Big 3 carmakers beg for $25B, warn of catastrophe

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS | November 18, 2008 09:49 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli testifies at a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs hearing on the automotive industry bailout on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 18, 2008. At left is Ford CEO Alan Mulally and right is General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

WASHINGTON — Detroit's Big Three automakers pleaded with a reluctant Congress Tuesday for a $25 billion lifeline to save the once-proud titans of U.S. industry, pointedly warning of a national economic catastrophe should they collapse.

Millions of layoffs would follow their demise, they said, as damaging effects rippled across an already-faltering economy.

But the new rescue plan appeared stalled on Capitol Hill, opposed by the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress who don't want to dip into the Treasury Department's $700 billion financial bailout program to come up with the $25 billion in loans.

Rank and file Republicans and Democrats from states heavily impacted by the auto industry worked behind the scenes trying to hammer out a compromise that could speed some aid to the automakers before year's end. But it was an uphill fight.

"Our industry ... needs a bridge to span the financial chasm that has opened up before us," General Motors Corp. CEO Rick Wagoner told the Senate Banking Committee. He blamed the industry's predicament not on management failures but on the deepening global financial crisis.

And Robert Nardelli, CEO of Chrysler LLC, told the panel the bailout would be "the least costly alternative" when compared with damage from bankruptcy.

Under questioning from skeptical senators, both said they'd be willing to consider slashing their salaries to $1 to show a willingness to sacrifice for federal help.

Sympathy for the industry was sparse, however, with bailout fatigue dominating Capitol Hill. Lawmakers bristled with pent-up criticism of the auto industry, and questioned whether a stopgap loan would really cure what ails the companies.

Story continues below
advertisement

At the start of a more than four hour grilling before his committee, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., told the leaders of GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. that the industry was "seeking treatments for wounds that I believe to a large extent were self-inflicted."

"You're asking an awful lot," Dodd, the panel chairman, said at the close of the session. "I'd like to tell that you in the next couple of days this is going to happen. I don't think it is."

Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., complained that the larger financial crisis "is not the only reason why the domestic auto industry is in trouble."

He cited "inefficient production" and "costly labor agreements" that put the U.S. automakers at a disadvantage to foreign companies.

Ford CEO Alan Mulally told senators the auto industry was "a pillar of our economy."

GM's Wagoner refuted criticism that his company was not keeping pace with the times, saying it had been on the brink of a turnaround before the financial meltdown hit, reducing sales to the lowest per-capita level since World War II.

Failure of the auto industry "would be catastrophic," he said, resulting in three million jobs lost within the first year and "economic devastation (that) would far exceed the government support that our industry needs to weather the current crisis."

Chrysler's Nardelli sought to respond to those who suggest the automakers seek Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, as have some airlines that later emerged restructured and leaner.

"We just cannot be confident that we will be able to successfully emerge from bankruptcy," Nardelli said.

Chrysler was bailed out by the federal government once before, in 1979, with $1.2 billion in loan guarantees. The company repaid the loan, plus interest, ahead of schedule. Back then, former Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca reduced his salary to $1.

Under questioning from Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., Mulally didn't join the other two executives in saying he'd do the same now.

"I sure respect the intent of it, but the most important thing is that we not degrade our ability to be competitive and deliver this plan," Mulally said.

Joining the Big Three CEOs, Ron Gettelfinger, president of the United Auto Workers union, said the emergency loans were important for the survival of the industry and union jobs. He said the UAW recognized that "in order for these companies to be competitive, we had to make tough calls" in labor concessions.

"My sense is that nothing's going to happen this week," Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said at Tuesday's hearing.

Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana said he also smelled a flameout. "I sense that nothing is going to be passed," the Finance Committee chairman said.

Earlier, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Congress might have to return in December _ rather than adjourning for the year this week, as expected _ to consider an auto bailout.

"Dealing with the automobile crisis is a pressing need. We are talking about a lot of people ... and a great consequence to our economy," said Hoyer, D-Md.

The financial situation for the automakers grows more precarious by the day. Cash-strapped GM said it will delay reimbursing its dealers for rebates and other sales incentives and could run out of cash by year's end without government aid.

In the Senate, Democrats discussed but rejected the option favored by the White House and GOP lawmakers to let the auto industry use a $25 billion loan program created by Congress in September _ designed to help the companies develop more fuel-efficient vehicles _ to tide them over financially until President-elect Barack Obama takes office.

"There is a way to do this," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other senior Democrats, who count environmental groups among their strongest supporters, have vehemently opposed that approach because it would divert federal money that was supposed to go toward the development of vehicles that use less gasoline.

"I don't think that's going very far in our caucus," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Instead, they want to draw the $25 billion directly from the $700 billion Wall Street bailout _ bringing the government's total aid to the car companies to $50 billion.

A Senate vote on that plan, which would also extend jobless benefits, could come as early as Thursday, but it currently lacks the support to advance. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson renewed the administration's opposition on Tuesday.

Even the car companies' strongest supporters conceded Tuesday that changing the terms of the fuel-efficiency loan program might be the only way to secure funding for them with Congress set to depart for the year and the firms in tough financial shape.

"If in the short run the only way we have to be able to get some immediate help is to take a portion of that, I would very reluctantly do that _ but only because I believe President-elect Obama is going to be focused on retooling and on a manufacturing strategy next year," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich.

The White House said the government shouldn't send any more money to the struggling auto industry on top of the already-approved loans.

"We don't think that taxpayers should be asked to throw money at a company that can't prove that it has a long-term path for success," said White House Press Secretary Dana Perino.

___

Associated Press Writers Ken Thomas and Tom Raum contributed to this story.

WASHINGTON — Detroit's Big Three automakers pleaded with a reluctant Congress Tuesday for a $25 billion lifeline to save the once-proud titans of U.S. industry, pointedly warning of a national e...
WASHINGTON — Detroit's Big Three automakers pleaded with a reluctant Congress Tuesday for a $25 billion lifeline to save the once-proud titans of U.S. industry, pointedly warning of a national e...
 
Comments
88
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)

Quote:
I would much rather GM employees lose their jobs and go on welfare than to keep giving money to their crappy business. That is a much better use of taxpayer money.

Guess who will be paying for their welfare? The taxpayers. We will end up shelling out nearly a trillion dollars to the unemployed, uninsured workers. Brillant! Where do you learn this stuff?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:28 PM on 11/19/2008

What historical examples can we look at for reference?
British Leyland received a governement bailout but still went bankrupt, after a long decline.
Renault received a bailout but returned to profitability, without the government losing its investment.

All auto companies around the world are being deeply hurt by the current financial crisis. This crisis was not caused by them, but threatens to put a number of them out of business.

There are reports that the phenomenon of auto companies asking for financial aid is not just happening here. Requests for auto manufacturer aid are also being reported from Europe and Asia.

What is not mentioned is that without temporary government loans, the auto industry in the U.S.A. may disappear, making any eventual economic recovery much more difficult, and probably much less robust. In this context, governmental involvement in Detroit's ownership may be exponentially less costly than the results of refusing to invest in the Big Three.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:29 AM on 11/19/2008
photo

So it makes sense to feed a Banking system while NOT FEEDING a Auto manufacturing system that has been guided by Bush and BIG OIL to produce "Gas Guzzlers" so EXXON can make Record Historic Profits!

I guess if you are Bush & Company this makes some kind of SENSE!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:32 PM on 11/18/2008
photo

The Unions have made concessions in the last 3 contracts negotiated. All before the wall street crash. Those who are anti union, believing that executive compensation and stocks are more important than the work force should just say so, we can have that argument and we will win. I think the Dems should divert the bare 5-6 billion for survival this quarter, then come back in january on a mission. They should be keeping track of every anti- gm vote, and every anit union comment made by every republican in congress. enough to keep republicans from EVER winning a great lakes state again. add them to new england and the mid atlantic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 11/18/2008
photo

Now, here's a big problem: "CEO Rick Wagoner told the Senate Banking Committee. He blamed the industry's predicament not on management failures but on the deepening global financial crisis."

It's this kind of attitude that is making Congress reluctant. And then you have the UAW -- In another article on HuffPo -- saying they won't give any concessions to the Big 3.

Elite company and elite union doesn't want to give an inch and assigns no blame to themselves or their shortsightedness. I don't want to see millions lose their jobs, but this is a problem.

Then you have money pit extraordinaire AIG -- we still don't know if that's going to survive and apparently management over their feels they're blameless. And we've already possibly lost billions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 PM on 11/18/2008

"CEO Rick Wagoner ... blamed the industry's predicament not on management failures but on the deepening global financial crisis."

I thought the same thing when I read that. Legacy costs or not, the US Auto industry doesn't build a vehicle I would care to own right now... Honda & Toyota do. I think Detroit has serious business/management issues that they need to address. I also think they would be surprised to hear what many consumers outside of Detroit think of their product lineup.

I wouldn't personally want a dime of my hard earned taxes going to these businesses unless the entire top management structure was replaced with people that would do a better job of running things. I'd prefer to see product development brought back in-house and a better understanding of how to listen to and respond to customer demands.

Ultimately product will save these companies... and unfortunately that's a longer, harder process that will require better leadership decisions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:49 AM on 11/19/2008
photo

It is a foregone conclusion that these companies will receive some assistance. However, the lender, in this case the taxpayers, should make some demands that these people cannot refuse if they want the help they are requesting.
First, they MUST develop alternative energy models faster. This means no more of that famous Detroit foot dragging they are so famous for.
Second, they MUST rescind any lucrative bonus agreements for ANY employee. Now is not the time for any single person in these companies to benefit from a LOAN!
Third, they MUST adapt more Japanese standards in order to compete. This may mean the unions have to make some concessions and the company will suffer some as well. Regardless, they need to do what is necessary to survive in this economic climate.
Finally, they MUST agree to act responsibly in the future, so the taxpayers do not have to endure their stupidity any further. It is simply ridiculous that such large profitable companies cannot manage their funds much less their own futures.
If they want the money, give it to them by making them agree to some very strict guidelines.
There will be no next time!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:42 PM on 11/18/2008

""Our industry ... needs a bridge to span the financial chasm that has opened up before us," General Motors Corp. CEO Rick Wagoner told the Senate Banking Committee. He blamed the industry's predicament not on management failures but on the deepening global financial crisis."

If that were true why isn't Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and the rest also lining up for a handout to "span the finacial chasm that has opened up before us" due to "the deepening global finacial crisis"?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:36 PM on 11/18/2008

There are so many reasons for the difference between the US and Asian predicaments it would be the subject of an article in itself. Legacy costs are a small part of the problem, but the bigger problem is the US automakers base (big trucks & SUV's) which haven't sold well and whose operating costs are tying down the US automakers most loyal customers.

US automakers also suffer from poor management decisions, a tendency to look only at next quarter's earnings (the coming fuel-price crisis was being talked about as far back as 2001, 2002) and not have a better long term vision for their businesses.

And perhaps most overlooked has been backlash across the country over the automakers behavior. Outsourcing has cost a lot of jobs for American families, while the Japanese have opened new plants in the US. Outsourced designs have been plagued with reliability issues while the in-house Japanese designed vehicles have provided more pleasant ownership experiences. Also, the big three have fought against taxpayer-supported (*cough* customer-supported) environmental & mileage legislation.

Add it all up and you get us to where we are now... Toyota & Honda still turning a profit, while GM's dwindling customer base finds themselves less able or willing to invest in a new vehicle in this economic climate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:37 AM on 11/19/2008

If you show up at a Ford, Chrysler or Chevy dealership and tell them, "I want one of your cars - but I can't afford it", they would tell you to get a loan.

If you don't qualify for a loan they would tell you "Tough Luck!"

Now they are showing up to beg for your tax dollars because they don't qualify for a loan - the banks know they are going down.

Tough Luck!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:29 PM on 11/18/2008

File for bankruptcy if your company sucks

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:17 PM on 11/18/2008

Anyone else keep having images of the EV1 (GM's successful electric car which was too successful, thus yanked from the market) pop into their minds as GM begs for money? Maybe it's just me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:13 PM on 11/18/2008
photo

Paulson is OK in FUNDING Big Banks Mergers to form MEGA-BANKS that stifle competition? Right?

To him Playing with Financial Paper to make PROFITS beats MAKING THINGS to Build Wealth?
What has our Economy Become? A HOUSE OF PAPER CARDS that is Crashing!

Democrats can pass this bill but not necessarily override the veto!
We must show that the Bush Administration is willing to sacrifice the financial safety and security of 18,000,000 people (4 x 4.5 million) for a less than 4% share of the $700 Billion Bailout package!
This should be Largest and perhaps Final "Black-eye" for Bush and Company!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:05 PM on 11/18/2008
- mgy I'm a Fan of mgy permalink

I am for some kind of assistance to the auto companies. Sure, they could have done things better. I am reading compelling arguments on both sides but tend to agree with those that see what can happen to the economy if they fail. To hear our elected officials say the auto companies were short-sighted (Richard Shelby) smacks of hypocrisy since they are being short-sighted on what these failures could mean in the bigger picture.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 PM on 11/18/2008

With the record debt this government has created the past eight years leading us to an economic depression, Shelby et al have no business criticizing anyone in the private sector. Money can always be found to support a phony war without end without regard to the cost in lives and treasure. Giving money to save a sector of the economy for the good of the nation is far better than squandering it for meaningless war.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:29 PM on 11/18/2008

Is that Sarah Palin in the picture?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:37 PM on 11/18/2008

did palin have such nice jubblies. if i had known that, i might have voted for her.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:49 PM on 11/18/2008
photo

They shouldn"t be begging. They should be using their astute, superior business knowledge to correct their failures. If they need the government, they should be fired and go into bankruptcy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:41 PM on 11/18/2008

Wall Street CEO's didn't beg. They didn't need to since they had Paulson, Bernanke, and Bush (who hadn't held a press conference since for months) do the begging for them. There were no financial executives appearing on news shows and before congress to make their case.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:19 PM on 11/18/2008

We're going to have to get Detroit building high fuel efficient cars.

It's in our National Security's best interest.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:53 PM on 11/18/2008
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect