The Note, 12/04/08: Bail Out the Bailout?
EmailBy Rick Klein with Hope Ditto Shave your beard, shut off your mic, hang up the phone (we don’t care who’s calling). Thursday brings the rarest of items to Capitol Hill: Congressional hearings that actually matter. When they arrive in Washington Thursday morning, hats in hand (or at least on the passenger seats of their hybrids), the Big Three automakers are jumping back into a volatile political mix, partially frozen by bailout fatigue — and asking for more money than they were last month. Democrats have boxed themselves into doing something — probably something big — for the auto industry. But what that something should be looks very different in the Senate than in the House. The Bush administration and congressional Republicans have drawn their battle lines — and may have a winner on their hands if they play it right. Save some politicians from Michigan, these are votes that just about no one wants to have to take. (President-elect Barack Obama doesn’t want to touch this, either, but he may not have a choice.) And that’s why it’s left to the auto executives who are seeking the bailout to bail out the politicians who are fighting for them. Skepticism abounds: “Even a top Democrat in charge of evaluating their aid requests made it clear he was eager to avoid voting on a bailout. Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, wrote to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Wednesday asking the central bank chief whether there was anything stopping him from using his considerable lending authority to help the automakers,” per the AP’s Ken Thomas. “And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said it was up to the Bush administration to unilaterally rescue the Big Three with loans drawn from the $700 billion Wall Street rescue fund, since Congress was still unwilling to do so. ‘I just don’t think we have the votes to do that now,’ he told The Associated Press.” “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President George W. Bush are engaged in a showdown over who will bail out the U.S. automakers and where the money will come from,” Bloomberg’s Alison Fitzgerald writes. “GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. are stuck in the middle, lobbying members of Congress, preparing for hearings which start this morning and making contingency plans if the money doesn’t come through.” Beyond the optics — and the symbolism does matter — there remain major policy (will it work?) and political (will it fly?) differences here. “Despite concessions from autoworkers to delay billions in payments to their health care fund for retirees and make changes to its job bank, the auto industry bailout faces an uphill battle in Congress,” ABC’s Imaeyen Ibanga and Jonathan Karl report. “A Republican Senate leadership aide, who asked not to be identified in order to speak candidly, said the union moves were ‘a step in the right direction for some members,’ but it was unclear how many,” McClatchy’s David Lightman and Kevin G. Hall report. The president-elect tiptoes back in: “It appears, based on reports that we’ve seen, that this time the executives from these automakers are putting forward a more serious set of plans,” Obama said at his news conference Wednesday. Could it fall to Obama, again? “The political climate on Capitol Hill is still doubtful for the automakers, and only seemed to worsen on Wednesday with a new CNN poll showing a majority of Americans opposing a taxpayer rescue,” Bill Vlasic and Nick Bunkley write in The New York Times. “As a result, there is growing concern among the Democratic leadership that they will simply not be able to drum up enough votes to pass an aid package next week, and that to do so will require a major lobbying effort by President Bush and Mr. Obama.” When are two presidents maybe better than none? “It’s going to take Bush and Obama calling people,” said a senior House Democratic aide.
“What you’re hearing on Capitol Hill is that unless the president-elect and the president step in, this thing won’t pass,” ABC’s George Stephanopoulos reported on “Good Morning America” Thursday. (And — judging the month that was: “It’s hard to imagine this month going much better for the president-elect,” Stephanopoulos said.) A path? “Late Wednesday, Senate Banking Chairman Christopher Dodd was tapped to develop a consensus rescue package that could be brought to the Senate floor next week,” per The Wall Street Journal. “The Connecticut Democrat, who convenes a hearing Thursday on the industry’s latest appeal for assistance, is to focus on legislation that would effectively create a bridge loan for the industry, by diverting funds from an existing loan program originally intended to help the industry retool to meet higher fuel economy standards.” What can even help? “It almost doesn’t matter whether the Big Three file for Chapter 11 protection. To a large degree, the markets are treating the auto companies as if they’re already in bankruptcy,” Newsweek’s Daniel Gross writes. Maybe that’s the inevitable outcome: “General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC executives are considering accepting a pre-arranged bankruptcy as the last-resort price of getting a multibillion-dollar government bailout, said a person familiar with their internal discussions,” Bloomberg’s James Rowley and Linda Sandler write. Not the transition they imagined: “Instead of being able to call in their chits for having helped elect Obama, union leaders are facing an array of crises, including layoffs, bankruptcies, contract concessions, and rising costs for healthcare and other services,” Michael Kranish reports in The Boston Globe. Not the transition they imagined, either: The selection of Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M., at Commerce is viewed as a step in the right direction for Latino groups — but only a step. “We won’t be happy with just two” Latinos in the Cabinet, Rep. Joe