News
President Joe Biden’s Tesla-void EV speech gave Ford too much credit [Opinion]
Earlier today, President Joe Biden spoke at Ford Motor Company’s Dearborn plant in Dearborn, Michigan, with intentions of delivering more details regarding his plans to expand the EV sector in the United States through a more broad charging infrastructure, freely unionized manufacturing jobs, and a heavily supportive dialogue that failed to include any details on companies that are pushing electrification forward, like Tesla. In my opinion, it showed that the President doesn’t have a broad understanding of electrification. While that’s okay, his position as President of the United States requires more comprehension on subjects that involve reducing emissions and increasing the number of EVs on the road, a direct factor in the reduction of greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere.
His speech gave Ford entirely too much credit, especially as the main essence was combining EV production with unionized jobs for U.S. workers.
In the speech, President Biden commended Ford for its extensive history of automotive legacy, something that nobody can deny. Ford has a rich history when it comes to cars, and some of its vehicles are still the best and most popular on the market. Two of the four vehicles I have owned have been Fords, the most recent being a 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid. It was the best car I’ve ever had. My Dad has owned nothing but Fords for as long as I can remember.
President Biden was increasingly concerned about the number of jobs that could be offered to U.S. workers or whether American companies would have to depend on foreign countries to build and produce EVs. It simply wasn’t an option for the American economy, the President hinted. Ironically, his speech took place at a facility owned by a company that outsourced its first mass-market electric vehicle production to Mexico.
With Ford entering the EV sector with the Mustang Mach-E, it opened up a favorable introduction into the industry for the company that Henry Ford started in 1903. The vehicle is safe and was awarded an IIHS Top Safety Pick award, and has received favorable reviews from owners thus far. Despite minor issues early on related to software, the Mustang Mach-E undoubtedly has a bright future in the sector and will likely be one of the company’s most popular vehicles for the coming years. But it’s not going to throw Ford into EV superstardom, especially not with the U.S.-produced tune that Biden spoke highly of during his speech. The vehicle is actually built at the Cuautitlán Assembly Plant in Cuautitlán Izcalli, Mexico.
That’s not going to help the American economy, nor will it supply U.S. workers with union jobs that Biden talked so much about during his speech.
The issue is, Biden seemed to give Ford credit for things that they’re just not very well-versed with quite yet. President Biden mentioned during the speech that the United States was falling behind China in terms of EV tech and battery cell efficiency. “Right now, China is leading in this race. Make no bones about it. It’s a fact.” The problem is this just simply is not true.
An American company is winning this race. An American company is dominating this race. An American company is growing its employment force hand over fist on an annual basis. An American company had the most popular electric car in China last year.
It was Tesla.
The issue with this is that America is in the lead when it comes to EVs. It is in the lead when it comes to EV batteries, and employment isn’t an issue for the company that continues to dominate the electric vehicle sector as a whole. Tesla is the benchmark for all three of these subcategories: overall EV performance, EV battery tech, and employment.
Tesla’s electric vehicles are the leader of the industry. With performance and range ratings that sit well above any other vehicle on the market, there is no secret why the company continues to be held to such a high standard. Recent data compiled by the EV Sales Blog shows that Tesla was the most popular EV OEM through Q1 2021, leading the partnership between SAIC, GM, and Wuling by nearly 82,000 units. Tesla sold roughly 184,500 cars through Q1. SAIC-GM-Wuling sold 102,574.
Ford was 17th, with 17,891 units sold in Q1.
Credit: EV Sales Blog
In batteries, Tesla’s 2170 cells come from Panasonic in Nevada at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Sparks. It is currently developing the 4680 cell, which will provide more power, range and decrease production costs by a significant margin. Tesla is effectively on the verge of decreasing electric vehicle costs by a significant margin, and in a few years, it expects to build a $25,000 car that will reach price parity with gas-powered rivals. While Biden spoke highly of Ford’s Georgia-based battery production plans for the electric F-150, he didn’t mention Tesla’s production of the 2170 cells in Nevada, nor did he mention the massive project at Kato Road in Northern California, just a stone’s throw away from Tesla’s Fremont Factory. This building is where Tesla is developing the 4680 cells, and it is rumoredly a Top 10 capacity cell manufacturing facility in the world.
Tesla’s 4680 Kato Rd. facility has a top 10 capacity, and it’s not even close to finished
While Biden’s enthusiasm for electric vehicles seems to be evident, it appears that the President needs a crash course in the world of EVs. It is rather bothersome to hear our President give zero credit to the American EV powerhouse Tesla, and while I can understand that Tesla may be on the list of banned words during a speech at Ford factories, it is a scare tactic to state that it’s an absolute fact that China is kicking our butts in EV development.
Make no bones about it, President Biden. It’s a fact that Tesla is leading this race. It’s not a close one at the current time, either.
I would love to see Biden make his way to Northern California for a tour of the Fremont Factory, or even a talk with Elon Musk regarding what Tesla is doing for the planet in terms of EV production. As Tesla has taken a commanding lead in the sector, legacy automakers have been forced to oblige and adapt to the changing industry. It is no coincidence that when these companies talk about who they are gunning for, Tesla is atop the list.
Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.
Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.
At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.
Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.
Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving
Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”
Licensing FSD has not proven to be easy, despite our best efforts to share the technology. https://t.co/VGYBU7Aduw
— Sendil Palani (@sendilpalani) February 3, 2026
The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.
Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.
However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.
Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.
While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.
The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”
Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.
Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.
Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.
Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count
Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.
He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.
Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.
Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.
🚨 Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, appeared today before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to discuss the importance of outlining an efficient framework for autonomous vehicles:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 4, 2026
Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”
This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.
Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.
Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.
Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.
However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.
Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.
Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.
But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.
Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.
Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.
Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space
Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.
Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.
Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.
Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space
You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.
The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?
Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity
The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.
Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.
Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.
Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors
Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee
