Waymo Faces Capitol Hill Heat Over Chinese Ties and Overseas Labor in Robotaxi Push

A routine Senate hearing on the future of self-driving cars took a sharp turn on Wednesday, as lawmakers directed pointed questions at Waymo over its supply chain and labor practices. The session highlighted growing political scrutiny of the autonomous vehicle industry's global dependencies.

Executives from Waymo and Tesla had initially framed the development of autonomous vehicles (AVs) as a critical technological race, one the United States cannot afford to lose to China. However, senators quickly turned that argument against Waymo, focusing on the Alphabet-owned company's partnership with Zeekr, a subsidiary of Chinese automotive giant Geely.

"You testified that we're in a race with China," said Senator Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio). "But it seems like you're getting in bed with China." He questioned whether Waymo's plan to use Zeekr vehicles was a "backdoor" to circumvent federal "connected vehicle" rules designed to restrict foreign-linked technology in sensitive transportation systems.

Waymo's Chief Safety Officer, Mauricio Peña, defended the partnership, stating the Zeekr-derived vehicles—which Waymo plans to rebrand as "Ojai" for the U.S. market—have "no connectivity" and that their autonomous driving systems are installed domestically. He argued that accessing a global supply chain is essential for scaling the technology and ensuring resilience.

Senator Moreno remained unconvinced. "Giving a natural market to a Chinese company to ship us cars is making us better and creating more jobs for Americans? That's completely ridiculous," he retorted.

The scrutiny extended beyond hardware. Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) challenged Waymo's use of remote human safety operators located outside the United States, including in the Philippines, who intervene when robotaxis encounter complex situations. "Having people overseas influencing American vehicles is a safety issue," Markey stated, warning that split-second decisions in dangerous scenarios should not be handled from abroad. He also tied the practice to job displacement, noting the irony of offshoring roles while developing technology that could replace U.S. drivers.

The hearing underscored a regulatory paradox facing the industry. While executives like Tesla's Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, argued that outdated federal regulations hinder innovation and U.S. competitiveness, lawmakers are increasingly concerned about the security and economic implications of the industry's global footprint.

Industry Context & Analysis: The tensions at the hearing reflect a broader dilemma for U.S. tech leadership. As noted by Ford CEO Jim Farley, Chinese firms are dominant players in the EV sector, a foundation for autonomy. While U.S. companies seek the best global partners to accelerate development, they now face mounting political headwinds over supply chain sovereignty and data security, potentially forcing a costly re-evaluation of their international strategies.

Voices from the Industry

"This hearing was a reality check. The 'race with China' narrative only works if your core technology and manufacturing aren't leaning on your competitor. Waymo's argument for global resilience rings hollow when it exposes critical infrastructure to geopolitical friction." — David Chen, Tech Policy Analyst at The Brookfield Institute.

"The focus on where a van's chassis comes from is a distraction from the real issue: building a coherent national policy for AVs. We're hamstringing our own companies with regulatory uncertainty while demanding they compete globally. The senators are missing the forest for the trees." — Anya Sharma, VP of Strategy at a Silicon Valley mobility startup.

"It's absolute hypocrisy. These companies cry about falling behind China, then turn around and hand them contracts and ship jobs overseas. They want deregulation at home but rely on factories and labor abroad. How does that 'win' the race for America? It's a farce." — Marcus Thorne, Founder of "Americans for Auto Independence," a advocacy group.

"The safety operator discussion is nuanced. Talent is global, and a well-trained operator in Manila can be as effective as one in Phoenix. The key is rigorous, standardized protocols, not physical location. This nationalist framing oversimplifies a complex operational model." — Dr. Lena Kowalski, Professor of Robotics and Public Policy at MIT.

Read the original article on Business Insider