant in Wheatfield, Indiana, operated by Northern Indiana Public Service Co., and the coal-fired F.B. Culley power plant near Newburgh, Indiana, operated by CenterPoint Energy.

That 90-day emergency order was renewed in March, requiring Schahfer’s two coal-fired units—built in 1983 and 1986—and Culley to remain operable at least through June 21.

Among the reasons Wright cited in the emergency order for keeping the plants operable, if not fully operating, was the same strain on MISO’s grid to which he referred in his Michigan order.

The December order also noted that it’s difficult for coal-fired generators “to resume operations once they have been retired.”

During a March 24 hearing before the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, Northern Indiana Public Service Co. President Vince Parisi said that keeping Schahfer’s two coal-fired units open cost the utility “in excess of $100 million.”

One of the two coal-fired units ordered to remain operable had been shuttered since summer and remained offline, he said.

CenterPoint President Michael Roeder said during the hearing that it had cost his utility at least $18 million to keep its F.B. Culley Unit 2 plant operating during the first three months of the year.

In his March 23 order extending the emergency another 90 days, Wright said that during Winter Storm Fern, Schahfer generated more than 285 megawatts daily and Culley pushed 30 megawatts a day into MISO’s stressed grid.

R.M. Schahfer gets its coal primarily from Wyoming’s Powder River Basin and, to a lesser extent, the Illinois Basin. Culley’s coal is shipped from Oaktown mines southwest in Indiana’s Knox County.

The Sierra Club, among other environmental groups and local consumer advocate organizations, in April filed a lawsuit in Washington arguing that Wright’s orders are federal overreach. The suit is similar to Michigan’s challenge, and, as with that case, the attorneys general of Illinois and Minnesota have also signed on.

Colorado: Craig

On Dec. 30, 2025, Wright issued an emergency order directing Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, the Platte River Power Authority, Salt River Project, PacifiCorp., and Xcel Energy’s Public Service Company of Colorado to ensure that the Craig Station Unit 1 coal-fired plant in Craig, Colo., “remains available to operate.”

Citing the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s 2024 Long-Term Reliability Assessment for Colorado and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council, Wright said, “I determined the [council’s] area faced a significant amount of retiring baseload generation resources and has concerns in meeting demand.”

Keeping Craig Unit 1 online “would help prevent the loss of power to homes and businesses that would otherwise pose a risk to public health and safety,” he wrote.

The plant, built in 1974, was scheduled to shut down on Dec. 31. On March 30, the order was extended for another 90 days.

Craig, around 200 miles northwest of Denver with a Census 2020 population of about 9,000, was a major energy hub in the 1970s-80s for the Western Area Power Administration’s Rocky Mountain Region and Southwest Power Pool regional grid because of its nearby coal mines, including Trapper Mine.

The four owners of the two coal-fired plants within the three-unit power complex in north-central Colorado had planned the closures since 2016.

Tri-State, a not-for-profit electricity wholesaler owned by the 43 cooperatives and municipal power districts, and Platte River, a nonprofit utility operator, said the coal-fired plants were no longer needed, their generation exceeded by new solar and wind developments.

They filed a Jan. 29 petition asking the Department of Energy to reconsider the order, claiming they’re being forced to impose costs on ratepayers. They called the federal action an “uncompensated taking” of their property in violation of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment.

A December 2025 analysis by Grid Strategies calculates that it could cost $85 million to $150 million annually to keep Craig 1 operating, in addition to concurrent expenses in operating new wind, solar, and transmission projects.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and a coalition of environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and Earthjustice, have challenged the emergency order, filing a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., claiming it is an abuse of emergency authority and will unjustly inflate Coloradans’ electric bills.

Americans are still paying elevated prices at the pump in 2026, but the biggest financial burden is falling on states with lower household incomes rather than the highest fuel prices.

This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti, shows where gasoline is least affordable by comparing the cost of a standard 15-gallon fill-up against median weekly household income across all 50 states.

The data comes from SmartAsset and AAA, as of May 2026.

The Highest Gas Burdens Aren’t in California

West Virginia ranks as the state where gas prices hit the hardest, with a 15-gallon fill-up consuming 5.2% of median weekly household income.

West Virginia’s fuel prices are not especially high by national standards. Instead, lower household incomes mean a routine fill-up consumes a larger share of weekly earnings.

Other Midwestern and Southern states dominate the top 10, including Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Mississippi, and Kentucky. In many of these states, long driving distances and limited public transit make gasoline a near-essential household expense.

High Gas Prices Don’t Always Mean High Burden

California has the highest gasoline prices in the country at roughly $6.10 per gallon, yet it ranks only 12th in overall burden. Hawaii and Washington also post some of America’s most expensive fuel prices but remain outside the top 10.

Higher household incomes help offset the cost of filling up. In California, for example, median weekly household income exceeds $2,000, significantly higher than in many states across the South and Midwest.

Minimum Wage Workers Face an Even Bigger Challenge

The burden becomes even more severe when measured against weekly minimum wage earnings. In Indiana, a single 15-gallon fill-up represents nearly 25% of a week’s minimum wage income. Pennsylvania, Idaho, and New Hampshire also rank among the highest by this measure.

Meanwhile, wealthier Northeastern states such as Massachusetts, Maryland, and New Jersey post some of the lowest overall burdens relative to household income. Stronger wages help cushion residents from volatile energy prices.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Gas Prices Surge to Highest Level Since July ’22 on Voronoi.

Authored by Adam H. Douglas via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Business email compromise (BEC) is a targeted fraud scheme in which criminals impersonate vendors, executives, or accountants to steal money from businesses. AI has made these attacks dramatically harder to detect by generating personalized emails that mirror real writing styles and existing business relationships.

The FBI reported more than $20 billion in internet crime losses in 2025, with BEC ranked as the second-largest attack method. Small businesses are the primary target.

There are, however, five cost-free verification steps that can significantly reduce your exposure.

What Is Business Email Compromise?

A BEC is not your typical phishing email. There is often no suspicious link, no misspelled bank name, and no “lottery prize.”

BECs in 2026 are targeted, researched, and increasingly indistinguishable from a legitimate message sent by someone you already work with.

The Core BEC Scheme

A criminal impersonates a trusted contact, such as a vendor, your accountant, or your own CEO, and requests a wire transfer, an invoice payment, or a change to banking details.

By the time you realize something is wrong, the money is gone. Wire transfers are rarely reversible once they leave the domestic banking system.

Why AI Has Made This Significantly Worse

For years, spotting a BEC email meant looking for bad grammar, awkward phrasing, or a sender name that did not quite match the domain. That approach no longer works.

AI tools can now:

• Scrape LinkedIn profiles, websites, and public business filings to map your vendor relationships and internal structure.
• Analyze writing samples to clone the tone and style of a specific person.
• Generate emails that reference real projects, real invoice numbers, and real business history.
• Produce flawless English with none of the telltale errors that once flagged these attempts.

The result is correspondence that reads exactly like something your CFO or your longest-standing vendor would write. The old “just read it carefully” advice has been effectively neutralized by tools that generate deception at scale.

What a Typical Attack Looks Like

These two scenarios play out regularly against small businesses and freelancers:

Scenario 1: The Fake Vendor Invoice

You receive an email from what appears to be a vendor you have worked with for two years. The address looks right at a glance. The email references your last project together and includes an updated invoice with new banking details. The tone matches the vendor’s usual communication style. You process the payment. The real vendor’s account was never involved.

Scenario 2: The Executive Wire Request

You get an email from your company’s owner or a senior partner. A deal is closing today, and a wire transfer needs to go out immediately. The request emphasizes urgency and discretion. The writing style matches. The amount fits your normal range. You send it.

Both scenarios have cost small businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars in a single transaction.

Why Small Businesses Are Targeted More Than Large Companies

Large enterprises typically have layered payment approval systems, dedicated fraud detection software, and internal cybersecurity teams. Small and mid-sized businesses generally do not.

A single employee may have full authority to execute a wire transfer without a second sign-off. Criminals know this and exploit it systematically.

Five Verification Steps That Cost Nothing

You do not need specialized software or a cybersecurity team to reduce your BEC exposure. You need consistent habits.

• “Call to confirm” protocol. Any request involving a payment, wire transfer, or change to banking details should be verified by phone, using a number already in your records, not one provided in the email in question.
• Create a payment change policy. Set a firm rule: vendor or employee banking information is never updated based on an email alone. Require a written request plus a live phone confirmation.
• Treat urgency as a red flag. Urgency is a deliberate manipulation tactic in BEC attacks. If an email is pressuring you to skip normal approval steps, slow down regardless of how legitimate it looks.
• Check the actual sending domain. The display name may read “Sarah at Metro Supplies” while the actual address is sarah@metro-supplies-llc.net rather than sarah@metrosupplies.com. Lookalike domains are a standard BEC tool.
• Require dual authorization for wire transfers. Even in a two-person operation, require a second approval on any outgoing wire above a defined threshold.

If Your Business Has Already Been Hit

If your business has already been hit, act immediately. Contact your bank and request a wire recall. File a complaint with the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center at ic3.gov. If the loss is significant, contact your local FBI field office directly.

Also, review your insurance coverage. Standard commercial general liability policies typically do not cover funds transfer fraud. A cyber liability policy or crime insurance endorsement may provide protection.

Talk to a commercial broker about your current coverage before you need to file a claim.

FAQs About Business Email Compromise

What Makes BEC Different From a Regular Phishing Scam?

Phishing sends the same generic email to thousands of people, hoping someone clicks. BEC is the opposite: it is researched and customized to your specific business. Scammers study your vendor relationships, your internal structure, and your communication patterns before sending a message designed to look like it came from someone you already trust. That targeting makes BEC significantly more dangerous than standard phishing and much harder to catch before money has already moved.

Can My Business Recover Money Lost to a BEC Scam?

Recovery is possible but not guaranteed. Wire transfers move quickly, and funds often reach overseas accounts within hours of being sent. Contact your bank the moment you suspect fraud and request a wire recall. File a complaint with the FBI IC3 at ic3.gov. Acting within 24–48 hours gives you the best chance at partial or full recovery. Once funds leave the domestic banking system, getting them back becomes substantially harder and, in many cases, is not possible.

Does My Small Business Need Cyber Liability Insurance to Protect Against BEC?

Standard commercial general liability and property policies typically exclude funds transfer fraud. If your business regularly processes wire transfers, receives vendor invoices, or handles client financial data, a cyber liability policy or a crime insurance endorsement is worth reviewing with a commercial broker. Premiums for small businesses can be modest relative to potential losses. Understand exactly what your current policy covers before you need to file a claim, not after.

The Epoch Times copyright © 2026. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.

In a revelation that blurs the line between calculated covert strategy and sheer desperation, the deep state’s latest regime change playbook for Iran has officially leaked via the NY Times; however, there are many aspects to the story which defy belief, and so like many Iran-related things being reported lately, should be taken with a big grain of salt.

According to a fresh New York Times report citing briefed US officials, Washington and Tel Aviv launched “Operations Roaring Lion” and “Epic Fury” with the objective to reinstall none other than former Iranian firebrand Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the nation’s new leader.

The very man who had widely been deemed by West as a ‘hardliner’ was president of the Islamic Republic from 2005 to 2013 with a fiercely anti-Western agenda, and yet was apparently tapped by US intelligence to manage “Iran’s political, social, and military situation.”

Another publication has correctly called the story and alleged plan “cartoonish” and outlandish-sounding. Indeed just look at how the NY Times report begins: it first recounts how President Trump in the opening days of the war mused publicly that it would be best if “someone from within” Iran took over, and then—

It turns out that the United States and Israel went into the conflict with a particular and very surprising someone in mind: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the former Iranian president known for his hard-line, anti-Israel and anti-American views.

But the audacious plan, developed by the Israelis and which Mr. Ahmadinejad had been consulted about, quickly went awry, according to the U.S. officials who were briefed on it.

Mr. Ahmadinejad was injured on the war’s first day by an Israeli strike at his home in Tehran that had been designed to free him from house arrest, the American officials and an associate of Mr. Ahmadinejad said. He survived the strike, they said, but after the near miss he became disillusioned with the regime change plan.

An associate of Ahmadinejad further told the NYT that the Americans viewed him as someone who could actually hold the fractured nation together, despite his well known and colorful anti-Israel statements while he had been in power.

But apparently some of the aspects which made him a candidate, or potential future US-Israeli puppet in Tehran (Delcy Rodriguez-style), was that he had been barred three times from running for president by Iran’s unelected 12-member Guardian Council (in 2017, 2021, and 2024). Following his 2017 disqualification, he apparently flipped, becoming a highly vocal critic of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

For this story to be true, it would mean that Ahmadinejad is an Israeli-US asset. It would also mean that his Israeli-US handlers decided to disclose this to the NYT. And it would mean that an Israeli-US bombing of Ahmadinejad’s home, which ended up wounding him, was actually… https://t.co/sfjsQI35z0

— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) May 20, 2026

Recent reports in the wake of the large-scale January protests, including in The Atlantic, indicated that his freedom of movement had been heavily restricted, and even his phones confiscated. He was by the start of Epic Fury under house arrest.

Because of all of this, a March Atlantic piece had concluded, “For more than a decade, he has been known more as a regime opponent than as a supporter.”

The Times report further alleges that blueprint to reinstall the former president was engineered by Israel, who supposedly had been actively discussing the plot with Ahmadinejad himself, but then the plan collapsed after Ahmadinejad was wounded during the chaotic jailbreak attempt – or rather, large-scale airstrike on his home. Since the strike, his actual condition and whereabouts remain entirely unknown.

⁠Ahmadinejad, SERIOUSLY? The Holocaust denier? The wipe Israel off the map guy? The Green Revolution death and torture guy who stole the 2009 elections? The nuclear program accelerator guy? The Islamic fundamentalist end-days guy? https://t.co/xYCUoKjy76

— Christiane Amanpour (@amanpour) May 20, 2026

But he has managed to deliver a few public addresses since his alleged escape – including a highly strategic congratulatory message on Mojtaba Khamenei’s rise to supreme leader, after his father was killed. So ultimately, little of this NY Times account, which reads like a fantastical spy thriller, sounds too believable.

What the report may have done is simply to paint a bright target on this back: “People close to Mr Ahmadinejad have been accused of having too close ties to the West, or even spying for Israel,“ the NYT added.

Pundits across the political spectrum have been scratching their heads over the NY Times report:

I wasn’t a fan of Mr. Ahmadinejad during his first term, and my aversion only grew during his second. But why would the New York Times now publish a claim branding him an alleged traitor to his own country? Why would the criminal Trump regime reveal its supposed assets in the… pic.twitter.com/JMEMcnUdph

— Seyed Mohammad Marandi (@s_m_marandi) May 20, 2026

The more believable aspect does come when the NYT suggests he Ahmadinejad was top of the list after he personally praised President Trump in a 2019 interview, and argued for a rapprochement between Tehran and Washington.

“Mr Trump is a man of action,” Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying. “He is a businessman and therefore he is capable of calculating cost-benefits and making a decision. We say to him, let’s calculate the long-term cost-benefit of our two nations and not be shortsighted.”

