Hegseth Defends Iran War, Powell Stays On As Fed Chair, SCOTUS Voting Rights Case

One of us feels that it's kinda cold in here. Is there is it within our power to do anything about that? Hm. What if we just like light a little fire?

Yeah.

I think it's a good thing.

I think we should.

Trash fire. That'd be even better. Give it a little pungent smell. Put an edge on the program today.

Hegseth testified about the first twenty-five billion dollars spent on the war with Iran.

What would you pay to ensure Iran doesn't get a good idea? What would you pay?

How much higher does the price go as the economic damage keeps climbing?

I'm Michelle Martin, that's Steve and Skeep, and this is Up First Familiar.

Jerome Powell says he will stay on the board of the Federal Reserve for now even after his stint as chairman ends.

I am confident that the Fed will continue to make But we've had to fight for it.

By staying on, Powell denies President Trump the chance to name a replacement.

So the Supreme Court changes the rules, making it harder to create black majority voting Stay with us. We've got the news you need to see.

This message comes from forty eight hours. Forty eight Hours Case by Case delivers updates on the biggest criminal stories unfolding now. From high profile trials to breaks and cold cases. Listen to forty eight hours case by case wherever you get your podcast.

We have an initial price for the war in Iran. The Pentagon estimates the US military has spent twenty five billion dollars so far on ammunition and jet fuel and other expenses.

A Pentagon official offered that number in testimony before Congress. Defense Secretary Pete Hagseth testified too.

What would you pay to ensure Iran doesn't get a nuclear bomb? Do you what would you pay? I reclaim my time.

Do you think that's the same thing? Twenty five billion dollars is an initial cost and does not include the economic damage that we are following this morning. The US and Iran continue blocking traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. And NPR National Security Correspondent Greg Myrie is following that standoff. Greg, good morning.

Hi, Steve.

What's happening in the Strait as of today?

Well, not a lot. Uh shipping traffic remains at an almost total standstill. Both sides say they're inflicting economic pain, and they are, and both believe the other side will blink first.

It's very sustainable with the forces they have in the region now because they can even peel some of that back and move others into the region and do a rotation.

And Iran also believes it can maintain its blockade using a combination of mines at sea and drones and missiles from the shore.

Does the US have the capability to clear those mines and defend against those drones?

Well it does and and Donegan says a negotiated agreement would be the best, safest way to reopen the strait and those talks are are stalled at the moment. Now he says the navy can clear the mines though it takes time to do this and to further weaken Iran's forces on land. He's uh now at the Middle East Institute in Washington, so he doesn't have access to the Navy's plans, but based on his experience he believes the US is relying on unmanned vessels to clear mines.

remotely controlled surface ships and remotely controlled I wouldn't call them submarines. They more look like big torpedoes, so to speak. And they uh can find any mines that are there. So you basically open a Two good passageways through, one coming in, one coming out.

Okay, if you open passageways with the Navy then escort oil tankers?

Well, yes, he says they could do that, but there would still be risks. And and right now it doesn't seem the US, either the Navy or the the military at large is prepared for this and and the shipping companies don't seem to have the appetite for that level of risk. Also, this would be a partial solution at best. You wouldn't see the same level of pre war shipping traffic, not even close, according to Donnegan.

Okay, hard to get up to that level again. How long has the US been planning for a scenario like it faces now?

Well, a long time, Steve. The U.S. naval presence in the Gulf dates to nineteen forty nine. The Fifth Fleet was formally established in Bahrain in nineteen ninety five, uh, specifically to protect the flow of oil. Here's Donnegan again.

It's at the forefront of everything that we did in the fifth fleet, including knowing that if we carried out military operations this would be a card that the Iranians would play. It's completely expected that this is what they would do and and it's built into your planning process.

So Iran's move was no surprise to the US Navy. If there was any surprise, it's just the Gulf has remained open despite all the Middle East turmoil over the decades.

Andrew S Greg Myri, thanks so much.

Sure thing, Steve.

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is not walking away from the central bank yet.

Powell says he plans to remain on the Fed's governing board for some period of time after his term as chairman ends next month. That is unusual and it highlights both the economic and political pressure the Fed has been facing in recent years.

NPR Scott Horsley has chosen to remain at NPR's business desk for the time being. Scott, good morning.

Good morning, Steve.

What did Powell say exactly?

Pal had been very guarded up until yesterday about what he would do when his term as chairman expires. Fed chairs usually step aside at that point, but Powell has the option to remain on the Fed's governing board through early twenty twenty eight. And at his last news conference as chairman, Powell said he's gonna exercise that option at least for a while.

I am confident that the Fed will continue to make its decision based on analysis, rigorous analysis and not on political considerations, but we've had to fight for it.

Powell did say he plans to keep a low profile once he's no longer chair. He won't be competing with Kevin Walsh, who appears to be headed for Senate confirmation, to be the next leader of the central bank.

The thing that affects us most directly here is interest rates. The Fed didn't change them on Wednesday. Kevin Walsh has been talking about lowering them, but what about the other people who vote on this?

Yeah, they're not gonna go along right away, I don't think. We're in this tricky environment where inflation's getting worse, not better, partly because of the war with Iran, which has triggered a sharp spike in energy prices. The average price of regular gas jumped another seven cents overnight.

I do.

think the tax refunds were really critical. I mean particularly in the month of March, that's kind of the peak. of the refund checks. That really does help particularly lower middle income households who are more cash strapped. That refund goes right into spending.

But of course tax refunds come only once a year, so if gas prices stay high, we could see some erosion in families' abilities to keep spending on things like restaurant meals and vacations once we get into the spring and summer.

How's the broader economy doing?

Not bad. We got a report from the Commerce Department this morning showing the U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of two percent in January, February, and March. Now that report's a little dated since the wartime price hikes only started in the last of those months, but it does show the economy was stronger in the first quarter than it was at the end of last year when we hit the speed bump of that six week government shutdown.

That gives you a real clear sense of how top heavy. consumer spending in the economy is. And you know, when things are going well and the stock market's hitting record highs on a daily basis, that's gonna provide a lot of juice to the to the spending by that group and it's gonna keep the economy moving forward. But it feels like it would be much more healthy if Yeah.

GDP is also getting a boost from all the business investment in data centers and artificial intelligence. The housing market is still in a slump though, so the residential portion of GDP looks pretty weak.

And press Scott Horsley, thanks as always.

A Supreme Court ruling could alter election maps across this country.

On Wednesday the court's conservative Republican supermajority made it much harder to apply the Voting Rights Act. Voting rights advocates have long considered the law the crown jewel of the civil rights movement.

NPR's Hanzi Lo Wong covers voting rights and is with us. Hanzi, good morning.

Good morning, Steve.

Okay, so this is a ruling concerning a specific congressional district, just one in Louisiana. Uh but what is the most important thing to think about as this is applied elsewhere?

This ruling reinterprets longstanding protections against racial discrimination and redistricting, and it's gonna make it much, much harder to challenge voting maps, not just for Congress, but at all levels of government with claims. That the maps unfairly weakened the collective voting power of racial minorities in places where white majority voters and minority voters of color tend to prefer different candidates.

Yeah, okay, so the the idea of the Voting Rights Act in the nineteen sixties was if black voters had their voting power diluted by gerrymandering, you could draw a new black majority districts. To correct that, that was the operation before what's the rule after the Supreme Court opinion?

Well the conservative justice Samuel Lito wrote the majority opinion for the court and Alito said the focus of section two of the Voting Rights Act, which is the section at the heart of this Louisiana case, Alito said the focus of it should be intentional racial discrimination.

Intentional racial discrimination. That's the change?

Congress amended the Voting Rights Act decades ago to say that section two should focus on any discriminatory effects of a redistricting plan. And you know, one legal expert I talked to yesterday was Tiva Ellis at Case Western Reserve University. And Ellis said that proving intentional discrimination, this new standard, is notoriously difficult.

We in essence are asking plaintiffs now to find a smoking gun, the proof of the racist intent that is sort of objectively and consciously articulated in order to prove their case. The problem with discrimination cases is that most legislators in this context know better than to say that.

So in practice, Atiba Ellis and other legal experts say these section two protections may now end up being basically impossible to enforce.

So you could have a discriminatory effect, but still struggle to prove that it was a discriminatory intent. Is there an immediate effect ahead of the midterm elections we have this year?

Well Republican controlled states, especially in the south, could try to eliminate some democratic represented House districts that the Voting Rights Act was likely protecting. But it is late April and we are past most state candidate filing deadlines for this year's midterm election. Now That hasn't stopped Republicans in places like Louisiana, Georgia, and Tennessee from urging their states maps to be redrawn as soon as possible. I should note.

This ruling comes just as Florida is the latest state to redraw its or try to redraw its map.

Yes, Florida's Governor Ron DeSantis said he expected this ruling from the Supreme Court and the governor's office cited the ruling yesterday to make a case for this new map, but the map was unveiled earlier this week, and it doesn't really try to dismantle the districts that were likely protected by Section Two.

Hansi, thanks so much. You're welcome.

And that's up first for this Thursday, April 30th. I'm Steve Inskeep.

And I'm Michelle Martin. Today's episode of Up First was edited. Ben Swayze, Mohammed El Bardici, and Ali Schweitzer. It was produced by Ziad Butch and Nia Dumas. Our director is Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support.