The Brief

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, as of Thursday, has ended a new mortgage-rescue program that so far has helped about 20,000 veterans avoid foreclosure and keep their homes.

The move leaves millions of military veterans with far worse options than most other American homeowners if they run into trouble paying their home loans. And it comes at a time when nearly 90,000 VA loans are seriously past due, with 33,000 of those already in the foreclosure process, according to the data and analytics firm ICE.

At issue is the VA Servicing Purchase program, or VASP. It was put in place during the Biden administration after missteps by the VA left homeowners with no affordable way to catch up on their VA-backed home loans if they fell behind. VASP rolls the homeowners' missed payments into a new, low-interest rate loan that the VA then owns outright. With today's higher mortgage rates of around 7%, it is often the only affordable option for homeowners with VA loans.

But Republicans in Congress have been critical of the VA Servicing Purchase
program, saying it puts too much taxpayer money at risk. In a statement this week to NPR, the VA said, "[As of May 1,] the program, which was unilaterally created by the Biden Administration and lacks congressional authority, will stop accepting new enrollees."

Mortgage industry groups, housing advocates and veterans organizations have been warning the VA that shutting down VASP without replacing it with something else first would result in large numbers of veterans losing their homes, many of whom are in this financial peril because of the VA's own mistakes.

"With the expiration of VASP, tens of thousands of Veterans and their families are now at significant risk of losing their homes," said Mike Calhoun, president of the nonprofit Center for Responsible Lending, a nonpartisan organization that advocates for the financial rights of underserved communities, including veterans.

His group is urging Congress to quickly pass legislation to create a new program to fill the gap, and he said, "VA should extend VASP until this program is up and running."

Thousands of vets left stranded, again

Thousands of veterans were left facing foreclosure two years ago after the VA abruptly canceled a key part of a pandemic-era mortgage relief program that allowed veterans to skip mortgage payments if they had trouble paying. When an NPR investigation first uncovered the VA's move in late 2023, there were about 40,000 vets in danger of losing their homes.

Kevin Conlon is one of them.

Conlon and his wife, Jenny, live in upstate New York, not far from where he was stationed with the Army at Fort Drum. After his two combat tours in Iraq, about 12 years ago the couple had a young kid and were struggling to pay rent and save money. Getting a VA loan meant that they could buy a house with no down payment. And they've been there ever since.

"That's the longest I've been in one place," said Conlon.

"Without the VA loan, there was no way that we could have afforded to buy a house," his wife added.

Kevin Conlon and his wife, Jenny, at their home in upstate New York. The couple have owned the house for 12 years and don't know where they would go if they lose it.

(

Cindy Schultz for NPR

)

The VA home loan has long been a bedrock benefit of the GI Bill, giving vets a leg up into the middle class.

But all that came unraveled for tens of thousands of vets like Conlon who were on what's known as a mortgage forbearance. It was supposed to help them during a time of financial hardship by pausing their monthly payments and then giving them an affordable way to start paying again and get current. After NPR reported that the VA had shut down the only affordable option for veterans to do that, the VA responded by halting foreclosures for a full year while it rolled out its VASP rescue plan.

While they've been waiting to get into VASP, the Conlons have been told not to make payments, so they've been falling further and further behind, and they say their family has nowhere to go if they lose this house.

"I joined right after Sept. 11th," said Conlon, who grew up in Queens, N.Y., and was in Manhattan the day of the attacks.

Conlon's wounds from his time in Iraq aren't visible, but they've taken years to heal. During his two combat tours, roadside bombs hit his convoys repeatedly and left him with traumatic brain injuries. On the second tour, his best friend died when he hugged a suicide bomber to the ground, giving his life to protect his friends. The trauma and survivor's guilt wounded Conlon, he says, as bad as the blast injuries. He struggled with PTSD and thoughts of suicide for more than a decade before finally getting to a stable, healthy place.

"I was willing to die for what I believed in. And for someone [to] ... take away the home that my family lives in? Like we've paid enough, we've really paid enough," he said.

Referring to the VA winding down VASP, VA spokesman Pete Kasperowicz told NPR, "This change is necessary because VA is not set up or intended to be a mortgage loan restructuring service."

Republicans have their own plan, but it's not in place yet 

Republican critics in Congress don't like that VASP buys the rescued loans from the mortgage industry and then holds the loans on the VA's own books. They say the VA would lose too much money if the homeowners fall behind again.

"The Trump administration rightfully put an end to VA's VASP program," said a joint statement from Rep. Mike Bost, an Illinois Republican and chairman of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and Rep. Derrick Van Orden, a Wisconsin Republican, when VA announced its plan to end VASP.

Van Orden has sponsored a bill to replace VASP with what's known as a "partial claim" program that experts say would help vets struggling to keep their homes by moving their missed payments to the back of their loan term so they would pay them back down the road.

But between VASP ending and Van Orden's bill possibly becoming law is a chasm that could swallow thousands of VA home loans.

Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin arrives at the U.S. Capitol in 2023.

(

Chip Somodevilla

/

Getty Images

)

"Veteran borrowers will face otherwise preventable foreclosures, which harm the government through increased payouts as well as harm Veteran homeowners," warned the nonprofit National Consumer Law Center and the Center for Responsible lending in a letter to Congress last month.

"Without VASP or immediate access to alternative policy tools that provide relief … many of these homeowners will be forced to sell their homes and move or face foreclosure," the letter said.

In the wake of the move by the VA, Democrats and Republicans in Congress both say they want to pass legislation to give veterans with VA loans better options for avoiding foreclosure. But it's unclear how long that will take.

In the meantime, veterans behind on their mortgages have far worse options than most other Americans who have loans backed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the Federal Housing Administration. Those entities all have loss mitigation options that allow homeowners to catch up on missed payments without being forced into a new modified loan at today's high interest rates.

Vets left in limbo and disbelief

For their part, veterans interviewed by NPR feel like the VA has now repeatedly stranded them by first offering them a lifeline and then cutting the rope once they grabbed hold.

"I feel let down and deceived," said Samuel McCrary, a Marine Corps vet with three young kids in Loganville, Ga. The new VASP program looked like it was going to save his house, but now the VA has ended new enrollments in it and he says his mortgage company can only tell him his application for VASP is "pending."

"I believe that we are going to lose the house," McCrary said. "Losing my house and having to go rent — it makes me sick to my stomach to think about."

Even veterans who have made it into the VASP program aren't sure if they'll be OK. That's because many of those vets are in a VASP three-month trial payment period. The VA says vets who have entered that process can continue it through August, "subject to VA's determination that funds remain available for VASP."

The VA did not respond to NPR's request for information about how much funding is available or how many more veterans in these trial periods will in fact be placed into affordable VASP loans.

Veterans also tell NPR they feel like they're scapegoated and paying the price for the VA's mistakes.

At a recent House Veterans' Affairs Subcommittee hearing, Rep. Van Orden criticized VASP this way:

"I understand the whole developmental process of this, and it was moronic," Van Orden said. "It gets rid of a bum loan, and it passes it off to the American taxpayers."

That comment did not sit well with fellow Iraq veteran Conlon and his wife, Jenny.

"That's a hell of a thing to say about his brothers and sisters," said Conlon.

Iraq war veteran Kevin Conlon is among tens of thousands of veterans left facing foreclosure because of a debacle in the VA home loan program.

(

Cindy Schultz for NPR

)

"That was so hurtful because these are not bum loans, and they're making the veterans and their families out to sound like irresponsible people," his wife added.

The couple says Kevin took the forbearance so he could get treatment for PTSD.  "That's why we needed it, so he could go inpatient at a veterans program," Jenny said.

The Conlons say they followed the VA's instructions and then got stuck when the VA shut off part of its forbearance program in 2022. Then they followed the VA's instructions again by applying for the new rescue program, VASP. And the VA now says it's shutting that off. Their mortgage company tells them they are enrolled in the VASP trial payment plan, but it's unclear whether the VA will determine it has funding to help all the veterans on those trial plans with permanent new VASP loans.

