The Food and Drug Administration commissioner’s effort to drastically shorten the review of drugs favored by President Donald Trump’s administration is causing alarm across the agency, stoking worries that the plan may run afoul of legal, ethical, and scientific standards long used to vet the safety and effectiveness of new medicines.
Marty Makary’s program is causing new anxiety and confusion among staff already rocked by layoffs, buyouts, and leadership upheavals, according to seven current or recently departed staffers. The people spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss confidential agency matters.
At the highest levels of the FDA, questions remain about which officials have the legal authority to sign off on drugs cleared under the Commissioners National Priority Voucher program, which promises approval in as little as one month for medicines that support U.S. national interests.
Traditionally, approval decisions have nearly always been handled by FDA review scientists and their immediate supervisors, not the agencys political appointees and senior leaders.
But drug reviewers say they’ve received little information about the new program’s workings. And some staffers working on a highly anticipated anti-obesity pill were recently told they can skip certain regulatory steps to meet top officials’ aggressive deadlines.
Outside experts point out that FDA drug reviewswhich range from six to 10 monthsare already the fastest in the world.
The concept of doing a review in one to two months just does not have scientific precedent, said Dr. Aaron Kesselheim, a professor at Harvard Medical School. FDA cannot do the same detailed review that it does of a regular application in one to two months, and it doesnt have the resources to do it.
On Thursday, Reuters reported that FDA officials have delayed the review of two drugs in the program, in part due to safety concerns, including the death of a patient taking one of the medications.
Health and Human Services spokesman Andrew Nixon said the voucher program prioritizes gold standard scientific review and aims to deliver meaningful and effective treatments and cures.”
The program remains popular at the White House, where pricing concessions announced by the Republican president have repeatedly been accompanied by FDA vouchers for drugmakers that agree to cut their prices.
For instance, when the White House announced that Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk would reduce prices on their popular obesity drugs, FDA staffers had to scramble to vet new vouchers for both companies in time for Trump’s news conference, according to multiple people involved in the process.
Thats sparked widespread concern that FDA drug reviewslong pegged to objective standards and procedureshave become open to political interference.
Its extraordinary to have such an opaque application process, one that is obviously susceptible to politicization, said Paul Kim, a former FDA attorney who now works with pharmaceutical clients.
Top FDA officials declined to sign off on expedited approvals
Many of the concerns around the program stem from the fact that it hasn’t been laid out in federal rules and regulations.
The FDA already has more than a half-dozen programs intended to speed up or streamline reviews for promising drugsall approved by Congress, with regulations written by agency staff.
In contrast, information about the voucher program is mostly confined to an agency website. Drugmakers can apply by submitting a 350-word statement of interest.
Increasingly, agency leaders such as Dr. Vinay Prasad, the FDAs top medical officer and vaccine center director, have been contacting drugmakers directly about awarding vouchers. Thats created quandaries for FDA staffers on even basic questions, such as how to formally award a voucher to a company that didnt request one.
Nixon, the HHS spokesman, said that voucher submissions are evaluated by a senior, multidisciplinary review committee, led by Prasad.
Questions about the legality of the program led the FDAs then-drug director, Dr. George Tidmarsh, to decline to sign off on approvals under the pathway, according to several people with direct knowledge of the matter. Tidmarsh resigned from the agency in November after a lawsuit challenging his conduct on issues unrelated to the voucher program.
After his departure, Dr. Sara Brenner, the FDAs principal deputy commissioner, was set to have the power to decide, but she also declined the role after looking further into the legal implications, according to the people. Currently, the agencys deputy chief medical officer, Dr. Mallika Mundkur, who works under Prasad, is taking on the responsibility.
Giving final approval to a drug carries significant legal risks, essentially certifying that the medicine meets FDA standards for safety and effectiveness. If unexpected safety problems later emerge, both the agency and individual staffers could be pulled into investigations or lawsuits.
Traditionally, approval comes from FDA drug office directors, made in consultation with a team of reviewers. Under the voucher program, approval comes through a committee vote by senior agency leaders led by Prasad, according to multiple people familiar with the process. Staff reviewers don’t get a vote.
It is a complete reversal from the normal review process, which is traditionally led by the scientists who are th ones immersed in the data, said Kesselheim, who is a lawyer and a medical researcher.
Not everyone sees problems with the program. Dan Troy, the FDAs top lawyer under President George W. Bush, a Republican, says federal law gives the commissioner broad discretion to reorganize the handling of drug reviews.
Still, he says, the voucher program, like many of Makarys initiatives, may be short-lived because it isn’t codified.
