Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/bid-to-accelerate-us-chips-projects-blocked-by-house-republicans.19264/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021370
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Bid to Accelerate US Chips Projects Blocked by House Republicans

Daniel Nenni

Admin
Staff member
022f436b62f321f62722e7dafe2bfacd

  • (Bloomberg) -- A measure designed to speed up the construction of semiconductor projects in the US was stripped out from must-pass defense legislation after objections from US House Speaker Mike Johnson and other Republicans, according to people familiar with the matter.
The provision would have exempted projects that receive funding from the 2022 Chips Act from federal environmental permitting reviews. The Chips Act set aside subsidies worth $100 billion to revitalize chipmaking in the US, and the permitting provision was a key priority for Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo as she prepares to distribute the first awards by the end of this year.

Without a permitting exemption, projects that win Chips Act money — which are widely expected to include sites under construction by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. in Arizona and Intel Corp. in Ohio, among others — could face significant delays as they navigate the environmental review process.

The measure is the latest bipartisan priority to fall victim to contentious National Defense Authorization Act negotiations in the House after clearing the Senate with overwhelming support. On this and a separate provision that would have curbed outbound investment to China, Speaker Johnson bucked broad bipartisan backing to side with individual committee chairs, according to the people, who asked not to be named as the deliberations aren’t public.

In this case, Johnson backed members including Washington Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who leads the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Rodgers did not want to give away leverage on chips-specific permitting exemptions when she is seeking broader reform, according to two people familiar with the matter — one of whom added that there is still some residual frustration among Republican members who were unhappy with the final version of the Chips Act.

Spokespeople for Johnson and Rodgers didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

“This fight is too important to both our economic and national security for it to stop here,” Republican Senator Ted Cruz said in a statement. “I hope that Republicans who care about permitting reform will see the light and we’ll soon get this into law.”

Bipartisan Support
The permitting measure had enjoyed support from both parties and in both chambers, plus it’s had strong backing from the Semiconductor Industry Association. A group of 120 lawmakers sent an October letter to the leaders of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees urging them to include chips permitting language in the final version of the defense bill.

Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act, which often take months or years, “could halt or delay commencement of new projects, impacting the United States’ ability to bolster its national security interests, economic growth, competitiveness, and technological leadership,” the lawmakers wrote.

Raimondo had made the same plea in congressional testimony earlier this fall. While the Commerce Department has set up a team to help chip companies navigate the permitting process, Raimondo said, the agency is limited without legislation allowing firms to bypass permitting requirements altogether.

“We are not in any way suggesting that we should do anything that hurts the environment, is unsustainable,” she said before a Senate panel on Oct. 4. “That being said, we do need to streamline the process, speed the process, make the process efficient and user-friendly.”

Projects would still have had to abide by other federal environmental laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. The Commerce Department’s application for Chips Act money includes a lengthy environmental questionnaire.

Cruz and Senator Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat, said in interviews last week that they were negotiating with individual members who expressed opposition to the permitting language, although they declined to name who was involved.

Both of their states have won billions of dollars in private semiconductor investment spurred by the Chips Act. In addition to TSMC, Intel is also undergoing a massive expansion in Arizona, and Samsung Electronics Co. is working on a new plant in Taylor, Texas.

“We’ve got to get this passed if we’re gonna get these plants built,” Kelly said last Thursday, adding that he was having conversations with members who opposed the permitting provision both on ideological grounds and as a political tactic during broader defense-bill negotiations. Cruz said he was also pushing “very, very hard” to keep the language.

 
These rules can be a nightmare. I worked on the BART SFO/South SF project and a truck ran over a single snake and operations were shut down until additional protections were added to an already long list of protections. These rules, some of which border on insanity and logic need to be made realistic. I know that snake cost the taxpayers a fortune. The existing protections already cost a fortune.
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering if the lengthy review and public comment drag too long, TSMC might finish the the second or even the third fab in Japan by then.
 
Last edited:
Part of the problem I think is too many of our key politicians in power are too old, many in their 70's and 80's. They may be good at and knowledgeable about other industries eg, agriculture, transportation, etc., but quite clueless when it comes to high tech and the fast speed these industries are often required to move to be successful. We have term limits, why not age limits.
 
Part of the problem I think is too many of our key politicians in power are too old, many in their 70's and 80's. They may be good at and knowledgeable about other industries eg, agriculture, transportation, etc., but quite clueless when it comes to high tech and the fast speed these industries are often required to move to be successful. We have term limits, why not age limits.

