Newsom fears backdoor ban on AI rules
Republicans in Congress rejected a push by some of their colleagues to temporarily ban states from regulating artificial intelligence in President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act — citing their confidence in state lawmakers and the importance of keeping the tech giants in check.
But now some in California are worried Trump revealed a backdoor ban this week with his release of an AI Action Plan that says he'll deny federal funding for AI to states with rules that might hinder the funding's 'effectiveness.'
Trump's comments afterwards suggested he would interpret that mandate broadly. 'You can't have one state holding you up,' he said at a Washington event. 'We need one common sense federal standard that supersedes all states, supersedes everybody.'
Trump's attitude caught the attention of California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, our colleagues in the Golden State reported.
California has moved more quickly than other states to regulate AI. Newsom signed a bill last year that bars health insurers in the state from using AI to deny claims.
'Having failed to get his group of sycophants to approve an AI moratorium in his 'Big Beautiful Betrayal,' Trump now tries to force it on states,' Newsom spokesperson Tara Gallegos said in a statement. 'Trump might not care but the Governor will not let him endanger our most vulnerable citizens.'
The backstory: The version of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act that the House passed in May would have barred states from regulating AI for 10 years.
Commerce Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) proposed similar language when the Senate took up the measure, but Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) tanked it, arguing that states needed 'to protect their citizens from the abuses of AI.'
She said she feared the moratorium would give tech firms licence to 'exploit kids, creators, and conservatives.'
MORNING MONEY: CAPITAL RISK — POLITICO's flagship financial newsletter has a new Friday edition built for the economic era we're living in: one shaped by political volatility, disruption and a wave of policy decisions with sector-wide consequences. Each week, Morning Money: Capital Risk brings sharp reporting and analysis on how political risk is moving markets and how investors are adapting. Want to know how health care regulation, tariffs, or court rulings could ripple through the economy? Start here.
WELCOME TO FUTURE PULSE
This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care.
A new study by Harvard researchers says that a baby's sex might not be random but connected to the mother's age, genes and older siblings' sexes.
Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Carmen Paun at cpaun@politico.com, Ruth Reader at rreader@politico.com or Erin Schumaker at eschumaker@politico.com.
Want to share a tip securely? Message us on Signal: CarmenP.82, RuthReader.02 or ErinSchumaker.01.
WORLD VIEW
The EU has joined the U.S. in scrutinizing citizens' exposure to fluoride, our colleagues across the pond report.
This week, the European Food Safety Agency, an arm of the EU, updated safe fluoride intake levels, setting new limits but finding overall that the EU's drinking water doesn't pose health risks.
In the U.S., Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wants to stop adding the cavity-fighting mineral to drinking water, as many water systems here do on the recommendation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Dentists say Kennedy is making a big mistake.
Compare and contrast: Nearly three-quarters of Americans drink fluoridated water, but few EU countries fluoridate — in fact, only Ireland and parts of the U.K. and Spain do — and the concentration of fluoride found in drinking water in European countries is usually less than 0.3 milligrams per liter.
The CDC recommends a level of 0.7 mg per liter to prevent tooth decay.
Kennedy, who says Americans can get all the fluoride they need from toothpaste and mouthwash, cites research finding higher levels of fluoride linked to lower IQ scores as justification for rolling back the agency's guidance.
The EU officials said those studies had prompted their review. They set 'tolerable upper intake levels' from all sources, including drinking water, of 1 mg per day for infants, 1.6 mg per day for children ages 1-3 years, 2 mg per day for children 4-8 years and 3.3 mg per day for anyone over 8 years old.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
19 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Caitlin Davis confirmed as top N.H. education official, drawing praise for lacking a ‘political agenda'
While divisive political debate may influence policymaking, Davis said the commissioner's job is to take the education policies that have been adopted and implement them fairly, professionally, and legally — an approach that drew praise from Republican and Democratic state lawmakers who often don't see eye to eye on education-related issues. Advertisement Representative Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up Representative 'She has no political agenda,' Damon said. 'She simply values providing an adequate education to all New Hampshire students in all settings where they are.' Republican Governor Kelly A. Ayotte, who took office in January, announced in March that she Advertisement Edelblut, a socially conservative businessman and politician, had been first appointed to the post in 2017 by Republican Governor Chris Sununu after narrowly losing to Sununu in the GOP's 2016 gubernatorial primary. Edelblut frequently drew ire from Democrats and teachers unions, as he advocated for the ' When asked on Tuesday what differentiates her from her predecessor, Davis said Edelblut had brought 'an outside perspective' to the job. By contrast, Davis said she has been working inside the department for 15 years, gaining an understanding of the challenges and unique circumstances at play. She has eight years under her belt as the department's director of education analytics and resources. Ayotte said Davis brings preexisting relationships with school leaders and community members, plus a 'collaborative, data-driven approach,' to the job. 'Together, we will make sure our schools continue to innovate, support our fantastic teachers, and strive for the highest standards of academic achievement so every child reaches his or her full potential,' Ayotte said. Davis said public schools are still 'the backbone' of New Hampshire's education system, as she also lauded efforts to provide an array of 'high-quality educational pathways' for students to find an environment conducive to their learning. 'Whether that is a traditional public school, a charter school, a home education program, a career and tech education program, a non-public school, an 'education freedom account,' or a new alternative model yet to be developed, we have a responsibility to ensure every student can access an education that helps them thrive,' she said. Advertisement Amanda Gokee of the Globe staff contributed to this report. A version of this story appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, a free newsletter focused on New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles elsewhere. To receive it via email Monday through Friday, . Steven Porter can be reached at
Boston Globe
19 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
The SALT income tax deduction cap was increased to $40,000 in Trump's bill. Should you take it?
