The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Steven “Steve” Rattner of Quadrangle Group will join the Presidential Task Force on Autos as an advisor to National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers. Rattner has no publicly-known experience in the automotive industry, although as a former newspaper man and print media investor, he surely knows a thing or two about dying industries. Anyway, as we reported earlier, Rattner’s major qualification for the position (he was previously being considered for “car czar” before that position was merged into the PTFA) appears to be that he’s a major Obama fundraiser, and is married to the finance chair of the Democratic National Committee.
In fact, Michael Wolff “strongly implied” that the New York papers hushed up a DUI of Mrs Rattner’s. This trope led Gawker to infer that “it’s definitely possible (Obama) ruled out Rattner to save themselves some headaches,” when news broke that there would be no single czar.
Yes, over his wife’s DUI.
Ironically almost everyone seems to have missed the real scandal with Rattner’s appointment to the PTFA. Rattner’s Quadrangle Group reportedly owes Cerberus Capital Management either $125m or the Maxim/Blender empire, a debt Chrysler owners Cerberus say is in default. And now Rattner will have a say in Chrysler’s fate. Conflict of interest much?
I’m confused? So is he stiff wired into the task force by Cerebus, or negative towards cerebrus, or better yet…use his newfound power as a barganing chip to save cerebrus to relieve his debt with cerebrus?
All I know is the name Cerebrus comes up alot in my question?
Rattner’s major qualification for the position (he was previously being considered for “car czar” before that position was merged into the PTFA) appears to be that he’s a major Obama fundraiser, and is married to the finance chair of the Democratic National Committee.
well it’s nice to see they picked someone solely on his qualifications to run an automaker rather than some political hack.
Anybody check his income tax returns the past few years, it may not be too late.
shameful
Nothing to see here, just snafu as usual. you really couldn’t make this stuff up…
Picks like this will sure restore confidence in the market. Any day now.
From someone who has worked on personal denial very very intensely, I can tell you its pretty complicated. People have layer, after layer after layer of denial. Everybody, on everybody side. Our Egos are programed to be in denial and getting out of it is quite a lot of work ie. you can’t do it for another. I’m not sure how much worse it can it, but it will get interesting.
Work for world peace, heal your inner (child) self .
-He handles Michal Bloomberg’s trust.
-He founded the Communications group at Morgan Stanley.
-He was a general partner at Lazard.
I would say he has a great deal of financial experience.
With regards to the debt owed to Cerberus: If it is legitimate, why don’t they sue him?
This story sounds like a media plant from Cerberus.
Rattner’s major qualification for the position (he was previously being considered for “car czar” before that position was merged into the PTFA) appears to be that he’s a major Obama fundraiser, and is married to the finance chair of the Democratic National Committee.
This is a ridiculous comment. Per Wikipedia, Rattner worked at Morgan Stanley, where he founded their Communications Group. In 1989 he joined Lazard as a General Partner; he founded their Media and Communications Group and became their deputy chairman and deputy CEO before leaving to found Quadrangle in 2000.
What is a really, really, really ridiculous thought (and yes, it merits three “reallys”) is that people think politicians act in anyway beyond self interest!
Steven, aka “Steve”… lol… Grosse Point Blank reference?
Rattner is also Arthur “Pinch” Sulzberger, Jr.’s (Publisher of the NYTimes) tennis buddy.
His appointment is overdetermined. The real question is how many taxpayer dollars will the Administration throw down the automobile rat hole before they send in the bulldozers.
This is a ridiculous comment. Per Wikipedia, Rattner worked at Morgan Stanley, where he founded their Communications Group. In 1989 he joined Lazard as a General Partner; he founded their Media and Communications Group and became their deputy chairman and deputy CEO before leaving to found Quadrangle in 2000.
While TTAC is perhaps not the most objective source of bailout info, (I probably just flamed) I think there are two points being made;
A) Mr. Rattner has no automotive experience. He’s another finance whiz. Another of the “smartest guys in the room”.
B) There are plenty of knowledgeable money men out there, (if that’s who you want in this position) who don’t happen to be married to the finance chair of the DNC.
The Obama administration should avoid even the appearance of impropriety.
If this administration is going to follow the argument that the auto industry is exceptional enough to protect, then it would seem that a decent standard (at least) ought to be applied to political appointees associated with the job. It may be that this guy is completely personally uninterested in the apparent conflict of interest, but it is still irresponsible to accept the appearance of it. Talk about mixed signals; and for a spending program that the general public is already against no less.
@mel23
Rattner’s major qualification for the position (he was previously being considered for “car czar” before that position was merged into the PTFA) appears to be that he’s a major Obama fundraiser, and is married to the finance chair of the Democratic National Committee.
This is a ridiculous comment. Per Wikipedia, Rattner worked at Morgan Stanley, where he founded their Communications Group. In 1989 he joined Lazard as a General Partner; he founded their Media and Communications Group and became their deputy chairman and deputy CEO before leaving to found Quadrangle in 2000.
It’s getting pretty sad around here. The above is just plain bad reporting. No excuse for it whatsoever.
TheRealAutoGuy
I think it’s a post that concerns the conduct of the administration more so than that of the American car industry.
Conflict of interest in these appointments is absolutely avoidable considering the overlap between car manufacturing and other industries. This isn’t a medical industry thing, where all the experts are compromised on paper.
Change we can believe in!
The cronies have a D next to their name now instead of an R!
Yes, the implicit point is that he has no more relevant experience specific to the automobile industry than dozens of other potential “czars” or “czar committee people.” The only thing separating Rattner from Joe Hedge Fund Manager is the $100k he and his wife raised for Obama.
The Post isn’t the only source for the story. The WSJ has a great overview, for example. If it’s a “Cerberus media plant” it’s fooling a lot of people.
To the purveyors of the perennial accusations of “hatred,” all I can say is please. If you don’t think this story is of importance, you’re entitled to that opinion. But you won’t convince me.
And just where is the “hatred” in this item? Should someone who owes Cerberus help control Chrysler’s fate? And principle aside, how will it even play out? Will he be Cerberus’s tool or is he out to get them? The only thing I’m certain of is that he couldn’t save Chrysler even if he were somehow obligated to Cerberus.
Either way, the appearance of conflict of interest together with the fact that he and his wife are major fundraisers should have been enough to keep him off the task force. Period. I say that out of a sincere desire to see the general economic situation (the domestic auto industry included) turn around.
More importantly, she looks a little bit hot in that pic.
So what we really need to know is, does Rattner care whether Chrysler comes, stays, lays, or prays?
Use to be that giving $100K to the cockroach in the Whitehouse got you an Ambassador position someplace nice…Inflation sucks.
Edward wrote: “Should someone who owes Cerberus help control Chrysler’s fate? And principle aside, how will it even play out? Will he be Cerberus’s tool or is he out to get them? The only thing I’m certain of is that he couldn’t save Chrysler even if he were somehow obligated to Cerberus.”
“Mr. Rattner will leave Quadrangle Group, the media-focused leveraged buyout firm he co-founded in 2000.” New York Times, 23 Feb. 2009.
Why should the fact that he and or his wife were fund raisers for Obama disqualify him? Should the Obama administration be forced to only hire people who worked for Halliburton?
Plain and simple, this is conflict of interest and he should step down.
Don’t blame me, I supported Ron Paul – who, strangely enough being an old fogey, is the most supportive of us young people – especially those of us wanting to shake up the system in this country.
But they bought off enough clowns willing to “hope and change” with Ivy League shysters.
What’s Rattner’s skill set relative to that of Rick Wagoner? It seems to me that he’s just another money man.
I think a lot of Ford’s chance of success is attributable to the fact that Alan Mulally is an engineer by training who had the experience of turning around a large manufacturing company. The president’s auto task force is sorely lacking in business and manufacturing experience.
I wouldn’t characterize Ford’s performance as success.
What are all of the big three lacking? Money. What does Rattner know about? Money.
Ratter is also an entrepreneur. He knows business because he started his own company. Rick Wagoner started bubkus but is just another golden parachute parasite.
I am confident that Rattner knows more about cars than Brownie knew about emergency management, than Rumsfeld knew about rallying public support for a war, than Gonzales knew about the Geneva Conventions, than Bush knew about dancing on the White House porch.
There are plenty of people who have turnaround experience. Mitt Romney comes to mind. There are plenty of people who have car company experience. Lou Hughes comes to mind. There are plenty of people who have turnaround experience at turning around car companies. Frank Macher comes to mind.
Rattner has no turnaround experience and no car company experience. Let alone both. His success has come at places like Morgan Stanley and Lazard Brothers and Quadrangle. Not a good proving ground for executives. Especially for a manufacturing company like GM and Chrysler.
Ron Bloom makes some sense for the car task force. But Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, and Steve Rattner should not more be doing this than Hank Paulson. And his forced (by Bush) bailout of GM and Chrysler is turning out to be a gross misjudgment.
As this post opines, Rattner has nothing to recommend him heading up the presidential car task force other than political pull.
SO when and if he takes a seat and votes to give Cerberus even more cash you think they’ll let him off the hook for his debt? I owe you guys $125 million but I’ll get you ten times that much, call that 10% I owe my commission and let’s do lunch next week okay?
Let’s get to the most important issue. What type of cars does he own?
He heads nothing. He is an advisor to Summers and Geithner. He does not have a cabinet post, but is one of hundreds of people who work for people with cabinet posts. He has no power to grant or punish Chrysler, especially since he cut his ties to his old company far more than Cheney cut his ties to Halliburton.
Why should people in the Obama administration hire Mitt Romney? For that matter, why didn’t Bush appoint Romney?
Look, the Republicans controlled congress until from 1994 until January of 2007. During that time, they also had a Republican president for six years as well. The country was financially raped by trillions of dollars of tax cuts to the top one percent. The result is a bankrupt economy. Why should anyone listen to any Republican about any economic issue? That is why the Democrats in congress have gained 25 percent in the last month while the Republicans have fallen. That is why Obama’s favorable ratings are in the sixties. All the Republicans want is to drive most people into servitude and bring back the old oil and money barons of the 19th century. People are sick of that same wacko shit.
carlos.negros
“Why should the fact that he and or his wife were fund raisers for Obama disqualify him?”
Conflict of interest is such an obvious problem in the management of government funds (or any funds for that matter) that recusal for it’s sake is a basic standard of good behaviour, both culturally and legally. The reasons why granting his wife this obvious political favor isn’t worth compromising that standard are 1.the political costs of baiting criticism on an unpopular effort and 2.the purpoted importance of that effort, which has been so highly touted to justify it in the first place that holding the administration to this standard is implicitly necessary and invited.
Frankly, I don’t doubt that he can manage money well and excercise good judgement. He may even have perfectly honorable intentions. How can we be expected to accept that risk however, when the stakes are so high and the trust we are placing in him holds the sweet temptation of billion dollar bills?
Carlos said:
What are all of the big three lacking? Money
I don’t agree with that statement. What they lack is competitive product and workable labor agreements. The marketplace has spoken.
You could give GM and Chrysler 2 billion a month forever and until they make cars people actually want to buy they will be on the dole.
If we aren’t going to let them sink or swim on their own then then perhaps the most ecologically and fiscally responsible course might be to just pay wages and benefits to the unemployed UAW workers. They could wait at home until called back to work or they took another job. Why waste raw materials and energy operating plants to build vehicles people do not want to buy.
The Obama administration could mandate that all government vehicle purchases (and purchases by companies that accept bailout funds) are GM or Chrysler products. That might help.
“Made in the USA” programs and protectionist tariffs won’t help Detroit since most Toyota, Honda, Subaru and Hyundai cars sold here all have equal or greater domestic content and labor as the Detroit brands.
Due to transportation costs and WWII the US auto industry really did not face serious competition until the 1960s. When competition finally arrived management and labor were so set in their ways they were unable to seriously compete. They were so large and powerful that it took 40 years of willful ignorance for the big three to squander their wealth and reputation.
@Carlos:
You are defending the type of conflict of interest that haunted the Bush administration and the accusations of cronyism – accusations that were correct. We all paid the price for Bush’s stupidity.
Seems like you believe there are different standards when there’s a D next to someone’s name.
It seems that you are using the stupidity and arrogance of Bush and Cheney as an excuse so that Obama use the same tactics. That’s disturbing.
Nothing’s changed in Washington. We are doomed.
carlos.negros: Why should the fact that he and or his wife were fund raisers for Obama disqualify him? Should the Obama administration be forced to only hire people who worked for Halliburton?
Once again, carlos, let me help you by summarizing your posts in shorter form:
When Republicans do this sort of thing, it’s bad.
When Democrats do this, it’s okay, because we must always assume that there was a very good reason for the move.
Isn’t that more accurate, and easier to type, to boot?
mtypex :
Don’t blame me, I supported Ron Paul … But they bought off enough clowns willing to “hope and change” with Ivy League shysters.
dougjp :
Nothing’s changed in Washington. We are doomed.
But it’s what the voters wanted, fellas!
And yes, we are doomed. But then, haven’t we been told/saying that for decades now? At some point, we have to just pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and go about our business until that doomsday actually arrives…
ca36gtp:
“Change we can believe in!
The cronies have a D next to their name now instead of an R!”
I’d say that pretty well sums it up.
“he’s a major Obama fundraiser, and is married to the finance chair of the Democratic National Committee.”
Anybody remember Bush’s prophetic line “Browny you’re doing a hell of a job”
Only the naive believed that Obama wouldn’t have to pay off that 150 million he raised during the campaigns.
Same old screw the people pay off the cronies office of the president just a different face.
Geeber wrote:
“Once again, carlos, let me help you by summarizing your posts in shorter form: When Republicans do this sort of thing, it’s bad.
When Democrats do this, it’s okay, because we must always assume that there was a very good reason for the move.”
Geeber, your posts remind me of the following quote:
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over” Joseph Goebbels
carlos.negros
That Goebbel quote was an epic low blow, even if you were provoked.
The issue I’d take with your position is that you’re assuming that all these objections are coming from Republicans using this conflict of interest to count coup on Obama’s new administration. I agree that Obama shouldn’t allow a political rival to gain these positions (it would be idiotic and would definitely lead to an abuse of the position to score political points against the President) espcially considering the fact that his rivals are modern Republicans and have zero demonstrated credibility with regards to good government. However, absent that demand as the only other option, there isn’t a good reason to waive our standards and accept a blatant conflict of interest.
Simply put, Rattner can be easily replaced (what special and unique skills does he bring to the table?) so the burden of explanation would definitely fall on you in this instance. What exactly about the man, or his wife, is so important to this government endeavor that we should ignore traditionally disqualifying complications? Again, this isn’t the medical community, where all experts are compromised by conflict of interest.
And as an advisor to Summer and Geithner he will absolutely have a position of influence. It would be foolish of me to claim that he’ll be making unilateral decisions of importance, but not to point out that he will have the means to commit acts of political aggresion against automakers and the government both (leaking for instance). He may also be in a position to set up a revolving door for himself if his control over access is great enough, and we’ve put up with quite enough of that crap over the last eight years (ok, longer).
carlos.negros: Geeber, your posts remind me of the following quote:
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over” Joseph Goebbels
I understand that you don’t like that I’ve boiled down your posts to their essence.
You need to use this opportunity to become less of a partisan hack, and more sophisticated about politics if you want informed posters to take you seriously.