Senators Say Nvidia's Shanghai Expansion Is a Serious National Security Risk
Sens. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) are seeking answers from Nvidia about the AI chip company's planned facility expansion in China.
In a May 28
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Governor signs bill aimed at deterring pop-up parties
The bill is a legislative attempt to combat unruly gatherings of teens and young people that officials say have caused havoc, especially in Shore towns. (Lori M. Nichols for New Jersey Monitor) The Senate on Monday joined the Assembly in concurring with Gov. Phil Murphy's conditional veto of a bill that would create new criminal charges to deter disruptive pop-up parties that have harried some New Jersey towns in recent years, and the bill became law after Murphy signed it Monday afternoon. The new law will allow authorities to charge those who provoke or attempt to provoke at least four others into disorderly conduct with inciting a public brawl or who conceal their identities to instill fear or frustrate authorities' attempts to apprehend or prosecute them. 'This law makes it clear that if you incite a public brawl, you will be held accountable. We need to give law enforcement the tools to stop this kind of chaos before someone gets seriously hurt, or worse,' said bill sponsor Assemblyman Dan Hutchison (D-Gloucester). Those who wear masks or disguises for medical, demonstrative, or religious reasons will not be subject to prosecution for concealing their identities. The new law is a legislative response to pop-up parties and other large, unruly gatherings of young people that have spurred violence and chaos in some New Jersey communities in recent years. A push in favor of the law rose after Memorial Day weekend, when authorities in Seaside Heights said gangs of young people created havoc on the boardwalk. In May, a brawl at the Menlo Park Mall broke out among 300 young people, forcing seven arrests and leaving one officer injured as locals called police from neighboring towns to bring the fracas under control, authorities said. Later last month, officials were forced to shutter a carnival outside the Woodbridge Center after hundreds of teens responded to a social media post about the event. Authorities said they made no arrests at the scene to avoid an escalation. 'This bill is meant to make such incidents less frequent and to give our public safety officers more training and resources to help bring these situations under control,' said bill sponsor Sen. Paul Moriarty (D-Gloucester). Murphy conditionally vetoed the bipartisan bill in early May over First Amendment concerns. The earlier version would have criminalized engaging or promoting others to engage in disorderly conduct and lacked exemptions for medical and other mask-wearing.
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Donors' vs ‘takers': SALT battle stirs debate between blue and red states
President Trump's domestic agenda bill is spurring a debate over whether blue states are subsidizing red states. After a successful pressure campaign from blue-state Republicans, the House version of Trump's bill was amended to boost the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap to $40,000. The agreement was a major win for a handful of House Republicans from wealthier districts in blue states. The GOP lawmakers backing the larger cap argued their constituents tend to pay higher state and local taxes in large part due to high property values. Before Trump's 2017 tax bill, the constituents could write off their state and local taxes. That bill imposed a $10,000 ceiling, which the blue-state GOP lawmakers said unduly punished their area's homeowners, who suddenly had a massively larger tax bill. The SALT cap is controversial because it's a tax break that benefits wealthier Americans in more affluent coastal states. But those arguing that the higher ceiling is justified say their constituents already send in more to the federal government in taxes than they get out in public services. As a result, they argue their states are already effectively subsidizing state with lower property values that tend to get more in federal benefits than their constituents pay in taxes. This has spurred a larger debate over who is subsidizing who when it comes to red and blue states. Democrats and blue-state Republicans defend the SALT deduction and advocate for a higher cap because their states often pay more in taxes than they get back in services. They distinguish between 'donor states' and 'taker states' and argue that, as donors, they should be able to fully exempt their regional taxes from their federal tax bill. 'Most of these states … are high tax states that give more to the federal government than they get back in federal services. Most of the red states are taker states, states that get more from the federal government than they actually pay in taxes,' Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.) said during a markup of the tax portion of the GOP bill earlier this month. 'It's really not fair that we are being stuck with this cap on our state and local tax deduction because people are getting taxed on taxes that they've already paid,' he said. The argument is a common one among Democrats. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) made the point during an interview with television pundit Sean Hannity in 2023. 'We're subsidizing your states, Sean, because of your policies,' he said. Republicans in red states see things dramatically differently. They argue many residents of blue states are simply living in high-tax areas and shouldn't get a federal tax reduction for doing so. If they want lower taxes, vote to lower the local taxes or move. State tax experts say blue states are generally sending in more to the federal government than they are getting out in benefits because they have larger local economies and more higher-income taxpayers. The 'donor state' and 'taker state' distinction has been around for decades, though funding used to flow more from northern states to Southern states rather than from coastal states to interior states. Recent studies show a bit of a complicated picture, though in many cases it is blue states that are paying in more to the federal government than they are taking out. For example, Washington, Massachusetts and New Jersey all ran a deficit with the federal government in 2023, according to a 2025 New York comptroller study, meaning these states sent in more in taxes than they received in benefits. Other states with a substandard balance of payments include California, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Utah and Illinois. Most of those states have repeatedly voted for Democratic candidates in recent presidential elections and have Democratic senators representing them in Congress. Utah is a notable exception. However, when it comes to states simply taking large amounts of benefits from the federal government, the report from the New York comptroller paints a more complicated picture. The top 10 taker states in 2023, the report found, included New Mexico, Virginia, Hawaii, Maryland and Maine, which repeatedly have backed Democrats in the presidential election. The list also included Alaska, Mississippi, West Virginia, Kentucky and Alabama, five red states. New Mexico, Virginia, Alaska, Mississippi and West Virginia all receive more than $12,000 more per person from the federal government than they pay in taxes, according to the comptroller study. A separate report from the State University of New York found the states in 2022 with the most favorable balance of payments per capita were Virginia ($14,888), Kentucky ($14,507), Alaska ($14,031), New Mexico ($13,009), and Maryland ($11,617). Texas and Florida, the two GOP-leaning states with the largest economies, received moderately more per person from the federal government than they provided in taxes. There's no single government program or tax that's responsible for the net transfers from blue states to red states, but experts point to health care matching contributions, also known as FMAP, as a major driver. 'If you look at FMAP, the share usually for red states is much higher, meaning there is more federal support,' Lucy Dadayan, a principal research associate with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, told The Hill. 'Medicaid is the largest share of all the federal aid going to the states. That's one [way] that red states get substantially more funding from the federal government than the blue states get.' The GOP bill makes large cuts to public health care programs to partly offset some of its tax cuts, with millions of people set to lose access to public health care as a result of the legislation. There is no regional breakdown of where those people live from the Congressional Budget Office, but the distribution of FMAP allocations suggests they may be located in Republican-led states. While the bill still has to make it through the Senate, the higher $40,000 SALT cap would lower taxes on more affluent taxpayers by allowing them to deduct more local taxes from their federal returns. This could take a bite out of the net federal subsidies from Democratic to Republican states by amping a tax cut that is of particular advantage to Democratic states. It will also contribute substantially to the federal deficit. One estimate from the Tax Policy Center found that a $40,000 SALT cap without an income threshold would cost more than $600 billion through 2034. Getting rid of the SALT cap altogether would cost more than $1.2 trillion through the next nine years, the group found. All the maneuvering the House has done on SALT and the last-minute agreement Republicans struck to raise the cap to $40,000 could be for nothing. Republicans in the Senate don't have a SALT caucus that is threatening to break from the rest of their party in the same way that the House does. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told The Hill that the SALT cap wasn't really an issue for the Senate, even though he recognized that the House had to make a deal. Investors say they expect changes on the bill could come from Senate moderates. 'We will be watching Senate moderates and moves in the bond market, as these will likely drive last-minute adjustments. The true deadlines remain the August recess,' Larry Adam, chief investment officer of investment bank Raymond James, wrote in a note to investors. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US FDA launches AI tool to reduce time taken for scientific reviews
(Reuters) -The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Monday that it had launched a generative AI tool, Elsa, aimed at improving efficiency across its operations, including scientific reviews. "Today's rollout of Elsa is ahead of schedule and under budget, thanks to the collaboration of our in-house experts across the centers," said FDA Commissioner Marty Makary. The agency said it is already using Elsa to expedite clinical protocol reviews, shorten the time needed for scientific evaluations, and pinpoint high-priority inspection targets. Once the FDA receives an application for a potential drug approval, it has six to 10 months to make a decision. Elsa assists with reading, writing, and summarizing tasks. It can summarize adverse events to support safety profile assessments of drugs and rapidly compare packaging inserts. "Elsa offers a secure platform for FDA employees to access internal documents while ensuring all information remains within the agency. The models do not train on data submitted by regulated industry, safeguarding the sensitive research and data handled by FDA staff," the FDA said. In May, the regulator said it would fully integrate AI by June 30, following an experimental run.