For the last seven years, the tax code has limited the amount taxpayers may write off for state and local taxes to $10,000. Prior to that, the cap was a much more generous $40,000. Advertisement The $10,000 cap was imposed by Congress as part of the first Trump administration's mammoth tax cut plan. It was quite costly to taxpayers in places like Boston's western suburbs, where local property tax bills range in excess of $25,000 (and where the state income tax is 5 percent and the sales tax 6.25 percent). Indeed, for some of the state's wealthiest residents, local property taxes plus state taxes exceeds $40,000. (Taxpayers must choose to include state income taxes or state sales taxes in their calculations, but not both.) This year's tax and spending bill, pushed by the current Trump administration, reversed what the previous Trump administration did by quadrupling the cap back to $40,000. It was done mostly to keep Republican Congress members who represent wealthy suburban districts on board for a bill that, overall, favors the well-off over those struggling to get by. Advertisement Here's what you should know about the SALT income tax deduction. Who qualifies for the SALT deduction? All taxpayers who pay state and local taxes may take the deduction, but it only makes sense for those who are relatively well-off. A threshold question for all federal income taxpayers is whether to take the How does the standard deduction work? The amount of income tax a taxpayer owes is based, logically enough, on how much income the taxpayer has. The more income, the more taxes . But the tax code allows for gross income to be reduced by a multitude of deductions, producing a taxable 'adjusted gross income.' Wealthier taxpayers who can afford CPAs and tax lawyers scour the tax code for deductions, while the vast majority of taxpayers simply accept a lump sum 'default' deduction, known as the standard deduction, which is set by Congress. What are the most common deductions for those who itemize? Besides state and local taxes, common deductions are for mortgage interest on a primary residence or second home; charitable contributions; and out-of-pocket medical and dental expenses. All are subject to certain limitations. Why take the standard deduction instead of itemizing? If all your itemized deductions come out to a sum that is less than the standard deduction, then the obvious choice is to take the standard deduction. Taking the standard deduction is also less time-consuming. Advertisement How much is the standard deduction? The standard deduction was greatly increased — almost doubled — under the first Trump administration tax cut. For individual filers it went from $6,500 to $12,000; for joint returns, $13,000 to $24,000. The tax bill enacted this month bumps up the standard deduction for single filers to $15,750 and for joint filers $31,500. It's a huge increase, one that benefits the vast majority of taxpayers, including those with lower and moderate incomes and do not itemize. What percentage of taxpayers take the standard deduction? Taxpayers have overwhelmingly — and increasingly — opted for the standard deduction. Since the 2017 tax cut, the percentage of Americans who take the standard deduction has skyrocketed to more than 90 percent, compared to less than 70 percent as recently as 2020. How long has the SALT tax reduction been around? It dates back to the advent of the federal income tax more than a century ago. Initially, the SALT deduction was unlimited, meaning you could deduct from your taxable income every dollar you paid in state and local taxes, without a cap. How has SALT changed recently? The biggest change came when, at Trump's behest, a Republican-controlled Congress in 2017 capped it at $10,000 over the objections of many blue state lawmakers. What was the rationale for reducing the SALT deduction in 2017? Trump in his first administration successfully lobbied for one of the largest tax cuts in history, including much lower personal and corporate income tax rates, higher standard deductions, and a doubling of the child tax credit. (A tax credit is a dollar-for-dollar reduction in taxes owed, as opposed to a tax deduction, which is a reduction in taxable income.) The 2017 tax cuts, however, were not offset by spending reductions. One relatively minor way the 2017 law sought to pay for the tax cuts was by slashing the SALT deduction by 75 percent. Advertisement What were the politics behind the 2017 SALT reduction? The SALT deduction favors mostly blue states that vote reliably Democratic in presidential elections. The Trump administration apparently felt politically safe imposing a heavier tax burden on taxpayers in states Republicans consider unwinnable. So why did the Republican-controlled Congress this year increase the SALT cap to $40,000? This year's tax bill passed the House by the slimmest of margins, 215-214, with all Democrats opposed and two Republicans voting against it on the grounds it explodes the national debt. Before the vote, a few moderate Republicans from blue states lobbied for increasing the SALT deduction cap. Doing so was apparently the price bill proponents were willing to pay to keep those few crucial Republican votes in line. When does the higher SALT deduction go into effect? Immediately. Taxpayers can take advantage of it before next year's midterm elections, which affords a modest political advance to Republicans. (Some of the most serious — and unpopular — cuts to the social safety net won't go into effect until after the midterms, another possible political advantage for Republicans.) How long will the higher SALT deduction continue? It will increase by $1,000 each year through 2029, but then revert back to $10,000 in 2030, unless Congress says otherwise. Got a problem? Send your consumer issue to
USA Today
19 minutes ago
- USA Today
GDP soars and Trump's economy roars. Liberals still won't give him credit.
Will Democrats put politics aside and applaud as the American economy shows a strength and resilience that so many of them doubted? Probably not. Thanks to President Donald Trump's bold policies, it appears that the United States will avoid a recession this year − one that so many liberals were predicting only months ago. Will Democrats put politics aside and applaud as the American economy shows a strength and resilience that so many of them doubted? Probably not. The Bureau of Economic Analysis on July 30 released more good news about our nation's vibrant economy. Gross domestic product grew a healthy annual rate of 3% in the second quarter after recording a less than 1% decline in the first three months of this year. Fears of a recession should now dissipate like morning haze after the sunrise. Nearly all markers of a strong economy are in top form. Unemployment is low, hovering at 4.1%. The past three months have seen steady job growth. Average hourly earnings for U.S. workers grew 3.7% over the 12 months ending in June. Consumer spending is expected to rise, and there's been a modest uptick in consumer confidence. The Consumer Price Index, which measures inflation, increased 2.7% over the 12 months ending in June, far below the 40-year high recorded in President Joe Biden's term. Even the average price of eggs has dropped dramatically, to $3.31 per dozen, down from a spike to $8 in February and back to roughly the same price level as a year ago. Stock indexes continue to grow at a strong pace, recovering from the sell-off this spring driven by concerns over Trump's tariffs. The Nasdaq and S&P 500 have set multiple record highs in July, a boon to millions of Americans with retirement accounts and other investors. On the tariff front, Trump's new trade deal with the European Union should be a catalyst for further economic growth, particularly in the energy and construction sectors. If this is what a recession looks like, let's keep it coming. Critics said Trump was destroying the economy Despite such healthy economic markers, I doubt I'll see many kudos offered to the Trump administration for powering past a recession, which the left predicted in doomsday terms. Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote in May that Trump and "MAGAnomics" were "destroying the economy and waging war on the middle class and the poor." The headline thundered that Trump was "making America backward again." Opinion: Trump's EU trade deal ushers in a golden age for blue-collar workers Interestingly, Krugman claimed that the U.S. economy was in good overall shape when Biden left office in January. He charged Trump with wrecking the economy in a mere three months. Now, that the data clearly shows otherwise, will Krugman admit his errors? I doubt it. Krugman, to be fair, wasn't the only so-called expert spouting off about our supposedly crumbling economy. CNN published an analysis in April with a headline that claimed "Trump took the US economy to the brink of a crisis in just 100 days." That same month, the Center for American Progress bemoaned that "President Donald Trump's decision to unilaterally launch a global trade war could be one of the worst economic statecraft blunders in American history." I read these articles in the mainstream news media and wonder if we share the same universe. Do progressives not see the same healthy economic markers that millions of other Americans and I see? The answer, of course, is that they do see − but they are too blinded by partisanship to admit it. Good economic news should be nonpartisan I don't have a problem with liberals criticizing Trump. Sometimes he deserves it. But when it comes to obvious wins like a blossoming economy, the constant derision is tiresome and pedestrian. A robust economy under any president is good news for Americans, regardless of their party affiliation. Right? I didn't care for Biden's leftist policies. But I didn't cheer when the economy struggled. It was bad news not just for Biden but, far more important, also for our nation and its citizens. More than a year after Biden entered the White House, annual inflation spiked to 9% in June 2022, the highest rate in four decades. Americans were hit with sudden increases in food, housing and transportation costs. Opinion: Nvidia CEO says Trump gives America an advantage. Hear that, progressives? Compounding the pain, the Federal Reserve acted to cool inflation by raising interest rates, which pushed up consumers' payments for auto, housing and credit card loans. Democrats tried to blame decisions made in Trump's first term, including federal spending used to fight consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. But Biden spent more even as the pandemic began to wane. In 2024, more than half of American voters said the economy was the issue that mattered to them the most. It's why Trump won more than 77 million votes and returned to the White House. Now, he is delivering on his promises to rebuild our nation's economy. But not everyone is happy about it. It's too bad liberals can't separate economic success from Trump's party affiliation. I can't help but wonder if they wanted a recession so they could blame Trump even more. Nicole Russell is a columnist at USA TODAY and a mother of four who lives in Texas. Contact her at nrussell@ and follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @russell_nm. Sign up for her weekly newsletter, The Right Track, here.