Baca, D-Calif., tells The Note. “We stepped up to the plate. When Latinos were asked to support Obama, we showed up and we did it.” Said Rosa Rosales, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens: “Right now we have one; we expect at least two more.” More on diversity, per ABC’s Jake Tapper: “As of now . . . Mr. Obama has not appointed any Asian-Americans, Native Americans, disabled Americans or openly gay or lesbian Americans to his Cabinet. And yes, there are groups paying attention.” The AP’s Nedra Pickler: “Some Latinos are grumbling it is not enough after all the support they gave him in the campaign, and gays and Asian-Americans are pushing for some representation in remaining Cabinet announcements. But overall Obama is allaying some early concerns that a black president wouldn’t need to put so much importance on diversity of those working under him.” There are a few ways to measure diversity: “Of the 28 senior White House staffers named so far, roughly one-third are nonwhite and nearly half — 43% — are women, according to a study by NYU Prof. Paul Light, an expert on presidential transitions. In addition, about two-thirds are the same age or younger than the 47-year-old Obama, himself the fifth-youngest President ever,” David Saltonstall writes in the New York Daily News. We’ll get you in the next round: “President-elect Barack Obama, after picking moderates for several cabinet positions, is looking at more-liberal candidates to fill some of the remaining vacancies,” Stephen Power and Laura Meckler write in The Wall Street Journal. “One potential choice is Rep. Xavier Becerra, a California Democrat who is in talks with the Obama transition team about heading the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, according to two Democratic officials familiar with the selection process. Mr. Becerra is widely seen as a skeptic of free trade,” they write. “Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva has emerged as a leading candidate for interior secretary, two people familiar with the deliberations said. Mr. Grijalva has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s policies on oil and gas drilling on public lands.” Your day in transition news, per the Obama-Biden press office: “President-elect Obama and Michelle will host a thank-you event for the members of the Ilinois finance committee. There will be a print pool in attendance for his remarks. Vice President-elect Biden will be in Delaware hosting private meetings and has no public events scheduled.” Some early tension, perhaps: “Timothy Geithner, President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for U.S. Treasury Secretary, is seeking to push Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair out of office,” Bloomberg’s Robert Schmidt reports. “Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, has argued Bair isn’t a team player and is too focused on protecting her agency rather than the financial system as a whole, according to two congressional officials and a person familiar with his thinking.” Promise watch: The windfall profits tax, blown away. An aide to the Obama Transition Team tells ABC News, “President-elect Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel. They are below that now and expected to stay below that.” David Sirota has feelings on the subject: “Between this move and the move to wait to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, it seems like the Obama team is buying into the right-wing frame that raising any taxes — even those on the richest citizens and wealthiest corporations — is bad for the economy.” Promise watch: Iraq. “As he moves closer to the White House, President-elect Obama is making clearer than ever that tens of thousands of American troops will be left behind in Iraq, even if he can make good on his campaign promise to pull all combat forces out within 16 months,” Thom Shanker reports in The New York Times. “There always was a tension, if not a bit of a contradiction, in the two parts of Mr. Obama’s campaign platform to ‘end the war’ by withdrawing all combat troops by May 2010,” Shanker writes. “To be sure, Mr. Obama was careful to say that the drawdowns he was promising included only combat troops. But supporters who keyed on the language of ending the war might be forgiven if they thought that would mean bringing home all of the troops.” Karl Rove weighs in with his latest on why Obama won: “If money talks, we’ll likely soon hear the real reason why Barack Obama beat John McCain. Both men and the national parties will report to the Federal Election Commission today how much money they raised in October and November. And what the numbers will probably show is that Mr. Obama outspent Mr. McCain by the biggest margin in history, perhaps a quarter of a billion dollars.” Rove continues: “Rather than showing the success of a new style of post-partisan politics, Mr. Obama’s victory may show the enduring truth of the old Chicago Golden Rule: He who has the gold rules.” The real story (you can tell by who’s brokering the deal): “Barack Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, is writing a book about the historic election victory and has retained Washington attorney Robert Barnett, Obama’s literary representative, to shop the proposal to publishers,” per the AP. Says Barnett: “There will be many books about the Obama campaign, but only one from the campaign itself.” What’s Obama doing with his lists? (Other than hawking hats and fleeces for the holidays.) “Former senator Thomas A. Daschle, Obama’s point person on health care, launched an effort to create political momentum yesterday in a conference call with 1,000 invited supporters culled from 10,000 who had expressed interest in health issues, promising it would be the first of many opportunities for Americans to weigh in,” Ceci Connolly reports in The Washington Post. Chris Matthews watch: “All signs point to a candidate who is gearing up to run for the Senate seat held by Republican Arlen Specter. Either that or the MSNBC host is doing an awfully good job making people think he’s running, perhaps, some say, for use as a bargaining chip in his upcoming contract negotiations,” Politico’s Michael Calderone and Josh Kraushaar report. “NBC colleagues, political operatives, and friends who’ve recently spoken to Matthews told Politico he’s seriously considering running in 2010 and making the moves to prove it.” Palin gives more gifts on Thursday: “Republican officials say that the RNC’s post-election financial report will include information on other ‘accessories’ purchased for Palin before the Nov. 4 election,” National Journal’s Edward T. Pound reports. “The amount to be reported is significantly less than $150,000,” one RNC official told National Journal. “The accessories on the report are less than $30,000.” Speaking of Palin — Jimmy Kimmel has a new twist on a holiday classic. The Kicker: “The Congresswoman then received another call from Obama and he told her ‘It is very funny that you have twice hung up on me,’ to which she responded that South Florida radio stations are notorious for these jokes. Obama told her that in Chicago they also have prank calls.” — Press release from the office of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla. “What I meant is that Janet is a person who works 24-7, just like I do. She has no life, neither do I.” — Gov. Ed Rendell, D-Pa., apologizing for his open-mic comment where he said Gov. Janet Napolitano, D-Ariz., is perfect for the Homeland Security job “because for that job, you have to have no life. Janet has no family. Perfect. She can devote, literally, 19-20 hours a day to it.” Our new format: The Note has a new format and a new online look starting this week. The morning Note will continue to serve as a tipsheet that lays out the day ahead in politics, publishing every weekday morning, though it will typically be shorter than it was during the election season. The Note’s “Must-Reads” will continue to provide an early set of links to the stories that are likely to drive the day. Both products will live on the new Note blog, which will be updated throughout the day with the latest reporting from ABC News’ political unit and reporters. Bookmark the link below to get The Note’s daily morning analysis:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/the_note/index.html And for up-to-the-minute political updates check out The Note’s new blog . . . all day every day:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/
Santorum Clarifies Concerns on Women in Combat 
Gulf of Mexico to Become Gulf of America?
I guess I am confussed by all this Bailout BS..It all boils down toan Auto Industry that has been run by crooks from its very inseption. Who likes going to a car dealership to get ripped off by manipulitive car salesmen? Change the process of selling the cars to be fair and they might have something the American people could get behind.It all boils down to the sales process.
Posted by: bobthenailer | December 4, 2008, 8:40 am 8:40 am
Keep writing, calling, emailing… WE have the power, until we give it away!!!
Posted by: please! | December 4, 2008, 8:53 am 8:53 am
I’m rather disturbed the 1st bailout was passed despite the public sending message after message that they didn’t approve. I was very against what was voted for for the reason it was done too quickly. Adding a week or two wouldn’t have made much difference considering the state of the economy and the public would have felt as if they were listened to. As for bailing out the automakers… I’d suggest “let’s get real and actually help these folks with foreclosures AND offer lower interest rates to those in trouble with credit card debt. It’s time to look out for the people in this country who need help. If we bail out the auto industry… what’s next???
Posted by: C Dickins | December 4, 2008, 9:01 am 9:01 am
Read this article before you tell Congress to bail out the Big Three
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Diet/story?id=6387202&page=1
Posted by: DelegateMath | December 4, 2008, 9:05 am 9:05 am
Reid and Pelosi have the power right now to draft legislation to save the Big 3 car companies, but they are trying to make Bush bite the bullet for them. He won’t do it. Can’t wait till Obama gets in there and when Pelosi and Reid come to him to bailout the automotive companies, and Obama will vote “Present”, that will be real interesting.
Posted by: Mike Jones | December 4, 2008, 9:09 am 9:09 am
Enough already! We the people are hurting financially and even if these companies go belly-up we still have to make our car payments and house payments etc… or else we’re out in the cold! These owners mis-managed their companies and didn’t think twice about the effects this would have on the American people…. We can’t allow the rich to keep getting easy outs and keep picking up the tab! Plus it’s not going to resolve the problem it’s just going to delay the problem for a little longer.
Posted by: Njmet | December 4, 2008, 9:17 am 9:17 am
You know I really think that people have to remember it’s not all about the Big 3 here. If one of them goes down, a lot of industries suffer. It will start in Michigan but it WILL trickle down. The automakers and the UAW have said they know changes have to be made. They were losing money so how can they not change their ways. I don’t understand using a bad car dealer experience to justify losing so many jobs and possibly throwing several areas of the country into a depression. Maybe I am biased since 3/4 of my family stand to lose their income if something doesn’t happen. I guess taxpayers will have to help me put food on my table since there will be no jobs for my husband who has done nothing but work his tail off for a major retailer for 13 years. Where are people going to go when they can’t sell their house? Put a different face to who needs this bailout that is hopefully a loan.
Posted by: HS | December 4, 2008, 9:17 am 9:17 am
I’m confused. So we can afford to send $700B to people who did nothing but mismanage money for over a decade (and NOTHING BUT THAT), but we can’t afford to send $5B to a trio of companies that have been a vertebrae in the backbone of the American economy for a century, employ tens of thousands of people, is basically the entire economy of Michigan, and actually PRODUCES A PHYSICAL TANGIBLE PRODUCT at the end of the process?
Posted by: Zach | December 4, 2008, 9:19 am 9:19 am
These guys deserve nothing. They get the big bucks for failing? I want that job. Lets see….Honda is showing a profit AND building plants in the US and US car companies are sinking. Let them figure it out for themselves.
Posted by: Robert C. | December 4, 2008, 9:20 am 9:20 am
Is a bailout free? I thought we were talking about LOANS.
Doesn’t anybody get that Nancy Palosi has a 737 to fly her home on weekends. It was in her contract.
What about Citibank. Doesn’t anyone find it offense that it received money and is using $20 million to keep its name on the new ball park. Hello!
If the automakers go down, that is the last manufacturing jobs in America. This country needs jobs. That’s the problem. All of the unemployment. The trickle down effect from the loss of auto jobs is literally going to put this country in another depression.
What part of for the good of the country don’t people understand.
The Big 3 tried, I believe it was in Bush’s first term, to get an appointment with him to ask for his help. I believe that meetnig ever took place.
This is a nightmare situation and it is only going to get worse.
Posted by: Mary O | December 4, 2008, 9:21 am 9:21 am
Get the Big 3 in line with the rest of mainstream America and get the outlandish wages in line with other industry. Overseas auto makers don’tpay $43 to $73 p/h for their workers. UAW need to quit being so greedy and start making wages of the average American!
Posted by: larry | December 4, 2008, 9:22 am 9:22 am
NO BAIL OUT until the UAW gives up 80% of their benefits….NO BAIL OUT BUSH…Don’t give in to the Bitxh PELOSI, Crooked DODD & REID. Ford is in good shape so let GM & Chrysler file for bankruptcy. UAW THINK about giving up some concessions or they will consider delaying some concessions….WHAT!!!!! you are fixing to lose your job and you rather THINK about giving up your free day care, pension health care, pension, health insurance for the entire family, the JOB BANK program that pays you 90% of your pay & beneftis while you are laid off….Give me a break…with that attitude you deserve to lose your job….
Posted by: 55Mariposa | December 4, 2008, 9:24 am 9:24 am
Pelosi does not care if the Automotive companies go bankrupt, she does not want them to drag down her beloved UAW down with them. Pelosi and Reid are going to make “All Americans” cover the $75,000 annual salaries of the Unions, which will include their pensions, healthcare benefits, and other perks. Perks that no one else gets, (not unless you work for Goverment).
Posted by: smearjay | December 4, 2008, 9:25 am 9:25 am
If we do not help the big 3 people, we will be paying much more than 25B. We will have the responsibility of 700,000 pensions plus unemployment benefits for another 3-4 million people. Lets do the math on that! 25B loan to keep Americans working and paying taxes, does not seem too bad to me!
Posted by: Dennis | December 4, 2008, 9:29 am 9:29 am
Why is the government allowing corporations to lay off people? Huge increases in the number of unemployed will have major reprecussions in the economy. This is another activity that corporations use as an EASY fix. Never mind that they have made bad management decisions, have had redundant organization structures, unmonitored capital investments, etc. In my opinion, our current situation started when the Tech Bubble burst and most corporations, not only Tech companies, started eliminating jobs. When management employees who have disposable income because they have good salaries lose their jobs, most often they end up taking a major cut in pay to be employed. When you eliminate disposable income, every industry suffers. This is economics 101. Yet with every bail out, jobs are lost. Believe it that every company is going to jump on this band wagon rather than taking a hard look at their non headcount related spending.
Posted by: Donna Irlbacher | December 4, 2008, 9:30 am 9:30 am
Why dont all american’s just work for minimum wage with no benefits. That will fix all of our problems. We can start with the congress and the senate, then with the CEO”s then MaryO and Larry above.
Posted by: Dennis | December 4, 2008, 9:33 am 9:33 am
If the auto industry didn’t have big unions and outrageous employee pay they would not be where they are now. I mean just to sweep the floor somebody could get paid $25 hour. I hope everyone is finding out Unions make you poor. Let the auto industry go under and then restructure how it operates. FYI. Toyata and Honda will be happy to take sell you a car that is more reliable.
Posted by: terrie | December 4, 2008, 9:39 am 9:39 am
I really don’t see why should we bail out the auto industry. The automakers aren’t making what the people want. The people don’t want gas guzzling cars anymore; the people want higher mileage hybrids.
If we bail them out, they’ll probably keep making more of what the people don’t want. There is minimal demand for those kind of cars. There is high demand for fuel-efficient cars. The Big 3 need to start making what the people want.
If they went bankrupt, I think it would be better for the economy. That’s because hopefully, someone who’s actually SMART can take over each of the Big 3 and actually make what the people want.
Those that worked for the bankrupted companies can work for the SMART people who know what the people want to buy. The bailout would just let them keep making more of what we don’t want, and that’ll have them coming right back to Congress asking for more money.
Bottom line, they don’t need a bailout. They need people that listen to the demand. And that demand is no longer the gas guzzling cars.
Posted by: Gage | December 4, 2008, 9:41 am 9:41 am
Let them fail! Just think of the opportunities; door greeters at Wal-Mart, burger flippers at Macs, Taco stuffers at……… It is the American dream. Yes sir the service industry is looking up!
I can’t wait untill I can’t get parts for my car.
Posted by: Thinking | December 4, 2008, 9:43 am 9:43 am
So, Congress can bail out AIG and they can continue to spend money on spa treatments, ‘retreats’ etc. but they refuse to loan money to the automakers whose collapse will affect millions of other jobs. What is wrong with this picture? Apparently the financial lobby has bigger hooks into Congress than the automakers. 55Mariposa, you sound a little jealous and bitter against the UAW. I agree the job bank is idiotic, but I’ve never heard of paid child care being provided. (I do think they have an FSA for that, but that is employee funded.) And you think health insurance is a bad idea for families? Didn’t we just have an election that was discussing the need of health insurance? I understand the more people that are insured, the less the insurance cost and you are proposing that there be less people insured to cut costs? Seems counter-intuitive to me.
Posted by: Cathy | December 4, 2008, 9:44 am 9:44 am
Silly Politics. Looks like the great industrial north has seen better days while our remaining industry is in the south. Now that the Ivy League plan for industry has failed, the same geniuses that killed the industry in the north want to change to socialism. What ever happened to common sense? The big question is which will occur first, “The South’s gonna rise again,” or “We will bury you?”
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | December 4, 2008, 9:51 am 9:51 am
I read here that Barack Obama doesn’t want to ” put himself in the middle of the Automakers bailout troubles. ” Well, WELCOME TO WASHINGTON,BUBBA!
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 10:02 am 10:02 am
And on Chris Matthews: What a blithering idiot!!I could just see him in the Senate !! He & Nancy Pelosi need to run away together, never to darken the landscape again!!
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 10:06 am 10:06 am
The Big 3 will get money, but it won’t be bailout money. It will be loaned. At least there’s a chance of getting something back from loans. With the Democratic Party leaders so tied to the labor unions, in spite of the opinion of the majority of the American public, congress will make taxpayer dollars available to the Big 3. It will be interesting to see what the provisions of the appropriation will be. This is one of those times when voters should make notes about who voted and lobbied for the UAW and the Big 3 and who opposed the action. There will be more elections in the future. Why won’t the congress do the will of the people instead of prioritizing party agendae?
Posted by: mmonroeliveson | December 4, 2008, 10:06 am 10:06 am
Ok folks lets think this through. Bailing out AIG, done in 60 seconds. Loan to americas car makers employing many more people than AIG no brainer. The problem is that the car makers don’t pay the comgress their bribes….
Posted by: Doug Jones | December 4, 2008, 10:15 am 10:15 am
BOO HOO! I have struggled all my life!Now maybe some of you stuck-up people that thought you were better than everyone else will lose your jobs,incomes, houses,boats,cars,etc… Then you’ll know for once in your life, what it is to have nothing, but have everything.If you look in the right place!
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 10:17 am 10:17 am
blatzrox you are a moron…
Posted by: Doug Jones | December 4, 2008, 10:26 am 10:26 am
REDUCE THE NATION’S CARBON FOOTPRINT+
This week the BIG 3 Chrysler, Ford, and GM are on Capital Hill asking for a $35Billion Loan. – The Federal Govt. should put the Auto Industry to work converting the NATIONWIDE Federal fleet of fossil-fuel powered vehicles to Hybrid vehicles, within (5) years. This would achieve (3) Objectives: (a.) This would put people in the auto industry to work. (b.) This would hold the struggling auto industry accountable for the $35 Billion Dollar loan they are currently seeking from Congress. (c.) This would REDUCE OUR NATION’S CARBON FOOTPRINT IMMEDIATELY. This Example should then be implemented at both the STATE & MUNICIPLE levels, based on population.
Posted by: Darrin Jones | December 4, 2008, 10:27 am 10:27 am
You only get a bailout if you guarantee all the jobs will be in-sourced back into the United States. No more outsourcing of parts, IT, engineering, etc. All that works comes back into the U.S. After all, we sale less than 1% of our vehicles in foreign countries. They don’t want our goods just our money.
Posted by: JOE | December 4, 2008, 10:27 am 10:27 am
BIG THREE AUTO RIP……THE END
Posted by: Anita Yova | December 4, 2008, 10:40 am 10:40 am
Congress should not bailout the automakers. They should not reward bad behavior by the auto elites. Before they allow one red dime they should all be replaced. One problem is Congress is just as guilty as the auto execs. They are also rewarded for bad behavior and they are not qualified for their own jobs.
Posted by: Gil | December 4, 2008, 10:41 am 10:41 am
Doug Jones, Eat me!!!
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 10:56 am 10:56 am
Over the years UAW paid big bucks to buy a liberal congress and Obama’s claim to the White House, so let Obama and Pelosi solve the problem. G. Bush, don’t touch this mess brought on by the unions that has destroyed this country’s ability to manufacture almost anything.
Posted by: SureEnough08 | December 4, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
i love to see all of you greedy people & companies alike fighting like wolves over crumbs!What a terrible fate that will befall all of you.Greed, greed, greed, by everyone!Merry Christmas!
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 11:05 am 11:05 am
Poor $20,ooo per hr. CEO’S. Yeah, like they need money more than we do. If the auto worker (union) want their jobs, let them take their lumps like the rest of us.Hrs. have been cut back for us, and finances are looking very glum. But what hrs. we do work, don’t want to pay taxes on that so they can keep their high paying jobs and all the benefits. THEY are the ones that would’t give and inch.
Posted by: ticked | December 4, 2008, 11:12 am 11:12 am
So all Obama has to do is to find the one gay-black-hispanic-woman who belongs to a union for his cabinet and he can knock off 5 special interests groups. Guess it doesn’t matter if the person is qualified. Welcome the inclusive world of the Democrats where it doesn’t matter what you know but what special interest group you belong to. And people said the Dems weren’t beholden to the special interests.
Posted by: jschmidt | December 4, 2008, 11:33 am 11:33 am
If the automakers are bailed out, what changes to make them more competitive. Will the suddenly come out with cars that people want to buy and will have few defects and last more than 100k miles? Will the waste in the industry suddenly come to an end? Granted the ripple effect of a bankruptcy will not be good, but does a bailout just forestall a bankruptcy that is inevitable anyway because Detroit doesn’t know how to make good cars competitively? The Dems could stop playing politics by going along with the Republicans and use the previous $25billion approved for the automakers to make fuel efficient cars and use it as a bailout now. They can always approve more money in the future since they’ll have more control anyway. But never let it e said that the Dems passed up an opportunity to try and score some political points.
Posted by: jschmidt | December 4, 2008, 11:49 am 11:49 am
If one manages his Pizza business badly, is the government going to “save his arse”, A lady with a hair salon, the same… both employ people, who will lose there jobs. I don’t understand how ANYONE, can ask for a guarantee. There is no guarantee on life tomorrow, there is no guarantee on work tomorrow. Why are we such a country of handouts for losers. Mind you, if you’re unable to work, due to health, disability, I’m more than willing to meet all your needs. If you’re capable, but, either lazy, or unthinking, then, YOU SUFFER. It’s your choice to wake up in the morning, get out and get a job. It’s not the governments responsibility to provide it, nor save it. It’s only the governments to keep the peace, and regulate unfairness. We’ve allowed our government to treat companies as individuals, that have rights, which is such a travesty of justice. We’ve allowed our “leaders” the power to increase their own wages, simply by a vote. It’s a failing of human nature, that one will nearly always succomb to. Only the self-employed have the power to raise or lower their income. They do so out of hard work, smart decisions. These are COMPANIES, yes, they employ thousands, all who have benefited for years. Did those employees prepare for a bad day, save some money, pay off their homes. The Industry I work in, is very volatile. Layoffs regularly, all depending on the economy, and the price of oil. With the recent drop in oil prices, many are down sizing rapidly. I haven’t heard one of them even consider to ask the government for salvation. Some will go under, it’s a fact. I don’t want to buy import vehicles, I don’t want to support another nations economy. I don’t want to support an american company that has the attitude of our american auto makers. (Previously, I did work in the auto industry for 3 years. Successfully, but, wasn’t in the pay group with union jobs). I just would love to see people, and companies, responsible for themselves, instead of begging for handouts, voting their own raises(without working for them). Either be Honorable, and Earn It, or, vice-a-versa.
Posted by: Mud Man | December 4, 2008, 11:52 am 11:52 am
The Dems have ruined this country. Period.
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
Three (3) members of the Chrysler UAW. Sit on the Board of Chrysler.
Two (2) Have their Masters Degree in : Industrial Management.
One (1) a Doctrine Degree in : Industrial Management.
They have – NO – Voting Rights.
One is paid the same Wage He Received as a : Fork Lift Driver.
One is paid the same Wage She Received in the : Upholstry Department.
One is paid the same Wage he Received as a : Welder.
Their Job Description is to : Understand the Business of :
The Auto Industry and to advise the UAW on : Union Contract Considerations.
If The Congress had any Brains. These are the People
The Congress, Should be Talking to ! !
Posted by: lastdance428 | December 4, 2008, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
MudMan: You are so, so right!!!
Posted by: blatzrox | December 4, 2008, 12:20 pm 12:20 pm
Just wanted to share this article that relates to our country’s current Financial Economic Crisis, Homeland and National Security issues-You Decide:
Thinking Anew and Acting Anew: A People’s Bailout Or A Politicians’ Bailout? By Newt Gingrich On
12/02/2008:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29727
These are pertinent quotes from this article:
“As Our Case is New We Must Act Anew and Think Anew”
I often quote President Abraham Lincoln at times like this because he captured the challenge so perfectly in his annual address to Congress on December 1, 1862:
“The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present and the occasional is piled high with difficulties, and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new we must act anew and think anew. We must disenthrall ourselves and then we shall save our country.”
Lincoln’s call to think anew and act anew is especially important today because of the establishment nature of the team President-elect Obama is gathering. I write this with admiration and not with criticism.
Pragmatic Decision Making Versus Institutional Reform
And if the Department of Homeland Security had the courage to go a step further and run tests involving simulated nuclear and biological weapons, the results would be so horrifying Americans would demand a crash program of preparedness beyond anything the current authorities can imagine.
The new Obama national security team is competent and professional and he is to be commended for his courage in recruiting Senator Clinton, Secretary Gates, and General Jim Jones.
These three nominees are intelligent, tough minded, and hard working.
The greatest danger they will face is in their own belief that hard work and methodical pragmatic decision making can substitute for strategic planning and institutional reform.
America’s Immediate National Security Threats:
The fact is Mumbai is a grim reminder that more than seven years after the attack of 9/11 the United States and its allies have no solutions to the most difficult problems of terrorism on the planet.
• The Saudis are still shipping money overseas to recruit for the most militant wing of Islam.
• The Iranians are still trying to develop nuclear weapons so they can dominate the Persian Gulf and eliminate Israel from the face of the Earth.
• Pakistan has more nuclear weapons and is more unstable today than it was in 2001.
• The Taliban and its Pashtun allies in Northwestern Pakistan are as entrenched as they were in 2002 and are regaining strength in Afghanistan.
• The erosion of Western rule of law under the onslaught of internal Islamic demands is continuing to spread through Great Britain, Holland, and other countries.
America’s Long-Term National Security Needs.
The long-term challenge of China as an economic, scientific and technological competitor requires a national security based assessment of the requirements for change in America.
If we are to remain the leading power in the world 25 years from now we have to reform litigation, taxation, regulation, education, health, energy, and infrastructure. The scale of change needed is greater than the New Deal but in a fundamentally different direction.
As Tom Friedman has written in other columns and in several best selling books, the United States needs an extraordinary level of achievement to remain the most productive and most creative country in the world. And our national security leadership depends on precisely those characteristics as well.
Out: Republican and Democrat. In: Honesty, Productivity, Creativity, Effectiveness
The key words describing the kind of reform that will solve our economic and national security challenges in the next decade will not be liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat.”
“Food For Thought”
Posted by: WeroInNM | December 4, 2008, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
The auto industry deserves the help as this issue is a global issue. The consequence of not doing something is catastrophic, who will buy goods and services if they are not working!
Posted by: Dan | December 4, 2008, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm
The ignorance in some of these comments is profound. jschmidt complains about the lack of qualifications in Obama’s appointments so far. I guess the poster doesn’t read or listen to news or pay attention to facts. Blatzrox, in a contuing steam of nonsense messages, claims the Dems have ruined the country. Yeah, that’s right, if you forget who’s had control of the White House the last 8 years and Congress for most of the last 14 years. Idiot.
Posted by: tmginnova | December 4, 2008, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm
Email your reps in Washington AND the White House to advise NO BAILOUTS for anyone!
Posted by: No Bailouts | December 4, 2008, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm
Boycott ALL companies that receive a bailout.
Posted by: Boycott Companies | December 4, 2008, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm
As far as the possible new direction of President elect Obama in regards to a windfall profits tax on the oil industry since the price of oil has dropped, I personally still think such a tax is needed. If nothing else, a windfall profits tax, would hold big oil accountable for the billions they made in income over the last two years. Once again the taxpayer is expected to bail out not only Wall Street, the financial industry, and possibly the auto industry while no one, including the president elect, is apparently willing to make big corporations accountable to the taxpayers. Without the largest corporations being forced to cut CEO pay and bonuses, and pay the taxes they should to help shore up the economy by creating tax revenue, nothing will improve for the taxpayers who will continue to be overburdened at the state and local levels if not at the federal level. My question. . .What change. I don’t see any. Those with the money skate by once again. Politics as usual.
