The cost of housing is the top political issue — ranked higher than the cost of food or protecting democracy — among U.S. voters between 18- and 34-years-old, a CNBC survey found.

CNBC’s All-America Economic Survey for the second quarter of 2026, which polled 1,000 registered voters across the country, found the cost of housing is a salient issue, particularly among the kinds of young voters that both parties are hoping to court heading into the 2026 midterm elections.

“It was my contention and the contention of some other people that Democrats had a huge miss in 2024 by not talking more about healthcare. It is an issue where Democrats have had an advantage in polling for a long time,” said Jay Campbell, a partner at Hart Research, the Democratic pollster for the survey.

“I think housing could be the healthcare of 2024, given especially the need for Democrats to turn young people out who are inclined to be anti-Trump and pro-democratic,” Campbell said. 

According to survey participants, who were interviewed between July 8 and 12, the costs of housing and healthcare were tied for the fourth-most important issue facing the country right now, trailing the cost of food and groceries, protecting democracy, and immigration and border security. It was the most important issue for male respondents between ages 18- and 49-years-old and second-most important for those respondents of all genders between 35- and 49-years old, after the cost of food and groceries.

Housing concerns are fueled by factors including expenses relative to income and ballooning mortgage costs driven by rising insurance and property taxes. Forty-nine percent of households that rent spent more than 30% of their income on housing, a June report by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies found. Of those 22.7 million households, 12.1 million pay more than half of their income for housing, the report found.

The importance of housing costs split somewhat along partisan lines. Self-described Democrats surveyed said it was the third-most important issue, behind only the cost of food and protecting democracy. Independents also gave highest priority to food costs and democracy, followed by immigration and border security, with housing costs in fourth. 

Republicans, meanwhile, list the issue lower among their top priorities, instead focusing on immigration, the cost of food and Iran.

The affordability election

Affordability and cost of living have been the buzzwords leading into the midterms, and both parties have tried to own the issue of housing.

A bipartisan bill, aimed at increasing housing supply, lowering the cost to rent or buy homes, and limiting the role of private equity in the housing market, advanced out of Congress…

Hello, this is Hui Jie writing to you from Singapore. Welcome to another edition of CNBC’s Daily Open.

U.S. markets started the week on a strong footing, with the Dow crossing 53,000 for the first time and the Nasdaq rising as chip stocks rebounded.

Politics, meanwhile, seems to be taking centerstage this football World Cup as FIFA rejected Belgium’s challenge to the eligibility of U.S. striker Folarin Balogun, with U.S. President Donald Trump defending his intervention to get Balogun’s suspension overturned.

Both sides have taken to the pitch, and scores will hopefully be settled there.

U.S. investors came back to markets in a celebratory mood following Independence Day fireworks, pushing the Dow Jones Industrial Average past 53,000 for the first time.

Other major indexes also climbed, with the Nasdaq gaining 1.12% due to a chip stock rebound and the S&P 500 rising 0.72%.

As risk-on mood took hold, gold prices pulled back, though Treasury yields held steady.

Stock investors’ buoyant mood bore a sharp contrast to the Belgian national football team, which saw FIFA reject their challenge over the eligibility of U.S. striker Folarin Balogun to play in the match against Belgium.

Balogun had initially been suspended after receiving a red card in the U.S.′ match against Bosnia and Herzegovina, but following a call by Trump to FIFA President Gianni Infantino last week the decision was overturned.

Trump posted on Truth Social Sunday thanking FIFA “for doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice!”

The match is currently underway between the two sides.

Besides football, America continues to pile more pressure on NATO to increase its defense spending, with U.S. ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker saying that tensions with partners reflect “growing pains” rather than a crisis. “The target is that Europe takes over the conventional defense of the European continent.”

“We’re not going away, we’re just doing less,” Whitaker said about the U.S. involvement in European defense and security, ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, this week.

Over in Asia, China’s Alibaba will ban employees from using Anthropic‘s artificial intelligence tools for work purposes as of July 10, citing concerns that the U.S. company has back-door security risks.

CNBC confirmed the Chinese e-commerce giant has put Anthropic’s Claude Code on a high-risk software list, according to people familiar with the matter.

The move comes after Anthropic sent a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, blaming the Chinese tech titan of “brazenly” and “illicitly” attempting to…

OpenAI has proposed handing the U.S. government a 5% stake in the company, the Financial Times reported Thursday, as the artificial intelligence startup seeks to defuse mounting political pressure in Washington.

A 5% holding would be worth roughly $42.6 billion, after the AI lab closed a record-breaking funding round in March at a post-money valuation of $852 billion.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman argued that giving the public a financial interest in the company is the best way to share the upside of AI, the FT reported, citing two people familiar with the talks.

Altman suggested a stake of that size in early discussions with the Trump administration, as part of a broader arrangement under which Washington would hold 5% of each of the leading U.S. AI developers via a government vehicle, according to the report.

The proposed arrangement envisions other U.S. AI companies, such as Anthropic, Google and Meta, ceding similar stakes to the government through a sovereign wealth fund vehicle, the FT said. It is not clear whether any of these groups would agree to OpenAI’s proposal.

The White House, OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Meta did not immediately respond to CNBC’s requests for comments.

Pressure has been mounting on major U.S. AI firms as Washington grows increasingly wary of cybersecurity vulnerabilities associated with their models and rising competition from Chinese open-source models that are proving to be almost as capable and significantly cheaper than some of the top American models.

Anthropic had disabled access to its most advanced Mythos and Fable models last month to comply with an export control directive from the government. On Tuesday, the company behind the Claude AI platform said it was cleared to restore access to the models after taking steps to resolve policymakers’ safety concerns.

OpenAI’s reported pitch came after more than a year of talks about a possible government stake in the company, CNBC reported last month, with Altman first pitching the concept directly to the Trump administration in early 2025.

In April, the leading model-maker proposed creating a “public wealth fund” to hold assets capturing growth in AI companies and distribute the economic benefits to the public.

The Trump administration has previously taken stakes in private companies, investing in Intel Corp, IBM, and other quantum and critical mineral companies during the president’s second term.

The government obtained a 10% stake in Intel after a landmark $8.9 billion investment in the chipmaker’s common stock in August last year. In May, President Donald Trump said he should have asked for a bigger stake in the company.

Trump has described the U.S. taking an ownership stake in AI giants as “a beautiful…

The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down limits on the amount that political parties can spend in coordination with candidates for office, notching a win for Republicans who argued the restrictions violated the First Amendment.

The 6-3 ruling, which was opposed by the court’s liberal justices, overturns coordinated-expenditure limits that had been in place for decades and withstood a previous legal challenge 25 years earlier.

In doing so, it further expands the role that money will play in American politics —a role that had already been enlarged by rulings lifting limits on independent campaign spending by parties and corporations.

Democratic Party organizations had opposed the challenge brought by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, arguing there was no Constitutional reason for the Supreme Court to convert parties’ “limited right into an unlimited one.”

But the court’s majority concluded, “the political-party coordinated-expenditure limits at issue here are ‘disproportionate’ and are not ‘necessary’ and ‘narrowly tailored'” to satisfy the government’s interest in preventing the “circumvention of the base limits on contributions to candidates through earmarked contributions to parties.”

President Donald Trump took a victory lap after the ruling, writing on Truth Social, “The Supreme Court just took restrictions off political spending! A BIG WIN FOR REPUBLICANS and, more importantly, The First Amendment!”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, said the limits placed on parties’ campaign spending under the Federal Election Campaign Act “necessarily abridge political parties’ freedom of speech,” thus violating the First Amendment.

Kavanaugh stressed that the ruling “treats all political parties equally.”

“It will allow all political parties—including the DNC and RNC and the respective Senate and House campaign committees, as well as other parties and party committees—to participate more freely and compete more fully in the political process, and to coordinate more closely with their candidates,” he wrote.

But Democratic Party committee chairs slammed the ruling as “a win for billionaire donors and special interests who want more influence over the GOP agenda and an invitation for corruption.”

This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Former Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell has warned that attempts by the U.S. government to exert greater political pressure on the central bank will damage public confidence in its independence.

Powell — whose time as Fed chair concluded on May 15 — said the central bank, along with other institutions such as the courts and universities, is facing a political “stress test” from President Donald Trump’s administration.

Speaking at the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation in Boston, Powell highlighted the White House’s push for his resignation, a Department of Justice criminal investigation into his time as chair and attempts to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook.

“If any administration finds a ​way to remove Fed officials ​over policy differences, then ⁠future administrations will do so as well,” Powell said while accepting the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award. “The public would lose faith that the central bank will make decisions based only on what’s best for all Americans.”

Federal prosecutors in January began a probe into the $2.5 billion renovation of the central bank’s Washington, D.C. headquarters.

At the time, Powell said the investigation — which was later dropped in April — stemmed from Trump’s frustration with the Fed’s refusal to cut interest rates at the pace and volume the president wanted.

“Democratic institutions take much time, effort, and patience to build but can be torn down all too quickly,” Powell said in his first public remarks since his time as chair concluded.

“It is essential that we preserve what is good about ⁠these institutions, even as we strive to improve them.”

Powell’s successor as Fed chair Kevin Warsh was sworn in on May 22. Despite standing down at chair, Powell is continuing as a Fed governor.

The United Arab Emirates’ decision to leave OPEC and OPEC+ was based on the country’s economic vision and not on politics, the country’s energy minister said on Saturday.

“This decision came following a comprehensive assessment of the national production policy and its future capabilities, and it is based solely on the national interest of the United Arab Emirates, its responsibility as a reliable energy supplier, and its unwavering commitment to maintaining market stability,” Suhail Mohamed Al Mazrouei said in a post on X.

The Emirates announced earlier this month it would depart the producer group OPEC, of which it was a member since 1967, before the UAE was even founded. 

“This decision is not based on any political considerations, nor does it reflect the existence of any divisions between the United Arab Emirates and its partners,” Mazrouei said.

The exit “represents a sovereign and strategic choice stemming from its long-term economic vision, the evolution of its capabilities in the energy sector, and its steadfast commitment to global energy security,” the oil minister said.

Before the war, the UAE was producing just over 3 million barrels a day — broadly in line with OPEC+ targets. Abu Dhabi has targeted a capacity to produce 4.9 million BPD. Now, due to the war, the UAE is producing between 1.8 and 2.1 million barrels per day.

The UAE was the most influential member of OPEC behind Saudi Arabia. It was one of the few members, along with Saudi Arabia, that had meaningful spare production capacity to influence prices and respond to supply shocks, Jorge León, head of geopolitical analysis at Rystad Energy, told CNBC after the UAE announced its decision.

Spare capacity is the idle production that can be brought online quickly to address major crises. Saudi Arabia and the UAE together control a majority of the world’s total spare capacity of more than 4 million barrels per day, making them particularly influential during periods of distress.

Oil prices rose Friday on speculation that President Donald Trump is likely to turn his attention back to the stalemated conflict with Iran after leaving a summit in China with President Xi Jinping.

International benchmark Brent crude futures for July gained more than 3% to close at $109.26 a barrel. U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures for June advanced more than 4% to settle at $105.42 per barrel.

Brent crude prices are 74 percent up year-to-date, but below a high of $118 a barrel reached in late April.

The U.S. has reiterated its offer of assistance to Cuba in exchange for “fundamental changes” to its communist political regime after CIA director John Ratcliffe visited the Caribbean island nation on Thursday.

Ratcliffe’s trip is thought to be only the second time the head of the U.S. intelligence service has been to the country since its 1959 communist revolution.

The CIA director delivered a message to top Cuban lawmakers, according to news agency Reuters, stating that Washington would “seriously engage” with the country’s government — but “only if it makes fundamental changes.”

On Thursday, the CIA posted photos on social media of Ratcliffe in the Cuban capital, Havana, with no context.

CNBC reached out to the CIA for comment.

In a statement, the Cuban government said that during Thursday’s meeting, “both ​sides … underscored their interest in developing bilateral cooperation between law enforcement agencies in the interest of the security of both countries, as well as regional and international security.”

Separately, CNN reported that the U.S. military has carried out dozens of intelligence-gathering flights near Cuba’s biggest cities since February.

Cuba is around 100 miles off the coast of Florida. The Trump administration has called Cuba’s government “an unusual and extraordinary threat”, suggesting the White House could turn its attention to Cuba when the Iran war is concluded.

The nation had been heavily dependent on oil imports from Venezuela, but the communist-run Caribbean island has effectively been cut off since early January a U.S. military operation to remove Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The White House has also slapped fresh sanctions on a number of Cuban officials and organizations in recent weeks.

The Cuban population has been plunged into blackouts lasting up to 22 hours a day as the oil blockade drags on, sparking protests in Havana. On Wednesday, Cuban Energy Minister Vicente de la O Levy told state media the country had run out of fuel oil and diesel, and had no reserves.

Cuba’s government has long condemned the U.S. blockade on the island, insisting it does not pose any threat to American national security.

The U.S. State Department said Wednesday that it was willing to provide $100 million in aid to Cuba, adding that Washington “continues to seek meaningful reforms to Cuba’s communist system.”

“The decision rests with the Cuban regime to accept our offer of assistance or deny critical living-saving aid and ultimately be accountable to the Cuban people for standing in the way of critical assistance,” the statement said.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer vowed to “face up to the big challenges” facing the U.K. in a make-or-break speech on Monday, amid mounting pressure on his leadership.

Starmer cited growth, national defense, the U.K.’s relationship with Europe and energy needs as key issues that must be tackled urgently, in an attempt to convince Labour Party colleagues to keep him in the job.

“To meet the challenges that our country faces, incremental change won’t cut it,” he said, recognizing that “some people are frustrated with me” and acknowledging that he has “doubters.”

“I know I need to prove them wrong and I will,” he told an audience of supporters.

The speech comes after the ruling Labour Party suffered heavy local election losses last week. While the vote did not affect how the U.K. is governed nationally, it was seen as an important reflection of public sentiment towards the ruling party and its leader.

The results prompted immediate calls from lawmakers within the Labour Party for the prime minister to step down, with several believed to be weighing up potential leadership challenges.

Starmer insists he’ll lead the Labour Party into the next general election, due in 2029, but speculation over a change of prime minister has put increasing pressure on already-high government borrowing costs.

“You will see hope, urgency and exactly whose side we are on,” Starmer said Monday, adding that “people need hope. We will face up to the big challenges and we will make the big arguments.”

As of 8pm on Sunday, 42 Labour MPs were calling for Starmer’s resignation. Labour MP Catherine West, who has led calls for a leadership contest, told Sky News on Sunday that she will launch her own bid if Starmer’s pitch proves unconvincing.

Starmer’s former deputy, Angela Rayner, is another potential leadership candidate. She said on X on Sunday that “what we are doing isn’t working, and it needs to change. This may be the Labour Party’s last chance.”

Other potential challengers include Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, though he would have to be…

Hello, this is Katie Foley writing to you from London. Welcome to another edition of CNBC’s Daily Open.

Three world leaders, three pressure-cooker situations. This week is shaping up to be very impactful for U.S. President Donald Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer. 

The U.S. leader is on a knife-edge over Iran, after rejecting Tehran’s counterproposal to end the 10-week war. Trump’s trip to Beijing this week to meet with his Chinese counterpart has already been delayed once, with worries that Iran will overshadow other key agenda items like tariffs and rare earths.

And it’s all coming to a head for the U.K’s embattled leader Keir Starmer, after a disastrous showing for his Labour Party in local elections – among its worst losses in decades.

U.S. President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s counterproposal to end the 10-week war in the Middle East, calling it “totally unacceptable,” while Tehran vowed to “never bow,” prolonging a standoff that has choked the Strait of Hormuz and roiled global energy markets. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that the war with Iran is “not over,” as the U.S. and Israel still aim to bring an end to Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Oil is moving higher, making gains against last week’s losses. Asian markets are diverging with South Korea’s Kospi scaling another fresh record, but the rest of the region is mixed and fairly muted, with that sentiment also echoed in futures for U.S. and European markets. 

In the U.K., the Pound is under some pressure as Prime Minister Keir Starmer fights for his political life with a high-stakes ‘reset’ speech today, after his ruling Labour Party suffered major losses in local elections. But it may be too little, too late – with former minister Catherine West saying she will launch a leadership challenge today unless a cabinet minister puts themselves forward to challenge Starmer.

On the data front, China’s consumer and producer inflation jumped more than expected in April as the Middle East conflict drives commodity costs higher. Export growth also gathered pace in April as factories raced to meet a wave of overseas orders from buyers seeking to stockpile components amid fears the Iran war could push global input costs even higher.

The Iran war is likely to take center stage in the summit between President Donald Trump and China’s Xi Jinping this week, leaving less scope to resolve issues like tariffs and rare earth supplies. The U.S. leader is set to arrive in Beijing on Wednesday evening, with an opening ceremony and bilateral meeting the next morning.

And in earnings, Saudi Aramco reported a 26% year-on-year jump in first-quarter profits on Sunday, beating analyst forecasts, as a key pipeline allowing it to circumvent the choked-off Strait of Hormuz reached…