Fabs, Funding, Fashion, and the Future

The new Arizona plant built by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company is now operational and is making A16 processor chips for Apple.  A lot of problems have been overcome in order to reach this stage, and congratulations are due to the American and Taiwanese workers, engineers, and managers who have driven this accomplishment.

This project has benefited from a $6.6B funding allocation under the CHIPS and Science Act, and I am sure that this plant will serve as a poster child for the kind of targeted industrial policy favored by Biden and Harris.  BUT:

When the opportunity to pioneer in advanced semiconductor manufacturing was emerging–an opportunity that TSMC took brilliant advantage of...would a US ‘targeted industrial policy’ have identified it as an opportunity worthy of focus and funding?  Highly unlikely, I think:  software, services, and marketing were what the Cool Kids talked about, manufacturing was viewed as something suitable for people with dull minds and countries with low-skilled populations.

“Targeted incentives” will go to the companies who are doing something currently fashionable and/or are politically well-connected. It seems likely that Schumer’s support of the NEPA permitting exception for chip manufacturers has something to do with Micron’s plan to build a new fab near Syracuse.

I’m certainly not arguing against the importance of US-based semiconductor manufacturing. But there are also a lot of other important product types and technologies and I’d much rather see a reassessment of NEPA criteria in general–as the above-linked article says, the rest of the economy needs a reprieve, too–rather than various exception bills.

Much of the genius of the US Constitution lies in the fact that it is short–it operates at the level of general principles rather than of endless specifics. We need more of this spirit in the design of legislation today.