Older ages of the representatives is probably not the cause of the delay in this particular case. Actually I believe a lot of elders in both chambers from both Republican and Democratic parties want to pass this measure. I suspect the younger generation of the politicians may have the tendency to boycott whatever they don't like in order to advance their own agenda or use the boycott to gain more power. National interest, bipartisanship, and long term consequences are useless (or not exciting enough, not glamour enough) in their mind.

Two opponents of this measure are Speaker Mike Johnson (only 51 years old) and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (54 years old).

"Speaker Johnson bucked broad bipartisan backing to side with individual committee chairs, according to the people, who asked not to be named as the deliberations aren’t public.

In this case, Johnson backed members including Washington Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who leads the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Rodgers did not want to give away leverage on chips-specific permitting exemptions when she is seeking broader reform, according to two people familiar with the matter — one of whom added that there is still some residual frustration among Republican members who were unhappy with the final version of the Chips Act."

 
Above my pay grade. Politics has always seemed to be reactive versus proactive. I do know by experience that reactive technology companies do not do well. Proactive companies are the ones that change the world, absolutely.
 
These rules can be a nightmare. I worked on the BART SFO/South SF project and a truck ran over a single snake and operations were shut down until additional protections were added to an already long list of protections. These rules, some of which border on insanity and logic need to be made realistic. I know that snake cost the taxpayers a fortune. The existing protections already cost a fortune.
Is the "snake" in this story a euphamism?
 
In this case, Johnson backed members including Washington Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who leads the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Rodgers did not want to give away leverage on chips-specific permitting exemptions when she is seeking broader reform, according to two people familiar with the matter — one of whom added that there is still some residual frustration among Republican members who were unhappy with the final version of the Chips Act."

Should there be exemptions or should we fix the problem at its roots?
 
Above my pay grade. Politics has always seemed to be reactive versus proactive. I do know by experience that reactive technology companies do not do well. Proactive companies are the ones that change the world, absolutely.

I always found America too apolitical to be true. High class Americans are avoiding politics, a complete opposite of Asia.

I never understood how America manages to not to implode under such setup, when the strong, and talented leave the power for grabs to people who aren't, because in Asia that usually ends up in a civil war.

In contrast, in America, there is so little contest, checks, and limitations to people in power, that political clubs which first ran the country in seventies managed to survive for 50 years.

In Japan, Korea, two countries with viciously competitive politics, the most any establishment gets is around 10 years.
 
"Reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act, which often take months or years, “could halt or delay commencement of new projects, impacting the United States’ ability to bolster its national security interests, economic growth, competitiveness, and technological leadership,” the lawmakers wrote."

According to this, it sounds like we shouldn't need exemptions for Fabs. we should just repeal the National Environmental Policy Act.
 
I had never before heard of Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who leads the House Energy and Commerce Committee. I, therefore, thought it might be useful to know more about her to understand her position on the CHIPS Act. Here are some highlights of Ms. Rodgers' political/legislative thinking:
  • Opposes the Affordable Care Act
  • Co-sponsored the Marriage Protection Amendment to the US Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage
  • Opposes both humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine
  • Opposes the legalization of marijuana
  • Opposed the continuation of the Violence Against Women Act
  • (there are many more of similar ilk)
and -- for a little icing on the cake

Rejects the theory of evolution, saying "The account that I believe is the one in the Bible, that God created the world in seven days."
  • The fact that this woman has a position of substantial power is, to me, worrisome.

 
Nowadays you have to be an extremist amongst the extremists to make it in US politics.
Consequently and naturally, nutcases such as this Cathy McMorris Rodgers gets selected to be in the position of power.
We don't need to CCP of China or the Czar of Russia. We are already defeating ourselves.
 
I had never before heard of Cathy McMorris Rodgers, who leads the House Energy and Commerce Committee. I, therefore, thought it might be useful to know more about her to understand her position on the CHIPS Act. Here are some highlights of Ms. Rodgers' political/legislative thinking:
  • Opposes the Affordable Care Act
  • Co-sponsored the Marriage Protection Amendment to the US Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage
  • Opposes both humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine
  • Opposes the legalization of marijuana
  • Opposed the continuation of the Violence Against Women Act
  • (there are many more of similar ilk)
and -- for a little icing on the cake

Rejects the theory of evolution, saying "The account that I believe is the one in the Bible, that God created the world in seven days."
  • The fact that this woman has a position of substantial power is, to me, worrisome.


God Bless America 😟🙏
 
Back
Top