*  *  *

Oppositionist lobbies never seem to learn that Washington ‘loyalty’ doesn’t run deep, and is even quite fickle…

Notable development for the Reza Pahlavi crowd and and his “Thank you Bibi” rallies. 👇🏼 https://t.co/wpIVPlbGuM

— Vali Nasr (@vali_nasr) May 20, 2026

By Ethan Howland of Utility Dive

Power plant and transmission owners often take their facilities offline in the spring for maintenance so they are prepared for the summer, PJM noted. The largest US electricity grid operator said it expected power plants totaling more than 40 GW would be offline for planned outages on May 18.

“The projected level of generation outages coupled with the forecasted demand raises a significant risk of emergency conditions that could jeopardize electric reliability and public safety,” PJM said.

The curtailments would be a last resort before ordering rolling blackouts, according to the DOE’s order, issued under the Federal Power Act’s section 202(c). Only large energy consumers with backup generation would be affected.

“The employment of this backup generation is expected to reduce stress on the grid,” the DOE said. “This will permit orderly, safe, and secure operations during PJM’s hot weather conditions.”

Next summer the Eastern seaboard will look like North Korea at night thanks to chatbots pic.twitter.com/NEY97pa1LB

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 6, 2026

There are significant amounts of backup generation in the United States that have remained largely untapped during grid emergencies, according to the DOE.

“Deployment of backup generation resources (whether auxiliary, standby, directly-connected, battery storage or other, and whether synchronized or not to the bulk power system) at data centers (including, but not limited to, hyperscaler facilities), and at other large load industrial and commercial customer sites, can prevent avoidable blackouts, thereby saving lives and reducing costs to the American people,” the department said.

In January, the DOE issued similar emergency orders to PJM, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas.

PJM said on Monday that it had issued “maximum generation” and “load management” alerts for May 19, with a “hot weather” alert in place for most of the PJM footprint.

Also, the grid operator activated demand response customers in parts of the Mid-Atlantic and Dominion regions. The grid operator said it called on pre-emergency demand response for the Baltimore Gas and Electric, Dominion and Potomac Electric Power Co. areas on Monday to address local transmission constraints and to preserve the run-time of generators that will be needed for the hot weather and higher electricity demand expected on Tuesday and Wednesday.

For three days starting on Tuesday, PJM expected its peak load to hit 134,027 MW, 135,961 MW and 119,103 MW.

As we discussed extensively in our preview, besides the Q1 revenue and guidance ($82BN+ and $90BN whisper respectively), Wall Street was expecting to get more color on the following topics during today’s call and Q&A:

1. Potential for increased shareholder cash returns,
2. Vera Rubin ramp timing (2H 26E),
3. Gross margin durability (~75% amidst continued memory/other cost inflation),
4. Update to the $1 Trillion 25-27 forecast, esp. contribution from LPU racks, CPU and Vera Rubin Ultra, not included before
5. Potential upside from agentic AI to the server CPU business;
6. Competitive landscape changes against Google TPU, agentic CPU, other ASICs. 

With that in mind, here is what the world’s biggest company just reported for Q1:

• Revenue $81.62BN, beating Exp $79.19BN, but a bit light of the $82BN whisper 
• Adj EPS $1.87, beating Exp $1.76
• Adj. Gross Margin 75%, beating Exp. 74.5%

Solid all around. 

The company’s all-important disclosed Data Center revenue was a record $75.2 billion in Q1, up 21% from the previous quarter and up 92% from a year ago. Nvidia also said that Vera Rubin is on track for second half of 2026. 

“The buildout of AI factories — the largest infrastructure expansion in human history — is accelerating at extraordinary speed,” said Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of NVIDIA. “Agentic AI has arrived, doing productive work, generating real value and scaling rapidly across companies and industries. NVIDIA is uniquely positioned at the center of this transformation as the only platform that runs in every cloud, powers every frontier and open source model, and scales everywhere AI is produced — from hyperscale data centers to the edge.”

Looking ahead, the company guided to revenue of $91.0 billion (plus or minus 2%), which is on top of the whisper number that had been discussed earlier. Certainly a solid guide, especially since  NVIDIA is not assuming any Data Center compute revenue from China in its outlook. 

