Tracy Mumford: From The New York Times, it's the headlines. I'm Tracy Mumford. Today's Wednesday, May 6th. Here's what we're covering. President Trump pulled a sudden U-turn on the war with Iran yesterday, contradicting himself and his administration. The day started with Secretary of State Marco Rubio taking questions about the conflict.

Marco Rubio: "The operation is over. Epic Fury is president notified Congress, we're done with that stage of it. Okay, we're now on to this project of freedom."

Tracy Mumford: Rubio told reporters that the United States had ended combat operations against Iran and was now fully focused on the new mission of Project Freedom, escorting ships through the Strait of Hormuz, the closure of which has been wreaking economic havoc on countries around the world. So, President Trump, as he always does, stepped up and answered the calls for their help. And he's directed the United States military to guide these stranded ships to safety.

Defense Secretary Pete Hgsth: "also talked up the new effort as a direct gift from the United States to the world. We have established a powerful red, white, and blue dome over the street."

Tracy Mumford: Trump, though, then pivoted. He said he was putting Project Freedom on hold one day into it and after just a few ships made it through. In a social media post, Trump said he was pausing it because there had been "great progress toward a long-term peace deal with Iran." He said Pakistan, which has been trying to mediate those peace talks, had asked for the pause along with other countries.

Tracy Mumford: At the moment, both Iran and the US claim to have control of the strait and traffic remains at a standstill. Analysts say the Iranian government believes it has the upper hand and that it can withstand economic pressure, as it's done in the past, longer than Trump can tolerate the rising energy prices.

Tracy Mumford: Now, three quick updates on the political front. First, in Iowa,

Farmer: "a lot of our farmers are struggling with high fertilizer prices. I'm aware of that."

JD Vance: "As the president of the United States has said, we got a little a little blip in the Middle East. We got to take care of some business on the foreign policy side. But you know,"

Tracy Mumford: "it was not an easy environment for that as many farmers in the state have also been affected by Trump's tariff policies. But Iowa will be critical for Republicans in the midterms with a few potentially competitive races. Vance also had a recent stop in Oklahoma. And overall, this trip may be a blueprint for his next few months of trying to boost GOP candidates across the country who are facing the headwinds of high gas prices and an unpopular war in Iran."

Tracy Mumford: Also in Indiana, President Trump got payback last night against several Republican state lawmakers who had defied him. The state senators had refused to go along with his push last year for Indiana to redraw its election maps and Trump promised [music] to primary them. That made voting in the state yesterday something of a test of the president's sway over Republican voters. And with the results now in, he pretty much got what he wanted. At least five of the seven senators [music] lost to GOP competitors that Trump backed instead.

Tracy Mumford: And in Washington, Senate Republicans have inserted $1 billion for Trump's ballroom project into a funding bill they're hoping to rush through Congress this month. It was a surprise addition, and the measure doesn't mention the ballroom. It calls for funds to cover East Wing security enhancements. Trump has cited security as a main reason for the ballroom. While the president previously said the renovation would be funded through private donations, some congressional Republicans started pushing for federal funding after the recent attack at the White House correspondents dinner. The $1 billion provision is tucked into an immigration enforcement funding bill, which the Republicans plan to push through in a way that will skirt any potential Democratic filibuster.

Tracy Mumford: Yesterday, another tech company announced widescale layoffs, saying in part, "It's optimizing for AI."

Tracy Mumford: Coinbase, a cryptocurrency exchange, said it's cutting 14% of its workforce. It's around 700 employees. The company's CEO said the changes will lead to smaller teams with humans managing the work of AI agents. This follows other big job cuts or buyouts at companies like Microsoft and at Meta, which also attributed its cuts in part to AI and the need to embrace this new technology.

Tracy Mumford: It's meant not just people losing their jobs, but also fewer job openings. I've been talking to economists and labor market experts and the one thing that they all seem to agree on is that our safety net is not ready for an age of AI-driven job disruption.

Tracy Mumford: Ben Castleman is the Times chief economics correspondent.

Ben Castleman: "They really point to two major shortcomings. The first is our unemployment insurance system, which is sort of meant to be the first line of defense for people who lose their jobs. That system potentially won't cover a lot of the workers who could be affected by AI. If you're a new graduate just entering into the labor market and and this is the group that economists think may be hit hardest by AI disruptions, you generally don't qualify for unemployment benefits. The other problem is that our sort of last line of defense against real hardship, food stamps, Medicaid, which provides health insurance to the poor, those programs have been pulled back so that they really only cover people who are working. And so that means that if you lose your job as a result of AI or for any other reason, you no longer have access to that piece of the safety net.

Ben Castleman: Economists are pretty divided about the impact that AI is going to have on the labor market. They're pretty skeptical of the idea that this is going to lead to mass unemployment, but they do say that there are almost certainly going to be disruptions, that people are going to lose their jobs. And if that's going to happen, they say this is the time to start aligning our safety net with that coming wave of disruption. And so far, that really has not happened.

Tracy Mumford: For the World Cup this year, which is kicking off in just over a month in the US, Mexico, and Canada, FIFA has made a big change from past tournaments. It's using dynamic pricing for the first time ever. That means tickets to see the most popular teams cost more. To understand how that's hitting fans, The Times checked in with people in Argentina, where soccer is a national obsession.

Fan A: "You've been to the World Cup before?"

Fan B: "Yes, I've been in Russia. Yeah. And also in Kadar."

Fan A: "Yeah. And how were those experiences for you?"

Fan B: "Fantastic. I It was amazing. I think"

Tracy Mumford: Argentina won the last World Cup, and that has pushed tickets for this year's games way up.

Fan A: "They had to spend $3,000 just for three tickets. It's crazy. Are you going to go to the US?"

Fan B: "I more close than to stay than going."

Tracy Mumford: My colleague TK Panga, who was talking with fans, said some people are just giving up because it's too expensive. Some said they'd paid less than a hundred bucks for tickets in the past. Now they're looking at prices that are more than the average monthly salary in Argentina. Others are going to extremes, racking up debt and maxing out credit cards in order to attend. FIFA has repeatedly defended the high prices. It says it needs the income to fund soccer development around the world. But in the eyes of some Argentinian fans, it's a cash grab. One fan who said he probably wouldn't go this year said quote, "It makes you angry that they take something that should be for everyone and turn it into something that is just for the few."

Tracy Mumford: And finally,

Visitor: "whoa."

Tracy Mumford: "When the wind shifts, it gets really hot."

Tracy Mumford: An update on what may be one of the world's most baffling tourist attractions. The gates to hell.

Visitor: "It's way bigger than I expected. Way bigger than I think it looks on pictures."

Tracy Mumford: In Turk menistan, local lore goes that some 60 plus years ago, Soviet geologists were drilling for oil when they hit a gas deposit. The ground collapsed, creating a pit, and scientists decided the best thing to do about the toxic fumes leaking out of it was to light them on fire. They figured it would burn out in a few weeks, but it has kept going. Over the years, it's become a puzzle for researchers and a draw for adventurous tourists. Recently though, it's become clear that the flames in the gates to hell, officially called the Darvaza crater, are not eternal. A company that monitors natural gas flares, says the intensity of heat from the pit is down 75% over the last few years based on infrared imaging data. It's not totally clear why.

Tracy Mumford: It's also not clear whether the flames going out is a positive thing or not. Right now, they are burning off methane that's leaking from the pit, which keeps that greenhouse gas from entering the atmosphere. So, in theory, if less fire, then more methane emissions. Now, if all of this has inspired you to consider a trip to the Gates to hell and you're concerned about the fire going out before you can get there, don't worry. A tour guide told the Times that on a recent trip, it was still hot enough that his group roasted marshmallows over it.

Tracy Mumford: Those are the headlines. I'm Tracy Mumford. We'll be back tomorrow.