Intel's new CEO wants to abandon a multibillion-dollar chip technology his predecessor championed. The risky pivot to next-gen 14A aims to win back Apple and Nvidia from TSMC—but could cost billions in write-offs. Stakes couldn't be higher.
Silicon Valley's biggest tech companies spent months lobbying for a 10-year ban on state AI regulation. The Senate voted 99-1 to kill it. Meta, Microsoft, and venture capital firms learned that money can't buy everything in Washington.
Grammarly bought email app Superhuman for an undisclosed sum, part of its plan to build an AI productivity empire. With $1 billion in fresh funding, the grammar company wants to put AI agents at the center of your workday.
Silicon Valley's biggest tech companies spent months lobbying for a 10-year ban on state AI regulation. The Senate voted 99-1 to kill it. Meta, Microsoft, and venture capital firms learned that money can't buy everything in Washington.
💡 TL;DR - The 30 Seconds Version
👉 Senate voted 99-1 to kill a 10-year ban on state AI regulation that Meta, Microsoft, and venture capital firms spent months lobbying for.
💰 The measure would have blocked states from AI laws if they wanted access to $500 million in federal broadband funding.
🏛️ Forty attorneys general and 17 Republican governors opposed it, creating rare bipartisan pushback against Silicon Valley's lobbying power.
📊 States have already passed 131 AI regulations since 2016, with 24 states enacting new laws just last year.
👶 Child safety advocates helped kill the measure, including parents whose children died from AI chatbot interactions.
🚀 States will keep passing AI laws while Congress debates, creating the exact regulatory patchwork tech companies tried to prevent.
Silicon Valley just learned that money can't buy everything in Washington. Not even close.
The Senate voted 99-1 Tuesday to kill a 10-year ban on state AI regulation from Trump's tax bill. The ban would have blocked states from passing AI laws if they wanted $500 million in federal broadband funding. Tech companies spent months pushing for it. They got crushed.
Meta, Microsoft, and venture capital firms led the charge. They said state laws would kill innovation and hand China the advantage in AI. Nobody bought it.
The lobbying effort read like a tech industry hall of fame. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told Congress it would be "very difficult to imagine us figuring out how to comply with 50 different sets of regulation." Marc Andreessen from Andreessen Horowitz backed the measure. So did Palmer Luckey from Anduril and Joe Lonsdale from Palantir.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick joined the push. He called it essential for national security and a way to stop blue states from passing AI legislation. Bloomberg reported the measure became the top priority for major tech companies.
The logic seemed simple from Silicon Valley's view. Why deal with dozens of different state rules when you could get one federal framework? Or better yet, no framework at all for 10 years while the industry sorts things out.
States had other plans. Forty attorneys general from both parties sent a letter opposing the measure. Seventeen Republican governors joined them. Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who served as Trump's press secretary, led the GOP opposition.
This wasn't just political theater. States have been busy passing AI laws while Congress talks. Stanford researchers found that 43 states have enacted 131 AI regulations since 2016. Twenty-four states passed AI-related laws last year alone.
California would have been hit hardest. The state has 20 AI laws on the books and 30 more proposals working through the legislature. State officials, including Attorney General Rob Bonta, came out against the federal measure.
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas championed the measure in the Senate. When opposition mounted, he tried to cut a deal with Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee. The compromise would have shrunk the ban from 10 years to five and allowed states to regulate some areas like child safety and artist voice protection.
Blackburn agreed, then backed out. She said the language still had problems and would let big tech keep exploiting kids and creators. Cruz blamed "outside interests" for killing the deal, though he didn't say which ones beyond mentioning China and California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The timing worked against tech companies. Parents of children who died from online harms sent letters to lawmakers. Megan Garcia, whose 14-year-old son killed himself after talking with an AI chatbot, wrote that the ban would give companies "a license to develop and market dangerous products with impunity."
The state AI regulation landscape isn't the chaos tech companies described. Most state laws target specific problems rather than broad restrictions on AI development.
Tennessee passed the ELVIS Act to stop AI tools from copying artists' voices without permission. Other states target AI use in hiring, healthcare, and criminal justice. Some require disclosure when AI systems make decisions that affect people's lives.
The regulations often address gaps that federal law doesn't cover. States moved faster than Congress on issues like algorithmic bias in hiring and AI-generated content in political ads. They filled a vacuum while federal lawmakers debated broader frameworks.
Tech companies said this creates compliance headaches. They're probably right. But states said they can't wait for Congress to act while AI systems cause real harm to their residents.
Federal funding drove much of the debate. The measure would have tied state AI regulation to access to broadband infrastructure money. States that passed AI laws could lose access to hundreds of millions in federal funds.
This wasn't subtle. It was a direct attempt to use federal spending power to override state authority. The approach backfired by making the stakes clear for state officials.
The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program aims to expand internet access in underserved areas. Tying it to AI regulation gave states a stark choice: regulate AI or get broadband funding. Most chose regulation.
The Senate vote reflects a larger tension between federal and state authority in tech regulation. Silicon Valley has long preferred federal rules, which are often more industry-friendly than state laws. Companies can lobby one set of regulators instead of 50.
States have moved faster on tech issues in recent years. They passed privacy laws, antitrust measures, and social media restrictions while Congress debated. The pattern repeats with AI regulation.
The defeat also shows limits to tech industry influence. Despite massive lobbying budgets and high-profile supporters, companies couldn't overcome bipartisan state opposition. Money helps, but it doesn't guarantee wins.
The failure doesn't end Silicon Valley's push for favorable AI regulation. Cruz said the measure could return in separate legislation. Tech companies will likely keep lobbying for federal preemption of state laws.
States will keep passing AI regulations. California is considering AI safety requirements for large models. Other states are drafting their own measures. The patchwork Silicon Valley warned about is already forming.
Federal action remains uncertain. Congress has held hearings and proposed bills but hasn't passed AI legislation. The delay gives states more time to act and creates more pressure for federal intervention.
The industry faces a choice: work with state regulators on reasonable rules or fight a 50-front war against different requirements. The Senate vote suggests fighting might not work.
Why this matters:
Q: How many states currently have AI laws on the books?
A: Stanford researchers found 43 states have passed 131 AI regulations since 2016. Twenty-four states enacted new AI laws just last year. California leads with 20 existing laws and 30 more proposals working through the legislature.
Q: How would the $500 million funding mechanism have worked?
A: States that passed AI regulations would lose access to federal broadband funding through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program. This program expands internet access in underserved areas, creating a stark choice: regulate AI or get broadband money.
Q: What specific AI laws are states actually passing?
A: Most target specific problems rather than broad restrictions. Tennessee's ELVIS Act stops AI voice copying. Other states regulate AI use in hiring, healthcare, and criminal justice. Some require disclosure when AI systems make decisions affecting people's lives.
Q: Which Republican officials opposed the tech industry's plan?
A: Seventeen Republican governors opposed it, led by Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Forty attorneys general from both parties sent opposition letters. The bipartisan pushback surprised tech companies who expected more GOP support.
Q: What was in Ted Cruz's failed compromise deal?
A: Cruz offered to cut the ban from 10 years to 5 years and allow states to regulate child safety and artist voice protection. Senator Blackburn initially agreed, then backed out, saying the language still had problems and would let big tech exploit kids.
Q: Will this provision come back in future legislation?
A: Cruz suggested it could return in separate legislation. Tech companies will likely keep pushing for federal preemption of state laws. However, the 99-1 Senate vote suggests any future attempts face steep opposition from both parties.
Q: Would this have blocked existing AI laws or just future ones?
A: The provision would have prevented states from enforcing existing AI laws if they wanted federal broadband funding, not just blocked new laws. This would have effectively killed California's 20 current AI regulations and similar laws in other states.
Q: How does this compare to other tech regulation battles?
A: States have moved faster than Congress on tech issues recently, passing privacy laws, antitrust measures, and social media restrictions while federal lawmakers debated. This follows the same pattern, with states filling gaps in federal oversight.
Trump killed Canada's tech tax with one threat. After he canceled trade talks Friday, Canada dropped its $3B digital levy on Google, Meta, and Amazon by Sunday night. The quick surrender shows how economic leverage trumps sovereignty.
Senate Republicans quietly added a tax on future solar and wind projects while ending EV credits by September. Even Elon Musk calls it "insane" as tech companies need clean power for AI data centers.
Germany demands Apple and Google remove Chinese AI app DeepSeek from their stores, claiming it illegally ships user data to China. The move reflects growing global tensions over AI privacy and data sovereignty.
Trump Media announces a $400 million stock buyback despite posting $400 million in losses last year on just $3.6 million in revenue. The company sits on $3 billion in cash, raising questions about whether returning money to shareholders makes sense.
Get tomorrow's intel today. Join the clever kids' club. Free forever.