Posted by: Jer Der | December 4, 2008, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
They are all crooks from labor leaders to politicians to the unions but that’s the way it is can we afford to let all those workers loose their jobs. Other countries get support from their governments to subsidize the auto industry. Which is more economical, close them down or keep people working. Granted they make way too much money compared to the average American worker cut their wages..
Posted by: don | December 4, 2008, 4:09 pm 4:09 pm
I don’t see why we, the taxpayers should have to bail poorly run companies. Let these execs thrown in their personal wealth into the companies they screwed up. They been running them poorly and have made sure they received their bonuses and large salaries. They should have been paying attention to companies like Honda and Toyota. You don’t see them asking for handouts.
Posted by: Major Payne | December 4, 2008, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm
First cut the suit salaries in half. CEO’s get nothing and all the assembly-line people cut their salaries to match their foreign competition, and MAKE CARS PEOPLE WANT TO BUY. THEN WE’LL TALK.
Posted by: me | December 4, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
tmginnova- you didn;t read about my comment. I have no complaints with Obams’s choices and am pleased they are so moderate. My comment was about the Democratic party and how ridiculous it is to try to satisfy every minority group out their just because they are minorites and not necessarily because they are qualified.People should be appointed because they are qualified, period. Re-read my comment.
Posted by: jschmidt | December 4, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
Our government is the only organization big enough to make this work. The government could setup an agreement where it would have control over the decisions made by this industry. They could establish an agreement that would keep them above water until they can produce enough cars that people want. The government could save thousands of jobs or just stand by and do nothing while they go under. It’s difficult to think that the banks can get help because if they failed it would be catastrophic, but yet not help a huge industry like the big 3. I think they need our support and we should be finding a way to prevent this devastation from happening, we’re running out of time.
Posted by: Jose | December 4, 2008, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm
Kick it over till January and let Obama take ownership of it. They can last until then. No more Paulson and his chicken little sky is falling talk. It can wait. The CEO’s only want to protect their 2008 bonuses.
Posted by: twain2008 | December 4, 2008, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm
Sell Detroit Auto Companies to Employees
Sell the Detroit auto companies to the employees, using the money Congress has already given to the banking and wall street communities.
If the employees don’t feel its worth buying, why should the American tax payer?
If they are going to fail, as it looks they should, better now than after executives fill their pockets with tax payer money.
Posted by: spokaneRH | December 4, 2008, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm
$70 billion total cost to bail out the Detroit 3 auto
makers, will buy a lot of home meals for the
unemployed, as well as paying all their rents.
For Congress to buy stock in Detroit’s sinking ship,
is irresponsible and contrary to public opinion.
Posted by: spokaneRH | December 4, 2008, 10:47 pm 10:47 pm
It is better to recover from a position of strength than one of weakness (such as from bankruptcy).
To avoid the cascading loss of jobs that will extend far beyond the automotive sector and its suppliers… and the likely-dire consequences to world economies, let us reralize that the 34 billion dollars will pale in comparison to collapsed economies.
We need to do something now to calm the crisis until sensible corporate and congressional heads can select a sounder recovery approach.
Let’s not throw money away, but let’s commit to commit, at least some of the dollars to stop a financial disaster from happening.
There is always a way.
Posted by: Art Northrop | December 5, 2008, 10:24 am 10:24 am
And I see so many African-americans, asians, native-americans, disabled,gay, etc are amongst your bevy of millionaires on ABC line-up!
Posted by: abiodun | December 5, 2008, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
Lynn Tilton (CEO of Patriarch Partners) was on CNBC Squawk Box on Friday…relevant insights to this discussion…Fixing the Financial Crisis: The truth of the situation can be ignored no longer (http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=960926779.)
This is the same woman who predicted the financial crisis on Bloomberg TV back in 2006(http://www.blinkx.com/video/lynn-tilton-on-bloomberg/87JL8lMSQmrDI4ALaa5zdQ) so perhaps she’s worth listening to now. She proposes direct lending to businesses through a new “Provisional Federal Bank (http://www.patriarchpartners.com/Lynn_Tilton_WashPost_NYT.pdf)”…Liquidity must be made available not solely to big banks where Treasury-injected capital has been amassed to fill the cavity left by gambling losses, but rather expressly to deserving American companies and their people who will reignite our sputtering economy. A provisional Federal Bank must be initiated to foster enterprise and to provide job opportunities for every American.”
Posted by: Truthseeker | December 15, 2008, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm