Automotive News [AN, sub] reports that “For automakers [that’s Ford, GM and Chrysler] to get access to up to $25 billion in low-interest loans included in the 2007 federal energy law, Congress must approve roughly $3.8 billion in new spending to cover default risk.” Bailout-wise, U.S. House of Reps Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) is on the case. Maybe. “Hoyer could not say precisely when or if any proposal would come before lawmakers for a vote before they are scheduled to break at the end of September — possibly for the remainder of the year.” That’s crazy talk! But if you want hardcore insanity, wait ’til Friday, when GM CEO Rick Wagoner hustles to the Hill to bring out his begging bowl in front of a Senate Energy Summit. The Wall Street Journal previews Rick’s party line: “The auto makers and their Congressional supporters also will argue that they need funding to meet new fuel-economy standards imposed by Congress, and that the debt markets have broken down in the credit crisis, leaving them few other options.” The WSJ reveals that Congress has 15 days to do the deal before our reps piss-off. Even worse (for Detroit) not everyone’s on board. “The industry’s chance of getting help may have dimmed, however the government announced it will provide a plan to provide as much as $200 billion in new capital as part of a takeover of the country’s main providers of funds for home loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac… Last week, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) said he was concerned about the amount of money. ‘We don’t want our automobile industry to go down, but on the other hand, they’ve made a lot of bad choices.'” While I bet they get the bucks, methinks Rick’s cruising for a bruising.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
‘We don’t want our automobile industry to go down, but on the other hand, they’ve made a lot of bad choices.’
What? A politician telling it like it is? How did he get in there?
We need to have a caption contest once in awhile here. Photos like that…
Attended a talk by David Cole, auto industry guru, last evening. He’s been helping the industry lobby for the bailout.
The case he makes: it’ll cost a lot more to clean up the mess if they go under than it will to keep them from going under.
Also: each auto worker job supports another nine jobs.
The reason he thinks it’ll happen: Michigan and Ohio are swing states in the election. So it’s got to happen before November.
The Federal government in Canada is doing the same thing, except it’s all approved already because Canadian election campaigns don’t last for 40 years. They’re spending $80 million on Ford’s Essex Engine Plant to re-open it. A Federal election was just called earlier this week, and people will be voting on Oct. 14th for a new Prime Minister. Steven Harper is hoping this will help him out in Ontario.
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/09/03/windsorfordmoney.html?ref=rss
Jim Press looks like a broken man in that picture. Suprising, since he was working for Toyota at th the time.
There actually is a grain of logic in there, namely: “If the government forces us to build more fuel efficient cars, via increased CAFE numbers, which will cost us lots of money, they should pay for it.”
Of course, it seems clear the marketplace itself is forcing them to build more fuel efficient cars, so the agrument fails. Of course, prior to about six months ago (when gas prices really started to soar), the argument might have held water. But today-nope.
As for Hatch’s honesty-there aren’t many auto plants in Utah, are there? So he can afford to be honest, with no electoral cost to his re-election chances.
That photo makes me want to hang a sign around Rick’s neck saying “Will Actually Work for Bailouts”.
If those numbskulls don’t start by slashing their personal paychecks down to what the janitor makes then they are going to find few friends on the Hill.
I don’t find myself agreeing with Hatch very often, but what he said is right on the money.
Well, with the renewed confidence in those ‘broken’ credit markets due to the receivership status of Freddie and Fannie, GM and the other asshats should have no problem getting access to more credit, right?
That is, if credit access is the real issue. Which it’s not.
The only reason Hatch is being honest here is because he can’t detect a party line that he’s supposed to adhere to in this case. It leaves him so confused that he actually tells the un-spun truth.
As far as reelection concerns go, the only way he’ll ever be unseated is if he gets an intraparty challenge from someone even more conservative than he is. I’m not sure that’s possible, though I suppose a hard-line conservative may say that the free market should prevail. But then what about watching out for corporate interests? Toss in union jobs, and it’s no wonder this bailout is going to sail through Congress.
Keep in mind Hatch was the guy who wanted to remotely blow up people’s computers when they were accused of downloading copyrighted music.