Some more guidance:

• Additionally, gross margins are expected to be 74.9% and 75.0% (GAAP and non-GAAP)  plus or minus 50 basis points.
• Operating expenses are expected to be approximately $8.5 billion and $8.3 billion (GAAP and non-GAAP, respectively).

A quick word on margins: as Bloomberg explains,  75% in an environment where, as the CFO defends it, they are shifting between architectures and Blackwell-based platforms are ramping up. Typically new chip ramps pressure margins because yields and supply chains can be messy at the start/early on. Nvidia holding at 75% is good, if almost unrealistic. 

In Q1, the company generated $48.6 billion in free cash flow, a staggering amount, which helped fund $20.0 billion in shareholder returns in the form of shares repurchased and cash dividends (as of the end of the first quarter, the company had $38.5 billion remaining under its share repurchase authorization). More importantly, the Board of Directors approved an additional $80.0 billion to the Company’s share repurchase authorization. Also of note, Nvidia’s cash and marketable debt were $50 billion at the end of the quarter. That was down by a couple of billion dollars. 

Another notable thing is that NVIDIA said it was transitioning to a new reporting framework that “better reflects its current and future growth drivers.” NVIDIA will have two market platforms — Data Center and Edge Computing.

• Within Data Center, NVIDIA will report two sub-markets, Hyperscale and ACIE, which incorporates AI Clouds, Industrial and Enterprise. Hyperscale will include revenue from the public clouds and the world’s largest consumer internet companies, while ACIE addresses NVIDIA’s growth opportunity in diverse AI purpose-built data centers and AI factories across industries and countries.
• Edge Computing highlights data processing devices for agentic and physical AI including PCs, game consoles, workstations, AI-RAN base stations, robotics and automotive.

Under the previous sub-markets, Data Center compute revenue was a record $60.4 billion, up 77% from a year ago and up 18% sequentially. Data Center networking revenue was a record $14.8 billion, up 199% from a year ago and up 35% sequentially. The only problem: Compute missed expectations, which probably explains why NVDA will no longer break it out.

And another red flag: inventory soared. Usually this is a horrible sign for component makers. In this case Nvidia is saying that it has been spending to secure strategic inventory and capacity to “meet demand beyond the next several quarters.” Of course, there would not be a shortage to begin with if inventory was not being massively stockpiled.

In any case, the market is glossing over the negatives, and focusing on the solid beat and guidance (even if compute appears to be lagging), and as a result after briefly dumping then pumping, the stock is unchanged, which means all that options traders who were betting on a 5.5% move after hours are about to see their calls and puts expire worthless.

Authored by Due via The Epoch Times,

What’s the main goal of your 401(k)? Well, my dear Watson, it’s to provide for your retirement. Specifically, it’s a long-term investment that benefits from compound interest. But for a record number of Americans, the “long term” is taking a back seat to immediate financial struggles.

In 2025, 6 percent of Vanguard 401(k) plan members took hardship withdrawals. That’s a big jump from 4.8 percent in 2024 and much higher than the roughly 2 percent annual rate we saw before the pandemic.

This trend, highlighted by the World Economic Forum and MarketWatch, paints an alarming picture of the American workforce’s financial health. Costs are rising, stress is growing, and well-intentioned regulatory changes are having unintended consequences.

That said, now is the time to investigate why this is happening and to identify the hidden costs. And, most importantly, you need realistic ways to avoid making your retirement nest egg an emergency fund.

The Breakdown: What’s Driving the Surge?

It’s not a coincidence that hardship withdrawals are at an all-time high. This is the result of several powerful economic forces colliding:

A Squeeze of Rising Costs and Financial Stress

It’s not a secret that life has gotten more expensive. Even though some metrics indicate a slowdown in inflation, the cumulative effect of price hikes in groceries, housing, and other essentials over the last few years has significantly reduced consumer purchasing power. As an example, consumer prices are approximately 25 percent higher than they were in January 2020.

As such, a small unexpected expense can trigger a crisis for many families with little to no financial buffer. In fact, according to a Bankrate survey, just 47 percent of Americans have sufficient liquidity or access to funds to cover a $1,000 emergency expense.

The Urgent Nature of the Withdrawals

These withdrawals aren’t for vacations or new cars. According to Vanguard, the median withdrawal amount in 2025 was $1,900. And, among the reasons people tapped their 401(k)s, these were the most common:

• Avoiding foreclosure or eviction (36 percent)
• Medical expenses (31 percent)
• Tuition (13 percent)
• Primary residence repairs (11 percent)
• Primary residence purchase (5 percent)

Ultimately, withdrawals represent a broader challenge: Americans have relatively few retirement savings at their disposal.

Lowered Hurdles Have a Positive Impact

Ironically, some recent regulatory changes intended to ease the burden may be contributing to the rise. As a result of legislation such as the SECURE Act 2.0 (SECURE refers to Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement.) and legislation from the pandemic era, it’s now significantly easier to access funds in a 401(k). Depending on the situation, the rules now allow withdrawals of up to a defined amount (like $1,000) without penalty for “unforeseeable or immediate financial needs.”

As important as this flexibility is in a real catastrophe, it also lowers the psychological and logistical bar to leveraging these funds. The result, though, is that your retirement account looks more like a savings account, which is a very dangerous mentality.

The True Cost of ‘Easy Money’

When you’re facing eviction or a huge medical bill, $5,000 from your 401(k) can seem like a lifeline. But that lifeline comes at a heavy price, one that is often overlooked in times of crisis, such as the following.

Immediate Tax Consequences

Unlike a 401(k) loan that you repay with after-tax funds, a hardship withdrawal is permanent. Therefore, the withdrawal amount is generally taxable as ordinary income. When you take out $10,000, for example, and are in the 22 percent tax bracket, you’ll immediately owe $2,200 in federal taxes, which reduces your actual relief to $7,800.

Potential Penalties

If you’re under 59 ½ years old, you will likely face an additional 10 percent early withdrawal penalty on top of income tax. That’s another $1,000 gone from your $10,000 withdrawal, bringing the total cost of immediate access to 32 percent.

The Devastating Sacrifice of Compound Growth

Obviously, this is the highest and most invisible cost. Imagine if the $10,000 you withdrew had been left to grow for another 20 years. With an average annual return of 7 percent, that money would have grown to about $38,700. By taking out that money now, you are not only borrowing $10,000 from your future self; you’re erasing almost $39,000 from your retirement account.

This is a magic trick. That’s the power of compound interest. Knowing this sooner will help you realize that 401(k) withdrawals aren’t “easy money”—they’re incredibly expensive loans.

The Irony: A Healthy System With Struggling Participants

An astounding contradiction can be found within the same 2025 data: even though record numbers of people are tapping into their 401(k)s for emergencies, the average 401(k) balance actually grew by 13 percent since 2024.

In addition, more recent analysis from Fidelity shows average 401(k) balances climbed more than 11 percent, indicating that nest eggs have rebounded after recent swings in the markets.

Although this may seem confusing, it indicates a widening gap. While many workers contribute consistently and benefit from employer matches, consistent contributions, and strong market conditions. Their wealth is growing.

Meanwhile, the 6 percent of participants who resort to hardship withdrawals constitute a vulnerable segment of the population. Although the retirement system appears healthy on the surface, they’re suffering the brunt of the affordability crisis. This is a powerful reminder that “average” statistics can mask serious underlying problems.

Realistic Strategies to Keep Your 401(k) Locked

If recent data tells us anything, it’s that relying on your 401(k) as a backup checking account is a high-stakes gamble. To ensure your retirement fund remains dedicated to your future, you need a proactive defense. Here are realistic, actionable options to keep that vault closed.

Re-Evaluate and Automate Your Budget

This is the foundational work that makes everything else possible. If you don’t track your spending, you can’t control it. Before you can build momentum, you have to stop the bleeding by identifying exactly where your cash is going.

• Audit your “leaks.” For one month, track every cent. You’ll likely find “ghost” expenses, like unused subscriptions, frequent small convenience purchases, or delivery fees, that are quietly draining your ability to save.
• Establish a “needs vs. wants” hierarchy. Be ruthless. Shelter, utilities, groceries, and minimum debt payments are non-negotiable needs. Everything else is a want. If your financial foundation feels shaky, wants must be the first thing to go.
• Use the right tools. Modern technology makes this much less painful. Using financial apps, such as WalletHub or Monarch Money, can put you in total control. By linking your accounts, your expenses are automatically categorized, allowing you to see your spending patterns in real-time. These tools also allow you to effortlessly manage and cancel subscriptions in one place, ensuring you aren’t paying for services you no longer use.

Build a ‘Firewall’ Emergency Fund

An emergency fund is the only thing standing between a flat tire and a raided retirement account.

• Start with a mini-goal. Don’t let the “six months’ expenses” rule overwhelm you. Start with a small target you can afford, whether it’s $300 or $1,000. That single amount covers the vast majority of common shocks, from a basic car repair to an urgent medical copay.
• Make it invisible. Set up a recurring transfer from your checking account to a separate high-yield savings account on the day you get paid. Even $25 or $50 per pay period builds a psychological and financial buffer. If the money never hits your main account, you won’t miss it.

Explore Smarter Alternatives for Fast Cash

Before you touch your 401(k), exhaust every other avenue. Retirement should be the last door you open.

• Low-interest personal loans. You can manage debt or major expenses with a low-interest personal loan from a credit union or bank without incurring heavy taxes or losing compounding interest. For well-qualified borrowers, fixed-rate loans offer predictable, manageable monthly payments with rates as low as 10 percent.
• 0 percent APR balance transfers. If high-interest credit card debt is the primary stressor, a zero percent introductory APR card can give you a 12-to-18-month window to pay down the principal without accruing more interest.
• Community and state programs. Local and federal organizations assist with housing and utility crises, such as 2-1-1, HUD, and the Homeowner Assistance Fund (HAF). Before sacrificing your future security, take advantage of these programs designed to prevent eviction and foreclosure.

A Final Safety Valve: The 401(k) Loan

If you have truly exhausted every other option and are facing an immediate crisis, such as eviction, a 401(k) loan is generally a better choice than a hardship withdrawal.

• Why is it better? Essentially, you’re borrowing money from yourself and paying the interest back to yourself. In addition, it does not trigger the 10 percent early withdrawal penalty or immediate income tax.
• The critical caveat. You must repay it, typically within five years, via payroll deduction. Be aware that if you leave your job, the remaining balance is often due immediately. If you can’t pay it back, it defaults into a withdrawal—triggering the exact taxes and penalties you were trying to avoid at a time when you may be least able to afford them.

Conclusion: Protecting Your Future, One Day at a Time

Vanguard’s 2025 data is alarming. Americans are increasingly financially vulnerable to the point that their primary tool for future security is being wiped out by today’s pressures. This is not a sustainable path.

The first step is to understand the “why” behind this trend, which is rooted in financial stress, urgent needs, and simplified rules. The second step is to acknowledge the true, exorbitant cost of this immediate relief.

In the end, building a financial infrastructure that can withstand storms is the key to preventing your 401(k) from being a go-to ATM. Start with a real budget and an emergency fund, no matter how small. Even when today’s demands seem overwhelming, you must discipline yourself and put your future first.

Remember, your 401(k) shouldn’t be viewed as a piggy bank but as a tool to ensure you’ll have the lifestyle you want in your golden years. Don’t risk your retirement for a temporary fix. The costs are simply too high.

By John Rampton

The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.