If you live by the press release then you die by the press release, Troy said. Anything that theyre doing now could be wiped out in a moment by the next administration.
The voucher program has ballooned after outreach by FDA officials
Initially framed as a pilot program of no more than five drugs, it has expanded to 18 vouchers awarded, with more under consideration. That puts extra pressure on the agencys drug center, where 20% of the staff has left through retirements, buyouts or resignations over the past year.
When Makary unveiled the program in October, there were immediate concerns about the unprecedented power he would have in deciding which companies benefit.
Makary then said that nominations for drugs would come from career staffers. Indeed, some of the early drugs were recommended by FDA reviewers, according to two people familiar with the process. They said FDA staffers deliberately selected drugs that could be vetted quickly.
But, increasingly, selection decisions are led by Prasad or other senior officials, sometimes unbeknownst to FDA staff, according to three people. In one case, FDA reviewers learned from GlaxoSmithKline representatives that Prasad had contacted the company about a voucher.
Access to Makary is limited because he does not use a government email account to do business, according to people familiar with the matter, breaking with longstanding precedent.
Under pressure from drugmakers, some FDA reviewers were told they can skip steps
Once a voucher is awarded, some drugmakers have their own interpretation of the review timeline creating further confusion and anxiety among staff.
Two people involved in the ongoing review of Eli Lilly’s anti-obesity pill said company executives initially told the FDA they expected the drug approved within two months.
The timeline alarmed FDA reviewers because it did not include the agency’s standard 60-day prefiling period, when staffers check the application to ensure it isnt missing essential information. That 60-day window has been in place for more than 30 years.
Lilly pushed for a quicker filing turnaround, demanding one week. Eventually the agency and the company agreed to a two-week period.
Lilly’s CEO, David Ricks, told attendees at a health care conference on Tuesday that the company expects FDA approval of its pill in the second quarter of the year.
Nixon declined to comment on the specifics of Lilly’s review but said FDA reviewers can adjust timelines as needed.
Staffers were pushed to keep the application moving forward, even though key pieces of data about the drug’s chemistry appeared to be missing, according to one person involved in the process. When reviewers raised concerns about gaps in the application, the person said, they were told by a senior FDA official that it was OK to overlook the regulations if the science is sound.
Former reviewers and outside experts say that approach is the opposite of how FDA reviews should work: By following the regulations, staffers scientifically confirm the safety and effectiveness of drugs.
Skipping review steps could also carry risks for drugmakers if future FDA leaders decide a drug wasnt properly vetted. Like other experts, Kesselheim says the program may not last beyond the current administration.
They are fundamentally changing the application of the standards, but the underlying law remains what it is, he said. The hope is that one day we will return to these scientifically sound, legally sound principles.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institutes Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Matthew Perrone, AP health writer
U.S. President Donald Trump suggested Friday that he may punish countries with tariffs if they dont back the U.S. controlling Greenland, a message that came as a bipartisan Congressional delegation sought to lower tensions in the Danish capital.
Trump for months has insisted that the U.S. should control Greenland, a semiautonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark, and said earlier this week that anything less than the Arctic island being in U.S. hands would be unacceptable.
During an unrelated event at the White House about rural health care, he recounted Friday how he had threatened European allies with tariffs on pharmaceuticals.
I may do that for Greenland too, Trump said. I may put a tariff on countries if they dont go along with Greenland, because we need Greenland for national security. So I may do that, he said.
He had not previously mentioned using tariffs to try to force the issue.
Earlier this week, the foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland met in Washington this week with U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
That encounter didnt resolve the deep differences, but did produce an agreement to set up a working group on whose purpose Denmark and the White House then offered sharply diverging public views.
European leaders have insisted that it is only for Denmark and Greenland to decide on matters concerning the territory, and Denmark said this week that it was increasing its military presence in Greenland in cooperation with allies.
A relationship that we need to nurture
In Copenhagen, a group of senators and members of the House of Representatives met Friday with Danish and Greenlandic lawmakers, and with leaders including Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen.
Delegation leader Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat, thanked the groups hosts for 225 years of being a good and trusted ally and partner and said that we had a strong and robust dialogue about how we extend that into the future.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, said after meeting lawmakers that the visit reflected a strong relationship over decades and it is one that we need to nurture. She told reporters that Greenland needs to be viewed as our ally, not as an asset, and I think thats what youre hearing with this delegation.
The tone contrasted with that emanating from the White House. Trump has sought to justify his calls for a U.S. takeover by repeatedly claiming that China and Russia have their own designs on Greenland, which holds vast untapped reserves of critical minerals. The White House hasnt ruled out taking the territory by force.
We have heard so many lies, to be honest and so much exaggeration on the threats towards Greenland, said Aaja Chemnitz, a Greenlandic politician and member of the Danish parliament who took part in Fridays meetings. And mostly, I would say the threats that were seeing right now is from the U.S. side.
Murkowski emphasized the role of Congress in spending and in conveying messages from constituents.
I think it is important to underscore that when you ask the American people whether or not they think it is a good idea for the United States to acquire Greenland, the vast majority, some 75%, will say, we do not think that that is a good idea, she said.
Along with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat, Murkowski has introduced bipartisan legislation that would prohibit the use of U.S. Defense or State department funds to annex or take control of Greenland or the sovereign territory of any NATO member state without that allys consent or authorization from the North Atlantic Council.
Inuit council criticizes White House statements
The dispute is looming large in the lives of Greenlanders. Greenlands prime minister, Jens-Frederik Nielsen, said on Tuesday that if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark. We choose NATO. We choose the Kingdom of Denmark. We choose the EU.
The chair of the Nuuk, Greenland-based Inuit Circumpolar Council, which represents around 180,000 Inuit from Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and Russias Chukotka region on international issues, said persistent statements from the White House that the U.S. must own Greenland offer a clear picture of how the US administration views the people of Greenland, how the U.S. administration views Indigenous peoples, and peoples that are few in numbers.
Sara Olsvig told The Associated Press in Nuuk that the issue is how one of the biggest powers in the world views other peoples that are less powerful than them. And that really is concerning.
Indigenous Inuit in Greenland do not want to be colonized again, she said.
Daniel Niemann and Darlene Superville, Associated Press
OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, said on Friday it will start including ads for those who use the app for free, or have the cheapest subscription, ChatGPT Go.
In the coming weeks, the company plans to start testing those ads in the U.S., which will directly relate to user prompts and conversations, “so more people can benefit from our tools with fewer usage limits or without having to pay,” the company said.
According to OpenAI, the ads will be “clearly labeled” at the bottom of the chat and users can turn off personalization if they want.
As for whether the ads will influence the answers ChatGPT provides, OpenAI said the “responses are driven by whats objectively useful, never by advertising,” and user data and conversations “are protected and never sold to advertisers.”
ChatGPT Go, which launched in India last August and has since rolled out in 170 countries, is now coming to the U.S. and everywhere the AI chatbot is available. It’s ChatGPT’s fastest-growing plan, and OpenAI claims it is “among the most affordable AI subscriptions globally.” (Of course, many AI chatbots are free.)
ChatGPT Go costs $8 a month, and offers access to its latest model, GPT5.2 Instant, giving users expanded access to messaging, image creation, file uploads, and memory, the company said in a statement.
For those who want to avoid ads, more premium subscriptions such as ChatGPT Plus and ChatGPT Pro come ad-free.
With this launch, ChatGPT now offers three subscription tiers globally: ChatGPT Go at $8 per month; ChatGPT Plus at $20 per month; and ChatGPT Pro at $200 per month.
Stocks wavered in afternoon trading on Wall Street Friday as the first week of corporate earnings season closes out with markets trading near record levels.
The S&P 500 rose 0.1% after shifting between small gains and losses. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 52 points, or 0.1%, as of 3:17 p.m. ET. The Nasdaq composite rose 0.1%.
Technology stocks were the strongest forces behind the market’s moves. The S&P 500 has slightly more losers than gainers, but several big technology stocks made strong gains and countered losses elsewhere.
Nvidia rose 0.4%, Broadcom rose 2.8%, and Micron Technology rose 6.8%. All three are semiconductor companies that are among several Big Tech companies with outsized valuations that often push the market higher or lower.
A handful of regional U.S. banks reported their earnings following mixed reports from their larger peers. Pittsburghs PNC jumped 3.9% after it beat Wall Streets fourth-quarter targets, but Regions Financial fell 3% after reporting results that missed forecasts.
Outside of the banking sector, transport company J.B. Hunt Transport Services fell 1% after reporting mixed quarterly financial results.
The latest round of earnings updates from companies could help give Wall Street a better sense of how consumers are spending their money and how businesses are operating amid economic concerns brought on by inflation and tariffs. Results from the technology sector are being scrutinized by investors trying to figure out whether the high stock prices fueled by the craze around artificial intelligence are justified.
Despite the strong start to 2026, we would not be surprised if markets experience volatility in the coming weeks as fourth-quarter earnings progress and the threat of escalating geopolitical tensions remains, wrote Doug Beath, global equity strategist at Wells Fargo Investment Institute, in a note to investors.
Wall Street will have a broader mix of earnings to review next week, coming from airlines, industrial companies, and technology companies. United Airlines, 3M, and Intel are all scheduled to release their quarterly earnings results next week.
Crude oil prices rose after dropping sharply on Thursday. The price of U.S. crude oil rose 0.4% to $59.44 and the price of Brent crude, the international standard, rose 0.6% to $64.13. Oil prices have been volatile amid widespread protests in Iran against that countrys leadership and President Donald Trump’s warnings that the U.S. will come to their rescue.
Gold prices, which have also been volatile this week, fell. Prices for the precious metal, often viewed as a safe haven amid economic and geopolitical uncertainty, fell 0.6%, but are still up more than 5% so far in January.
Treasury yields moved higher in the bond market. The yield on the 10-year Treasury rose to 4.23%, from 4.17% late Thursday. The two-year Treasury yield, which more closely tracks expectations for what the Federal Reserve will do, rose to 3.60%, from 3.57% late Thursday.
The Fed’s next policy meeting on interest rates is in two weeks, and Wall Street is betting that it will maintain its current benchmark interest rate. The central bank is trying to balance a slowing jobs market with stubbornly high inflation. Updates on inflation this week showed that prices remain above the Fed’s 2% goal.
The U.S. central bank will get one more update on inflation next week when the government releases the personal consumption expenditures price index, or PCE. It is Fed’s preferred measure for inflation.
European markets fell, and markets in Asia were mixed. Taiwan’s benchmark index rose 1.9% after its government signed a trade deal with the U.S. China, which claims the self-governed island as its own territory, protested the agreement.
The deal with Taiwan comes amid an ongoing trade war between the U.S. and much of the world. Uncertainty over tariffs have raised concerns about inflation and economic damage because of higher costs for businesses and consumers.
Canada is the latest to shift its partnerships because of the uncertainty. It has agreed to cut its 100% tariff on Chinese electric cars in return for lower tariffs on Canadian farm products as part of the break with the U.S. Tesla rose 0.4%, and Rivian fell 2.6%.
By Damian J. Troise, AP business writer
The northern lights could light up the skies above several northern states this weekend.
The aurora borealis will be visible Friday and Saturday nights over North America, and most prevalent for those states on the northern border of the mainland, according to a forecast from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Space Weather Prediction Center.
Friday offers the highest odds of visibility for most Americans, with the northern lights potentially visible in those states stretching from Washington to Maine, and as far south as Iowa. And Fridays aurora could be brighter, with a score of 5 out of 9 on an index measuring the three-day geomagnetic forecast.
For the aurora borealis fanatics, NOAA even offers a more detailed 30-to-90 minute forecast of the location and intensity of the lights. This weekend will mark the first in 2026 when the northern lights are predicted to be visible in the U.S.
WHEN AND WHERE TO SEE THE NORTHERN LIGHTS
Northern lights can bring vibrant greens and purples to the night sky, and the best aurora is typically in the 10 p.m. to 2 a.m. period. NOAA recommends facing north, in a spot away from light pollution for the best viewing.
According to NOAA, the aurora borealis could be visible in up to 15 states on Friday: Alaska, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine.
If you seem to be seeing the northern lights more frequently than you recall in the pastor, at the very least, hearing about themits true: Theyve become a more common sighting in recent years. Thats because the sun is at the maximum of its 11-year solar cycle, according to astronomers.
During solar maximum, the sun blazes with bright flares and solar eruptions, according to information from NASA about the current solar cycle that began in 2019.
LOOK TO THE SKY
The northern lights wont be the only highlight of the night sky this weekend: If you missed the optimal naked-eye viewing of Jupiter last weekend, when it was its biggest and brightest for the year, the largest planet in our solar system will also light up this sky this weekend with a bright orange color. With small binoculars, you may even be able to view Jupiters four moons.
Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune will also be visible this weekend, according to The Sky Live.
And while far fewer people will get to see this, SpaceX has a rocket launch planned for Friday evening from the Vandenberg Space Force Base, a military base near Santa Barbara, California. The launch will send the twelfth batch of satellites into orbit as part of a reconnaissance satellite constellation built by SpaceX and Northrop Grumman.
Meet the new CEO of Sam’s Club: Latriece Watkins.
As you’ll hear from my interview with Watkins this week’s episode of Fast Company’s Most Innovative Companies podcast, she is a Walmart veteran, who began her career in the real estate division in 2006. Over the next two decades, she rose up through the ranks to become Walmart’s chief merchant in 2023, making her one of the most powerful people in the retail industry, responsible for choosing the $500 billion worth of products the retailer sells every year.
In recent years, Watkins has made a deliberate attempt to woo higher income consumers into stores by introducing higher-end brands, like Sonos and LaRoche Posay, as well as elevating its fashion, home and food private labels. Her team’s product curation appears to be working: In recent quarters, Walmart’s has been gaining market share among households that make upwards of $100,000 a year.
Now, Watkins has been tasked with running Walmart’s membership club, which generated $90.2 billion in net sales across its 600 stores in 2024 making up roughly 13% of Walmart’s total revenue. In many ways, her promotion makes sense, since Sam’s Club customers tend to be more affluent than those from Walmart. Watkins has proven she’s skilled at meeting these needs of these customers.
Watkins is now tasked with stealing market share from CostCo, the biggest player in the membership warehouse club industry, which generated $269.9 billion last year, an 8.1% increase over the year before. Part of CostCo’s success has come from its private label, Kirkland, which now drives roughly a third of its total revenue.
Watkins is skilled at developed successful private labels. It was under her leadership that Walmart launched its first new private label grocery brand in two decades, called Bettergoods. Every aspect of the brand from its chic, colorful packaging to its focus on global flavors was carefully designed to win over today’s consumers. And yet 90% of products in the line cost under $5.
Sam’s Club has its own private label called Member’s Mark, which also generates about a third of its revenue. Part of Watkins’ mission will no doubt be to ensure that Member’s Mark grows as a business, and continues to evolve to keep pace with changing consumer tastes.
In some ways, Watkins has the opportunity to be more experimental at Sam’s Club than she was at Walmart. As a smaller, nimbler brand, Sam’s Club has become something of an innovation lab to test out retail concepts that, if successful, may be adopted by Walmart.
For instance, in 2024, Sam’s Club unveiled cashierless checkouts in a few stores: Customers simply scan products themselves on their Sam’s Club app, pay for them using their credit card, then walk out the door. (Entrances now have arches equipped with computer vision to check what’s in a person’s cart, avoiding manual receipt checking.) Sam’s Club also tries things out with its private labels. In 2022, it set out to remove 40 potentially harmful ingredients in the Member’s Mark line a goal it achieved last week. Walmart used learnings from this process to make Bettergoods products without these ingredients as well.
Watkins has helped Walmart navigate through difficult times, from a volatile economy to new tariffs to inflation. She’s well-equipped to steer Sam’s Club through these choppy waters.
During the Hollywood strikes of 2023, a major sticking point for members of the Writers Guild of America and SAG-AFTRA was artificial intelligence. When the unions ultimately came to an agreement with Hollywood studios, they won key protections for actors regarding digital replicas and guardrails for how generative AI could be used in writers rooms.
The stipulation that studios could not create digital replicas of actorsat least not without their consentreflects growing concerns over how AI might compromise the livelihoods of artists and creatives.
Now it seems some performers may be looking for new ways to protect themselves against more general misuse: A January 13 Wall Street Journal report revealed that actor Matthew McConaughey filed eight trademark applications that are intended to deter unauthorized AI-generated simulations of his voice or likeness.
The trademarks, which have been approved by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, include several video clips of McConaughey, along with one of his most iconic moments: audio of him saying, Alright, alright, alright, a line from the 1993 movie Dazed and Confused that has since become a catchphrase.
My team and I want to know that when my voice or likeness is ever used, its because I approved and signed off on it, McConaughey told The Journal. We want to create a clear perimeter around ownership with consent and attribution the norm in an AI world.
McConaughey has reason to take preemptive action. AI has already enabled fraudulent ads that used the likeness of actors like Tom Hanks to promote wonder drugs. Just this week, there was a deepfake video circulating on the internet that featured eerily realistic face swaps with the cast of Stranger Thingsan example of how easily AI can be exploited by virtually anyone. The video has more than 15 million views (and counting) on X. Another creator shared a similar video using the likeness of Leonardo DiCaprio in The Wolf of Wall Street.
By trademarking himself, McConaughey is looking to prevent this kind of content from being monetized.
From a legal perspective, Orly Lobela law professor and the director of the Center for Employment and Labor Policy at the University of San Diegosays this is a novel way to combat deepfakes. The traditional name and likeness protections under state law, otherwise known as publicity rights, are meant to protect against the unauthorized use of an actors image to sell products.
But those laws are inadequate in the new era of generative AI, according to Lobel, since AI content can be monetized on the internet; there is less clarity on what constitutes commercial use on those platforms. McConaugheys decision to trademark his voice and likeness is a hybrid approach and it elevates the protections to federal claims, Lobel says.
Even McConaugheys lawyersamong them prominent entertainment attorney Kevin Yornhave noted that theyre not entirely sure whether this measure of protection would hold up in court. I dont know what a court will say in the end, Yorn told the Journal. But we have to at least test this.
A trademark also primarily protects commercial use, though McConaugheys lawyers seem to think the risk of federal claims may act as a deterrent and discourage people from creating any kind of AI-generated content with his likeness.
Still, this could set a precedent for other actors and performers to take similar action at a time when creatives are fighting an uphill battle against the use of AIand gearing up for another contract negotiation that will likely revive a number of AI-related concerns.
I think [this] is a signal that actors and others want attribution and consent and are ready to fight back, Lobel says.
The data centers that power the AI boom also need power themselves and a lot of it. Now, the Trump administration wants the tech companies cashing in on AI to foot a bigger part of the bill.
The Trump administration said Friday that it would urge major East Coast power grid operator PJM Interconnection to hold an emergency auction for tech companies, inviting them to bid on 15-year contracts for new electricity generation. Under the plan, the power auction would raise billions of dollars that would then go directly toward building out $15 billion in new power plants.
Tech companies would be locked into paying for the power they buy at auction over the lifetime of the long-term contracts whether they wind up using the electricity or not, a measure designed to smooth out spikes in electricity costs and offer 15-year revenue certainty for new plants.
The governors of Virginia, Maryland, Ohio and Pennsylvania and other states in PJMs area also signed onto the proposal to remake Americas power supply. U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum also supported the plan, which urges the power grid operator to make changes but isnt binding.
For two years, Ive been sounding the alarm, explaining that without fundamental changes to PJM Pennsylvanians were going to be paying more and more, and getting nothing in return, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro said in a press release. …Ive been working with my fellow governors and federal energy officials to push PJM to make needed reforms, and Im glad the White House is following Pennsylvanias lead and adopting the solutions weve been pushing for.
In a fact sheet on the proposal published to the Department of Energys website, the Trump administration is also encouraging PJM to cap what existing power plants charge in an effort to pass along savings to residential power users. The Department of Energy described the measures as temporary, noting that the changes could stave off painful future price increases and make blackouts less likely.
Worries grow over resource-hungry AI
Acknowledging the growing backlash around AI data centers, Microsoft also announced a new initiative this week that it claims will protect residential customers from eating the cost of its AI buildout. The tech giant says it will work closely with utility companies on the price of electricity, likening its AI expansion to other historic national infrastructure improvements like canals, railroads, the electrical grid, or the interstate highway system.
Communities value new jobs and property tax revenue, but not if they come with higher power bills or tighter water supplies, Microsoft Vice Chair and President Brad Smith wrote in a blog post. Without addressing these issues directly, even supportive communities will question the role of datacenters in their backyard.
Trump hinted at Microsofts plan earlier this week in a Truth Social post, stating that new policies would ensure Americans dont pick up the tab for higher energy bills. I never want Americans to pay higher Electricity bills because of Data Centers, Trump wrote. …We are the HOTTEST Country in the World, and Number One in AI. Data Centers are key to that boom, and keeping Americans FREE and SECURE but, the big Technology Companies who build them must pay their own way.
Americans are starting to blame AI for high bills
In the AI arms race, techs hottest companies often frame their insatiable appetite for electricity as an inevitability rather than its own problem. But as the cost of electricity goes up, Americans may disagree.
Tech giants are pouring billions into massive electricity and water-guzzling server warehouses to fuel their AI ambitions. In 2025 alone, five companies making big bets on AI invested $399 billion into the technology and its accompanying infrastructure, and that number is expected to shoot up to $600 billion by 2028. Those investments have also prompted broad concerns that the stock markets concentrated growth around AI represents a single point of failure if the industry starts to wobble.
Other worries are much less theoretical. Americans are grappling with higher power bills and theyre starting to blame the tech industry. A nationwide survey last year found that two-thirds of those polled believe that AI is driving up their electricity bill and most said that they couldnt afford a $20 per month increase.
Beyond power, data centers also need massive amounts of water for cooling all of those servers humming day and night. In The Dalles, Oregon, city officials are seeking to buy part of a nearby national forest to get access to more water a move that is alarming some residents and environmental groups. While officials have claimed the water will meet growing population demands, Google is The Dalles thirstiest resident and the tech companys data centers already consume a third of the citys water.
Breaking with the United States, Canada has agreed to cut its 100% tariff on Chinese electric cars in return for lower tariffs on Canadian farm products, Prime Minister Mark Carney said Friday.
Carney made the announcement after two days of meetings with Chinese leaders. He said there would be an initial annual cap of 49,000 vehicles on Chinese EV exports coming into Canada at a tariff rate of 6.1%, growing to about 70,000 over five years. China will reduce its total tariff on canola seeds, a major Canadian export, from 84% to about 15%, he told reporters.
Our relationship has progressed in recent months with China. It is more predictable and you see results coming from that, Carney said.
Carney hasn’t been able to reach a deal with U.S. President Donald Trump to reduce some tariffs that are punishing some key sectors of the Canadian economy and Trump has previously talked about making Canada the 51st state.
Earlier Friday, Carney and Chinese leader Xi Jinping pledged to improve relations between their two nations after years of acrimony.
Xi told Carney in a meeting at the Great Hall of the People that he is willing to continue working to improve ties, noting that talks have been underway on restoring and restarting cooperation since the two held an initial meeting in October on the sidelines of a regional economic conference in South Korea.
Carney said that “this agreement will drive considerable Chinese investment in Canadas auto sector, creating good careers in Canada and accelerating our progress towards a net zero (emissions) future and the auto industry of the future.”
Nelson Wiseman, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Toronto, called Friday’s deal good for both China and Canada. Canada is diversifying its bets economically,” Wiseman said. “And China is succeeding in driving a small wedge between Canada and the U.S.”
Improve global governance
Carney, the first Canadian prime minister to visit China in eight years, told Xi that better relations would help improve a global governance system that he described as under great strain.
Later, he said at the news conference that the system may give way at least in part to country-to-country or regional agreements rather than the global ones that have underpinned economic growth in the post-World War II era.
The question is: What gets built in that place? How much of a patchwork is it? he said.
The new reality reflects in large part the so-called America-first approach of Trump. The tariffs he has imposed have hit both the Canadian and Chinese economies. Carney, who has met with several leading Chinese companies in Beijing, said ahead of his trip that his government is focused on building an economy less reliant on the U.S. at what he called a time of global trade disruption.
A Canadian business owner in China called Carney’s visit game-changing, saying it re-establishes dialogue, respect and a framework between the two nations.
These three things we didnt have, said Jacob Cooke, the CEO of WPIC Marketing + Technologies, which helps exporters navigate the Chinese market. The parties were not talking for years.
Canada had been aligned with US on tariffs
Canada had followed the U.S. in putting tariffs of 100% on EVs from China and 25% on steel and aluminum under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Carneys predecessor.
China responded by imposing duties of 100% on Canadian canola oil and meal and 25% on pork and seafood. It added a 75.8% tariff on canola seeds last August. Collectively, the import taxes effectively closed the Chinese market to Canadian canola, an industry group has said. Overall, China’s imports from Canada fell 10.4% last year to $41.7 billion, according to Chinese trade data.
Carney tried to address the concerns of Canadian automakers and auto workers by saying the initial cap on Chinese EV imports was about 3% of the 1.8 million vehicles sold in Canada annually and that, in exchange, China is expected to begin investing in the Canadian auto industry within three years.
Were building (a) new part of our car industry, building cars of the future in partnership, bringing affordable autos for Canadians at a time when affordability is top of mind, and doing it at a scale that allows for a smooth transition in the sector, he said.
For the exchange of a small piece of the Canadian market, we have a commitment. We are waiting for an investment commitment in Canada. The real leaders of the new industry. So its an agreement that will create the future for our industry.
But Ontario Premier Doug Ford, the leader of Canada’s most populous province where the country’s auto sector is based, blasted the deal.
“Make no mistake: China now has a foothold in the Canadian market and will use it to their full advantage at the expense of Canadian workers,” Ford posted on social media.
Worse, by lowering tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles this lopsided deal risks closing the door on Canadian automakers to the American market, our largest export destination.
China sees an opening under Trump
China is hoping Trumps pressure tactics on allies such as Canada will drive them to pursue a foreign policy that is less aligned with the United States. The U.S. president has suggested Canada could become America’s 51st state.
Carney, though, noted Canada’s relationship with the U.S. is much more multifaceted, deeper and broader. Canada and China have different systems and disagree on issues such as human rights, he said, limiting the scope of their engagement even as they seek ways to cooperate on areas of common interest.
The Canadian leader leaves China on Saturday and visits Qatar on Sunday before attending the annual gathering of the World Economic Forum in Switzerland next week. He will meet business leaders and investors in Qatar to promote trade and investment, his office said.
Ken Moritsugu and Rob Gillies, Associated Press
Associated Press business writer Chan Ho-him contributed to this report.
Quickfire question: Who, in a business, should be responsible for AI?
Most of us would assume the tech side of an organization should hold the bag: the CTO, CIO, CDO, CMO or perhaps even a new chief AI officer. And while this direction certainly made sense in the early wave of AI adoptionwhen it was still a mere toolthe rise of agentic AI (read: autonomous, intelligent agents that behave less like gadgets and more like colleagues) forces us to rethink our assumptions.
Which means we should be asking whether AI should be treated as a technology or as a member of the team. And if its the latter, is HR actually the role best positioned to oversee it?
WHY HR IS RE-EMERGING AS A STRATEGIC AI PLAYER
While some might think that AI will diminish the influence of chief people officers, human-centered agentic design is bringing HR back to the center of business transformation. After all, autonomous AI could transform the very definition of an HR role: managing workflows, employee experiences, and workplace culture.
One challenge blocking effective AI management is often rooted in organizations outdated design models. Traditional enterprise structures, especially in the Fortune 500, lag years behind the market and best practice. For instance, until recently CFOs were often leading AI decisions, largely optimizing for cost savings only. But just because a machine can do something doesnt mean it should.
Research by Gather found that 95% of AI pilots fail to deliver meaningful business impact because theyre overly based on algorithms. Meanwhile, employees spend $13 billion annually on their own subscriptions as enterprise tools dont meet their needs. Human-centered design is the missing ingredient for AI success at scale; companies that design for human needs achieve faster ROI, lower risk, and sustainable competitive advantage.
Fortunately, I can see a more progressive mindset emerging. Its no longer How do we do the same with fewer people? but How do we help the same people do more with AI? And instead of What roles can AI replace? its What roles can only humans perform?
These reframed attitudes make the people function central to AI transformation. If AI is treated as an employee-like resource that affects experience, workflow, and culture, HR becomes its logical home.
REINVENT HR: INTRODUCING THE CHIEF RESOURCE OFFICER
But if AI really is joining the workforce, HR must evolve beyond managing just human resources. In the agentic era, the function becomes responsible for orchestrating all faculties: human and digital.
Enter the chief resource officer (CRO). This is a new role that would reflect AIs real place in a company, responsible for integrating AI into workforce planning, ensuring ethical and effective use, and promoting a culture that encourages augmentation over replacement.
Mic drop, I know.
Now hear me out. Weve seen similar transformations before. The chief revenue officer didnt exist until CFO priorities shifted, and suddenly organizations needed a new leader to capitalize on growth opportunities. AI represents a similar inflection point, one that expands HRs mandate rather than diminishes it.
THE REAL CHALLENGE? UPSKILLING THE C-SUITE
The biggest barrier to this shift will be leadership readiness. Many existing HR managers are not yet AI experts, and theyre often stereotyped as preferring traditional processes and workflows. But as companies adopt agentic systems, CROs will become core stakeholders. Theyll need fluency in data governance, workflow management, and experience design. Any AI work integrations must be human-centered and, from an agentic perspective, negate the chances of garbage in/out. As a result, CRO training and upskilling, whether performed in-house or with the help of an external partner, become more important than ever.
The risks of unwittingly fostering an AI knowledge gap are real. At Gather, we partnered with a major global financial services company whose lifecycle management systems werent communicating properly with its AI capabilitiesresulting in churn, operational escalations, increased risk, and inconsistent messaging to card members. But the problems were organizational, rather than technological.
Gather interviewed five core user groups to map the complete automation lifecycle (intake to execution), identifying opportunities to improve efficiency and consistency. Then, we created assets to showcase automation use cases and build stakeholder awareness, introducing structured data models for better reporting, governance, and reuse. So far, the changes have proved a huge successpowering significant progress for the businesss automation adoption goals.
DESIGN A HUMAN-CENTERED AI FUTURE
Thriving in the agentic era starts with asking another quickfire question: What work must remain human?
Creativity, empathy, judgment, and relationship-building remain irreplaceable, and these are the areas that determine long-term business success. So, a new CRO must:
Bring HR into AI strategy early
Upskill executives together, not in silos
Treat AI as a collaborator rather than a cost-reduction tool
Design systems where both humans and agents can thrive
Far from diminishing HRs role, AI will expand it. As agentic systems take on more responsibility, HR and the chief resource officer will become some of the most important stewards of the modern workforce. Ultimately, AI wont replace peoplebut it will replace organizations that fail to redesign around them.
Justin Tobin is founder and CEO of Gather.