"The level of just mistrust I have — I mean, I get they're trying to cut spending and all that, but it's like, how do you justify cutting something that is to help the vets who were basically put in this position because of you?" Conlon said.

NPR asked the VA if it's concerned about veterans losing their homes after it shuts down VASP with no replacement ready yet. A VA spokesman has not answered that question but at one point referred our reporters to Congress.

NPR asked the Republican House VA committee leadership the same question; that office referred our reporters back to the VA.
Copyright 2025 NPR

Two of California’s largest courts are testing an AI tool that can draft orders and produce research memos.

Judges so far are using it primarily for civil cases, but documents obtained by CalMatters indicate the possibility of expanded applications in criminal cases, where people’s freedom and access to justice are on the line.

The Los Angeles County Superior Court began a pilot program in February to test a tool created by the company Learned Hand. Other courts may follow, according to Learned Hand founder and chief executive officer Shlomo Klapper.

Learned Hand uses a combination of language models from Anthropic, OpenAI and Google to act as an AI clerk for judges. The company says it tests for bias and accuracy, but it has not yet published results.

In Riverside County, which has a $10,000 agreement with the company to test the program, civil and probate attorneys are primarily using the tool to draft research memos that help judges reach their decisions. It’s typical for research attorneys to assist judges as they review cases.

Los Angeles County Superior Court has a roughly $314,000 contract that includes a roadmap to test the tool’s use in criminal, family and probate divisions. Officials would not describe in detail to CalMatters the criteria they’re using to evaluate whether use of the tool can safely expand to criminal and family courts, where the stakes are often much higher than in civil cases.

One judge who spoke to CalMatters on condition of anonymity due to judicial rules of conduct was alarmed when their colleagues at a recent luncheon said the technology could be used one day to evaluate appeals from people who believe their conviction or sentence was tainted by racial bias. California courts are handling a wave of those claims after lawmakers passed the Racial Justice Act in 2020.

“I think it is outrageous,” said the Los Angeles County Superior Court judge. “AI cannot and never will be able to replace human judgment in evaluating complex social dynamics. Ultimately, that will erode the public’s confidence in the competence and fairness of the judiciary.”

A majority of California's superior courts now have generative AI use policies, according to documents obtained by CalMatters via public records requests, which they were required to create by the state Judicial Council before using the technology. Roughly a dozen of the 51 courts that have responded to CalMatters’ requests said they are using AI-powered tools from LexisNexis, Thomson Reuters, and Microsoft’s Copilot.

Use of AI in courts has been controversial because of the propensity of AI models to cite falsehoods and to produce sycophantic text. Models from major companies like Google and Anthropic can reduce critical thinking and brain activity, according to a 2025 MIT study.

Language model hallucinations have already made it into the judicial system. Researcher Damien Charlotin has documented hundreds of instances of litigants, lawyers, and judges making mistakes when using AI to do their jobs including nearly 90 cases in state or federal courts based in California since August 2024.

Last fall, a Los Angeles-based lawyer received a historic $10,000 fine for citing cases that don’t exist, and earlier this month the Sacramento Bee reported that use of AI led to errors in four cases handled by prosecutors in Nevada County. Most of these cases involve lawyers or people who are representing themselves in court, but UCLA Law School professors predict that more judges will make AI-fueled mistakes in the future. In recent months, the U.S. Senate investigated federal judges in Mississippi and New Jersey for drafting decisions with generative AI that had serious factual errors.

Klapper, who previously worked as a clerk for a federal appeals court and for surveillance technology company Palantir, said the judiciary needs AI in order to reduce backlogs and increase efficiency.

“Could we hire more people?” he told CalMatters. “Maybe, but it’s not going to keep pace with the exponential increase that’s coming, nor is it going to be able to adequately solve the crisis of today. I think the only solution is to give every single judge and staff attorney their own AI clerk.”

Klapper said he’s aiming to combine the best parts of what human judges can do with the best parts of what machines bring to bear.

“I’m not saying all machines aren’t biased,” he said. “I’m not saying my machine isn’t even biased. I’m saying we can test it and people have tested it. And that is the benefit over humans.”

Generative AI use policies for the Los Angeles and Riverside County superior courts only require disclosure if a motion, decision, or other document is written entirely with generative AI.

Both courts refused to say whether plaintiffs are aware that the tool is being tested on their cases. In a statement to CalMatters, a spokesperson for the Los Angeles County Superior Court said testing is done on motions that have already been decided, separate from live case environments. However, the contract allows for testing on live cases.

“It is important to note that even with successful evaluation and thorough testing, the Court remains several months, if not years, away from implementing this type of tool,” said the spokesperson.

The contract allows the tool to be used for two critical motions in the criminal division: A motion to suppress, which is designed to determine what type of evidence the prosecution is allowed to present at trial, and motions for post conviction relief, which are filed by people who have already been convicted and want another shot at freedom.

That’s the “greatest concern” for Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman. When he reviewed the contract, he referred to the motions as “two incredibly important motions in the criminal justice system.”

“When you’re dealing with someone’s liberty — as opposed to in the civil setting, which is everything other than liberty — the stakes couldn’t be higher,” said Hochman. “I don’t want to take the chance, particularly in a criminal case, that AI happens to get it wrong. And now someone’s constitutional rights have been infringed. Someone has gone to prison who shouldn’t have, or on the flip side, that somehow someone gets off.”

'An extremely perilous road'

In Los Angeles, some judges first heard about the new Learned Hand contract during a March presentation by Superior Court Judges Yvette Verastegui and Olivia Rosales. They lead the criminal branch and visit courthouses throughout the county as part of an annual roadshow, where they update judges on court operations, discuss workload and field questions. During a luncheon, Verastegui and Rosales said the tool could be used to assist with Racial Justice Act petitions in the future.

California’s Racial Justice Act allows people to challenge a criminal conviction or sentence that they believe was based upon racial bias. Petitions are filed directly to the court from people in state prison. If a case is found to have merit, the process includes appointing legal counsel, filing briefs and setting evidentiary hearings before a judge would decide whether to grant the petition.

That process could look different with a tool like Learned Hand. Verastegui and Rosales explained that, following an incarcerated person’s petition, the tool could generate tentative decisions for judges to consider in denying or advancing cases to the next stages, according to one judge who attended the luncheon.

“The concern, of course, that I have is that the courts will utilize that as a reference point and then get stuck to that initial analysis,” said the judge. “It’s an extremely perilous road to go down. Putting aside the inaccuracy, which will be a significant concern, it dehumanizes the whole process. It does not treat people as individuals with lived experiences. It essentially reimposes a one-size-fits-all style of justice.”

A second Los Angeles Superior Court judge who spoke with CalMatters on the condition of anonymity remembered the presentation and said they would not trust nor use the tool to summarize a Racial Justice Act petition.

AI can replicate or intensify patterns contained in the data used to make a model, including human biases. Large language models have a history of demonstrating race and gender bias, an analysis of predictive policing tech used by LAPD found racial bias, and an analysis of the risk assessment algorithm COMPAS found that it is more likely to label Black people as at risk of committing crimes after incarceration than white people with a similar record.

Public defenders who spoke with CalMatters echoed those concerns.

Elizabeth Lashley-Haynes, a deputy public defender at the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office, said it would be “highly problematic and bordering on unethical” for a judge to use the tool to review Racial Justice Act petitions, which she described as “incredibly nuanced.”

“They’re like nothing else in the legal system that has ever really been done,” said Lashley-Haynes, who specializes in Racial Justice Act cases. “Words that are used in these cases that have racial undertones or racial meanings are way beyond the realm of anything that artificial intelligence could do.”

In interviews with CalMatters, Klapper and Los Angeles County Superior Court Executive Officer, David Slayton, denied that the court has any plans to use the tool for Racial Justice Act petitions. A spokesperson for the Los Angeles Superior Court later confirmed in an email to CalMatters that the contract permits the tool to be used in such a way “but that possibility has not commenced in any way.”

Klapper said if they were to build out a Racial Justice Act module, the tool would need to be evaluated for bias and co-developed with the court.

“The timing very fortuitous, right?” he said. “It’s a very fraught decision, I’m not going to lie…extremely high stakes — a scenario where I understand people might be very concerned. Especially with criminal, I have even more hesitancy, even more guardrails than normal about, because there are liberty interests at stake.”

Extending beyond civil cases

In Los Angeles, six superior court judges and their research attorneys are primarily using the Learned Hand tool to conduct research, summarize motions and assist in drafting tentative rulings, according to Slayton. He says the tool won’t move beyond the civil division “until the court leadership is comfortable.”

“The court is being very deliberate and careful about how we use technology like this,” he said. “So until we evaluate it and determine that it is effective in those areas, we will not extend it to other areas.”

Los Angeles County Superior Court's Hollywood Courthouse, in Los Angeles, on March 12, 2025. Photo by Jules Hotz for CalMatters The tool will be evaluated on a quarterly basis to determine its future application, Slayton said, but he did not specify what kind of evaluation that entails. In an email to CalMatters, a spokesperson later said that Learned Hand is evaluated “against the same substantive expectations applied to law clerks and research attorneys: accurate legal research, sound analysis, neutral and judge-ready writing, and reliable work product that supports judicial decision-making.”

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Samantha Jessner, who chairs the Judicial Technology Advisory Committee, said she was unaware of the possibility that the tool could eventually be used outside of the civil division until recently. Judges are not privy to contract negotiations due to certain ethical limitations, she said.

“I think we have a duty and obligation to explore whether or not there is a place for artificial intelligence in what we do as a judicial branch and that’s exactly what this pilot is intended to afford us the opportunity to do,” said Jessner.

Riverside County Superior Court signed an agreement with Learned Hand in February. In emails obtained by CalMatters, Klapper proposed to two Riverside County Superior Court executives, Jason Galkin and Sarah Hodgson, that the court use the tool for a common civil court motion and “then expand quickly once we earn our stripes.” He suggested that Hodgson assemble a list of motions and workflows “that generate the most pain,” citing examples that included the Racial Justice Act.

Roughly two weeks later, Hodgson described the most laborious motions “that want to drive us into retirement,” including discovery motions and attorney fee motions. For criminal cases, the court suggested that Klapper focus on “things with the largest paper records,” citing death penalty habeas petitions and parole revocation.

Since the pilot started, seven civil and probate attorneys have been granted access to the tool. Galkin, the chief executive officer of the Riverside County Superior Court, said they are “kicking the tires on the product” to see what tasks it can do. The tool is not being used to draft tentative rulings, he said.

“We don’t even know if expansion is likely so there is no set criteria for what expansion might look like or thresholds for that because right now, the core question is: Does this help staff and does it advance what they’re trying to do in their roles?” said Galkin.

As testing is underway, attorneys like Hochman say that use of AI is inevitable, but would be better suited for low-level, repetitive and routine tasks.

“It’s the analysis of the case itself, coupled with the conclusions that will be reached, that I’m very hesitant to trust AI at this point — in large part, because I don’t know all of the inputs that AI is using to make its decision. The only thing I’m 100% sure of is that AI didn’t go to law school,” said Hochman.

Cayla Mihalovich is a California Local News fellow.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

California’s Board of Equalization is a coveted spot once again for state lawmakers looking for a new gig almost a decade after then-Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law gutting the organization of any serious governing responsibility.

This year, three current state lawmakers are competing for seats on the nation’s only elected tax board. They’re among some two dozen candidates on the ballot for its four elected positions, which are divided by geographic districts.

The board has long been a launching pad to higher offices in California politics — Fiona Ma served on it before becoming state treasurer, as did Betty Yee and Malia Cohen before each being elected state controller.

The agency itself is a throwback to the 19th Century. It’s rooted in an 1879 constitutional amendment that created it and charged it with “equalizing” county property tax assessments statewide.

From that narrow mandate, it swelled to become a juggernaut that collected a third of the state’s tax revenue and provided a venue for people and businesses to contest their tax bills in front of the elected board. It survived numerous efforts by governors to kill it outright, including attempts by Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger.

That is until 2017, when a cascade of allegations about board members misusing the office to promote themselves led to an authoritative state audit that lawmakers could not ignore.

Brown signed a law stripping the agency of any powers beyond what voters gave it in 1879 and created two new departments that report to the governor instead of the elected board: one to collect sales and use taxes and another to hear taxpayer appeals.

After that, Board of Equalization elections tended to be lower profile contests. Ted Gaines, a former Republican state lawmaker from the Sacramento area, won a seat. Former Democratic Assemblymember Sally Lieber is up for reelection on the board this year. The other members had experience in local politics instead of inside the Capitol.

“We’re lean but we’re not mean,” said Lieber, the incumbent for District 2, which includes 19 counties centered on the Bay Area. “I think the Board of Equalization is the right size in the system right now…I do really believe that the board has a role to play in being a forum for taxpayers to come forward to.”

This year voters will see more contentious elections for the tax board:

• In District 1 representing inland California, Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove of Bakersfield has more than $900,000 in a campaign account and name recognition from her representing the San Joaquin Valley in the Legislature since 2010. Democrats are putting up a fight for the district. Fresno City Councilmember Nelson Esparza is running with the party’s support.
• In District 2 representing coastal California north of Los Angeles, incumbent Lieber faces San Mateo Community College District Trustee John Pimentel. Lieber has the Democratic Party’s endorsement, but a number of Bay Area Democratic leaders are backing Pimentel, including state Treasurer Ma and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan.
• In District 3 representing the Los Angeles area, former Monterey Park City Councilmember Yvonne Yiu put up $760,000 of her own money and has about $1 million on hand. The race has another heavyweight in Assemblymember Mike Gipson, a Democrat from Gardena who has served in the Legislature since 2014. 
• District 4 representing the San Diego area has an especially crowded race with Democratic state Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana, San Ysidro school board member Martín Arias, San Diego Unified School District board member Cody Peterson, and Denis Bilodeau, a Republican supported by San Diego Assemblymember Carl DeMaio’s Reform California organization.

A forum for California taxpayers

The board was always popular among taxpayer advocacy groups, who liked that it provided a forum to focus on tax issues in a capital where debates often center on labor and business.

“It’s a very useful elected body that answers to the voters,” said Susan Shelley, vice president of communications for the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Some of this year’s candidates are thinking of ways to make the most of the agency.

Arias believes the board could do more to assist homeowners and potential homeowners. As a taxpayer advocate in the San Diego County Assessor’s Office, he says he works with the Board of Equalization every day and has a front seat to how the system works.

“I think there’s a bigger opportunity here to make the Board of Equalization the constitutional office that it is — that it should be,” he said. “There’s a clear opportunity here for us to start advocating at the state level for all of our taxpayers, including those that don’t speak English.”

Umberg said he’d like the board to have more investigative power and resources. Citing instances in which San Bernardino and Los Angeles assessors have been arrested on felony charges, he said he’s most interested in the board’s oversight of property tax assessors.

“Although it’s not a high-profile job, it’s a critically important job, especially when we’ve got so many revenue challenges in California,” Umberg said in an interview with CalMatters.

Questioning BOE’s relevance

Advocating for the board’s expansion has drawn criticism from former board members and employees. Yee, a board member from 2004 to 2014, has been vocal about abolishing the board entirely because she believes that its limited responsibilities could be easily transferred to another department or agency.

“I just really do question how this board continues to have relevance,” she told CalMatters. “I sometimes feel like the board is really doing a lot of work in search of finding problems to solve. …I know with each of the board members, they feel very strongly about being a taxpayer advocate. But frankly, every public official should be a taxpayer advocate. ”

Democrats stopped short of killing the agency entirely because they would have had to put that question to voters.

“They should have just chopped the head of the snake off and done away with the Board of Equalization altogether,” said Mark DeSio, a former communications director for the board. “They didn’t do that. They left enough of the cancer to grow back.”

He cooperated with the audit that revealed misspending at the agency that appeared intended to promote its elected members as well as another that showed widespread nepotism in its hiring practices. He then lost his job in the reorganization and filed a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit against the state.

DeSio believes lawmakers want seats on the Board of Equalization because it allows them to maintain a high profile until they can run for office again.

“That was the recipe for disaster a few years back,” he said. “Somebody better watch these guys. They’re not there for the policy. It’s for the exposure.”

Cayla Mihalovich is a California Local News fellow.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Even as gas prices continued to rise across the United States, sales of electric vehicles fell in April. That is in contrast to strong growth elsewhere in the world, such as Europe. But American drivers are gravitating toward at least one more efficient powertrain: hybrids.

Sales of new EVs fell roughly 18 percent from March to April, according to the latest data from Edmunds, an auto research firm. Another company, Cox Automotive, pegged the drop at closer to 6 percent. Either way, experts said it’s clear that high gas prices aren’t leading to a significant shift toward EVs.

“There was a lot of window shopping,” said Ivan Drury, director of insights at Edmunds, noting that searches for electrified vehicles on the company’s site were strong. “It did not translate to tire-kicking and purchases.”

Price remains the steepest barrier for most people, said Drury. While electric vehicles can be less expensive to operate over the long-term — especially when gas prices are high — the upfront costs remain significant. The average transaction price for an EV in April was $6,214 higher than for vehicles with internal combustion engines, Cox reported.

“It’s still a cost hurdle,” said Stephanie Brinley, a principal automotive analyst at S&P Global Mobility. “You don’t know how long it’s going to take to get that back.”

At Thursday’s average gas price of $4.56 per gallon, an EV buyer would have to drive more than 40,000 miles to make up the difference with a car that gets 30 mpg. Savings on maintenance, like oil changes, could accelerate that timeline, but factors such as higher insurance prices and having to install a home charger could make the payback period even longer. If fuel prices fall, the advantage of an EV also shrinks.

“It’s very difficult for people to wrap their head around, ‘Hey, if I spend this $55,000, I might over time save’,” said Drury. “It requires a bit more math than most people want to go through.”

The calculus is much simpler for hybrid vehicles, which utilize batteries that can improve fuel economy by 25 to 45 percent without needing to plug in. A Honda CR-V, for example, gets around 29 mpg while the hybrid version gets 37. More and more popular models are only available as hybrids, a strategy that Toyota has perhaps embraced most notably. Last year, it ditched the gas-only version of the Camry sedan. The 2026 RAV4 followed suit.

Overall, Edmunds data shows that sales of hybrids are up 20 percent year-over-year and nearly 50 percent since February, when the U.S.-Iran conflict began. Sales of gas-powered gas are up about 11 percent over those same two months.

“I think this is going to be a hybrid moment,” said Stephanie Valdez Streaty, director of industry insights at Cox Automotive. “There are a lot of options.”

Used EVs provided another somewhat bright spot, she said. The segment saw a 3 percent increase in sales from March to April and a price premium of only $1,096 over used internal combustion vehicles. Used EVs also sold faster than their used gas-powered counterparts. “They’re really selling efficiently,” said Valdez Streaty, who added that there should be a glut of EVs available throughout the year as leases end. “I don’t think the inventory will be an issue.”

With Iran maintaining its hold over the Strait of Hormuz and summer travel season looming, gas prices appear set to keep climbing — which would only make an EV more appealing. Other parts of the world have seen significant jumps in sales since the conflict began, with Europe experiencing a surge and China setting an export record in April, according to BloombergNEF.

In the United States, though, it seems that only people already in the market for EVs are making the leap. “Edge-case people,” as Brinley called them. Dramatic pump readings “might nudge them because they were already in that direction,” she said. “But what we’re unlikely to see is a shift in current [internal combustion car] owners just fundamentally making that change simply because of gas prices.”

This article originally appeared in Grist at https://grist.org/solutions/why-hybrids-not-evs-are-winning-over-u-s-consumers/.

Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org