Good for Ohio. But I don't think it solves the fundamental problem for US semiconductor manufacturing competitiveness, which is getting the best and brightest people to major and choose careers in nano-fabrication to move US ahead of competition. TSMC and Samsung have their pick of the best and brightest in their countries, while in the US, that honor belongs to the software giants, followed by hardware design houses, and only then maybe the fabrication facilities. You can't win against other advanced countries' A teams if you are bringing B or C teams.
Intel needs to go to the beginning and look at it from perspective of a smart high school senior or college freshman choosing a major today. If they follow the software engineering path, they can quickly advance to make over half a million per year, extract major perks, and work from anywhere with a flexible schedule, with a lot of employer competition for their skills. Compared to picking a career in semiconductor manufacturing, where they will likely end up tied to a few locations in states with not so great weather like Texas, Arizona, and Ohio, with usually single employer for their skills likely taking advantage of that to pay less, working on a rigid schedule in clean rooms with risk of exposure to toxic chemicals. Right now it's a slam dunk easy choice to go into software or if you are really HW enthusiast, chip design. Chip manufacturing is not really attractive, and it's for the likes of Intel to fix that by setting up an incentive structure starting with the first year of college to get top students on a path towards long term careers in chip fabrication. They should provide scholarships and set up high pay structure for engineers (with top senior engineers making over a million dollars a year, like they could in software) to look forward to now to even have a chance. They have to get out of the bottom feeder cost cutting mindset.