Carmakers' bailout pleas hit Senate skepticism

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Carmakers' bailout pleas hit Senate skepticism stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS | December 4, 2008 11:27 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Auto executives, from left, General Motors Chief Executive Officer Richard Wagoner, UAW President Ron Gettelfinger, Ford Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally, and Chrysler Chief Executive Officer Robert Nardelli testify on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Dec. 4, 2008, before a Senate Banking Committee hearing on the auto industry bailout. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

WASHINGTON — Desperate U.S. automakers ran into fresh obstacles from skeptical lawmakers Thursday as they appealed with rising urgency _ and a new dose of humility _ for a $34 billion bailout. Without help, said one senator, "we're looking at a death sentence."

With lawmakers in both parties pressing the automakers to consider a pre-negotiated bankruptcy _ something they have consistently shunned _ the Big Three were contemplating a government-run restructuring that could yield results similar to bankruptcy, including massive downsizing, in return for the bailout billions. But there was no assurance they could get even that.

And that wasn't all the unwelcome news. Congressional officials said one leading proposal _ to tap an already approved fund set aside for making cars environmentally efficient _ wouldn't give the carmakers nearly as much money as they say they need.

The auto executives pleaded with lawmakers at a contentious Capitol Hill hearing _ their second round in less than a month _ for emergency aid before year's end. But with time running out on the current Congress, skepticism about the bailout appeared to be as strong as ever.

"In all due respect, folks, I don't think there's faith that the next ... three months will work out, given the past history," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y.

"No thinking person thinks that all three companies can survive," said Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee.

Chris Dodd, chairman of the Banking Committee, was the senator who spoke of a death sentence _ though he also said, "We're not going to leave town without trying" to help.

The auto executives are to make their case at a House hearing on Friday, and Congress could take up rescue legislation next week in an emergency session.

Story continues below
advertisement

But Democratic congressional leaders were leaning on the White House to act on its own. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrote to President George W. Bush on Thursday asking him, as they have repeatedly, to use the $700 billion Wall Street rescue fund to help the auto makers _ something the administration has consistently refused to do. They argued that such a course was justified because of the potential for grave harm to the financial sector in the event of a carmaker collapse.

Auto state lawmakers went further, threatening to block the administration's access to the second half of the financial bailout fund unless it made "a firm commitment to assist working Americans and save American jobs."

The clear implication was that no more Wall Street aid would be available without help for the Big Three.

"I think they'll read between the lines," said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., who teamed with Democratic Rep. John Dingell, also of Michigan, in a letter to colleagues outlining their position.

Under legislation enacted in October creating the financial industry rescue program, Congress can vote to block the Treasury Department from accessing the second $350 billion, although it would need a two-thirds supermajority to do so over a presidential veto.

Bush, too, voiced skepticism about an auto rescue package.

"No matter how important the autos are to our economy, we don't want to put good money after bad. In other words, we want to make sure that the plan they develop is one that ensures their long-term viability for the sake of the taxpayer," he said in an interview with NBC News.

President-elect Barack Obama was keeping his distance, prompting Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who has been dealing with both the financial bailout and the auto rescue proposal to say Obama is "going to have to be more assertive than he's been." Frank is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, which will conduct Friday's hearing.

Repentant after a botched first crack at bailout pleas, the executives from General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC all agreed during Thursday's session that a multibillion-dollar bailout deal would include a supervisory government board that could order major overhauls of the companies if deemed necessary for survival.

United Auto Workers union President Ron Gettelfinger, aligned with the industry in pressing for the aid warned that without action by Congress: "I believe we could lose General Motors by the end of this month." He said the situation was dire and time was of the essence.

The Big Three CEOs apologized for past blunders. "We made mistakes, which we're learning from," GM chief Rick Wagoner said. Ford CEO Alan Mulally also acknowledged missteps, saying his company's approach once was "If you build it, they will come."

But as a result of the misjudgments, he said, "we are really focused."

The Bush administration wants the aid to be drawn from an existing $25 billion program to help the industry retool its plants to make their vehicles more fuel-efficient.

But congressional budget analysts said Thursday that would yield only $7.5 billion in short-term loans.

The auto executives made the trip from Detroit in new-model hybrid autos made by their respective companies, two weeks after a first appeal for $25 billion in which they were chided for flying on private jets to beg for money.

Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli promised that his company, recipient of a previous government-subsidized rescue loan in the 1970s that it repaid, would reimburse taxpayers by 2012 this time and would devote itself to manufacturing "fuel-efficient cars and trucks that people want to buy."

Asked whether the carmakers would agree to a setup like the one established for Chrysler's 1979 bailout, with a federal restructuring trustee who had some of the same powers as a bankruptcy court, all three executives indicated they would. Ford's Mulally added, "I probably need to think about that a little bit. It sounds right, but I just don't know all of the implications."

Lawmakers still complained of sticker shock, noting that the bailout's price tag had jumped $9 billion since the trio last appeared.

Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the Banking Committee, pressed the automakers to explain why, and explain how the sum would not simply "prop up a failed business model for a few months ... and how are you going to pay it back?"

Democrats, too, questioned whether an auto bailout would amount to investing taxpayer money in a failing enterprise.

"Be honest and tell me ... just tell me if things stay the way they are now, are you going to be back in a year" asking for more money? asked Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.

Protesters who briefly interrupted the hearing were a reminder of what polls show is thin public support for a rescue. "The bailout is a sellout!" demonstrators chanted as they were escorted from the hearing room by police.

Gene L. Dodaro, the top official at Congress' watchdog agency _ the Government Accountability Office _ agreed with Dodd that the financial industry rescue fund set up in October "is worded broadly enough" to permit it to be tapped for the automakers.

Dodaro testified that the Federal Reserve also has the authority under existing law to make loans to the domestic auto industry if it so chooses.

Dodd said that both Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke had been invited to testify at Thursday's hearing but had declined. He later criticized the treasury chief for traveling to China at a time of economic peril in the U.S.

"Time to come home _ we have a serious problem here," Dodd said. "I need the Federal Reserve to step up as well."

Though the current total request is $34 billion, Ford's proposal says it might have to come back with a second request for an additional $4 billion if the recession persists into 2010, raising the total even higher.

___

Associated Press writers Ken Thomas and Tom Raum contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Desperate U.S. automakers ran into fresh obstacles from skeptical lawmakers Thursday as they appealed with rising urgency _ and a new dose of humility _ for a $34 billion bailout. W...
WASHINGTON — Desperate U.S. automakers ran into fresh obstacles from skeptical lawmakers Thursday as they appealed with rising urgency _ and a new dose of humility _ for a $34 billion bailout. W...
Filed by Dave Burdick  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
184
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: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)

Could they not have carpooled?

I feel little sympathy for the CEOs who make millions (probably more) running a company into the ground. Especially when I could do that for 1/10th the money and wouldn't require the perks. However I do feel for the person on the line, depending on the salary. In that sense I believe the bailout is necessary, but please don't just hand them money. Somehow make them accountable to the US Taxpayers. We are stuck in this together, it's in our and the country's best interest to fix the problem. But then what? We don't seem to learn (Oil Shortage in the 70's anyone?). Please Washington, take clear notes and refer to them in the future so this doesn't happen every 30-40 years. Is that too much to ask? I don't think so.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:22 AM on 12/04/2008
- Ammobob I'm a Fan of Ammobob 36 fans permalink

No one is talking about the impending SHOCK to the unemployment roles no matter what happens. The BIG 3 will have to downsize in a MAJOR way whether they get the loan or not. That's possibly another 1 million unemployed soon. Let it happen NOW instead of prolonging the slow bleed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 AM on 12/04/2008
- baghdadjoe I'm a Fan of baghdadjoe 37 fans permalink

Exactly. Wagoner was saying yesterday that GM is going to lay off workers by the 10's of thousands whether they get this bailout or not. It's time for us to pay the piper. These US auto companies are too far gone to be rescued. It would be like trying to bail out the sinking Titanic - there's too much damage to the "ship" for it to make any sense. With GM alone burning up $5 billion a month in cash just to continue operations, a bailout is not a viable alternative.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 AM on 12/04/2008
- Pharos I'm a Fan of Pharos 9 fans permalink

So a condition of the bailout should be no layoffs. We will pay for the layoffs, is it not better to avoid them. What's happened to the progressive caring philosophy of the HP readers?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 AM on 12/04/2008
- williamg I'm a Fan of williamg 251 fans permalink
photo

If the automakers say something like "we expect things to turn around in the next 18 months,'' then each and every Senator needs to stand up, and walk out the door. There is no way the auto industry turns this thing around anytime soon. Even the Asian manufacturers are going to have a tough time over the next 3 years.

No way that the "Volt" is answer to their woes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 AM on 12/04/2008
- baghdadjoe I'm a Fan of baghdadjoe 37 fans permalink

"No way that the "Volt" is answer to their woes." - Right. It's too little too late.

The Volt is going to cost $40K for the consumer. Toyota and Honda will have great plug-in hybrids, launched at the same time as the Volt, that will cost less and perform better.

An all-electric car, like the EV-1 that GM buried, would be a better idea since several major areas (CA Bay Area, state of Hawaii) are installing charging systems for electric vehicles and mandating their use. Hell, I'm buying an electric car myself just as soon as I can. But I would NEVER, not for any reason, buy one of Detroit's antiquated petroleum-guzzling global warmers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:29 AM on 12/04/2008
- munki I'm a Fan of munki 34 fans permalink
photo

I heard over 75% (was it on radio) of CEO resumes are inflated...
Please check on them... because, the last trip shows... something was missing...
Are they really qualified? or Corporate Politic winners?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 AM on 12/04/2008

Only Americans are dumb enough to shoot themselfs in the head when they are sick. You complain about no jobs here in America, but you won't even buy your own porducts.This is truly a third world country with lipstick.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 AM on 12/04/2008
- JenMI I'm a Fan of JenMI 15 fans permalink

Yes!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 AM on 12/04/2008
- Tom Joad I'm a Fan of Tom Joad 274 fans permalink
photo

Is that a picture of them car pooling? welcome to the middle class, CEO's.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 AM on 12/04/2008
- EllisWyatt I'm a Fan of EllisWyatt 21 fans permalink
photo

I repeat, let;s go with Congressman Gohmert's plan for a two month federal tax holiday for American taxpayers. There would be no federal income taxes withheld, or Social Security and Medicare taxes withheld for two months. That includes the employers matching of the SS adnd Medicare taxes. It would cost approximately $332 billion.

Why give this money to failed corporations who will only squander the taxpayers' hard earned money.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:16 AM on 12/04/2008

Why, so you can take your saved tax money to Walmart and buy a flat screen TV? Ya, that will help the economy for about 2 months. Then what?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 12/04/2008
- EllisWyatt I'm a Fan of EllisWyatt 21 fans permalink
photo

On your wages maybe, but the average family of 4 making $50,000 could save a couple of thousand dollars, to spend on a big screen if they want to. Why not? Puts money back into the economy. And the employer saving those payroll taxes could keep a few people on instead of laying them off.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 12/04/2008
- topkatnc I'm a Fan of topkatnc 30 fans permalink
photo

What about taking the cap off of income tax so the rich will pay the same percentage as the rest of us ?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:27 AM on 12/04/2008
- Ammobob I'm a Fan of Ammobob 36 fans permalink

The QUEST for everyday, Joe Plumber affordable, alternative energy autos is decades away. What will $34 bil do now? NADA......­.....eithe­r do the 'pre-bankruptcy' or the FULL MONTY bankruptcy­.....reneg­otiate ALL contracts and executive pay scales. As HICKS says - NUKE 'EM FROM ORBIT, IT"S THE ONLY WAY TO BE SURE...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 12/04/2008
- EllisWyatt I'm a Fan of EllisWyatt 21 fans permalink
photo

Packard, Studebaker, Nash,DeSoto, LaSalle, Oldsmobile. We seem to none the worse off because of the disappearance of these companies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 AM on 12/04/2008
- williamg I'm a Fan of williamg 251 fans permalink
photo

We are a poorer nation because of the loss of Studebaker.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 12/04/2008

Did all thes companies go out of business at the same time? Because that is what we are looking at right now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:24 AM on 12/04/2008

Horrible comparison. There were still other domestic automakers after those companies folded.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:44 AM on 12/04/2008
photo

While GM is asking for more money and hinting that if they can get it they will turn over a new leaf and make efficient cars, etc. Well right now there is an Ad promoting huge trucks running some kind of obstacle course and bragging they are getting somewhere around 20 miles a gallon. Which leads one to realize that the vehicles the big three are making are products of huge advertising campaigns to sell such gas burning monsters. Something about manliness toughness driving around in over built piles of junk whose main purpose is to take one from point a to point b. So here is an idea. Instead of bailing these companies out give them work. Set up a program that the big three make very efficient electric vehicles and then take these electric vehicles and replace every gas guzzling vehicle in the country for free. This can be done on a voluntary basis. A note for those that want to keep their self centered gas guzzling vehicles require a $10 dollar tax a gallon.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 AM on 12/04/2008

That is the Chrysler ad. Dodge Ram trucks. Its such a stupid ad. It shows why these corporations are in the state they are. If you realisticly think about it, would any one in the real world ever encounter an obstacle course like that? Yea it looks fun but why?? How about creating a car for the average joe who drives to work and back?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 AM on 12/04/2008

I saw that ad. I thought is was an imitation of the millions of TOYOTA ads I saw for their pick up truck. Boy, that Toyota is so stupid. They must be doing horrible.

Side note. Number one sell vehicle in November? A truck. Number two selling vehicle? A truck.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 AM on 12/04/2008

There is one major difference when Toyota does it. When one thinks about Toyota you don't think about their trucks. You think of their fuel efficient cars like Corolla, Camry and the Prius. They can do it and get away with it because they provide an alternative. Meanwhile you have Chrysler which is put out pathetic vehicles and touting how great the Ram truck is. Sorry but personally I think the Ram truck is one ugly a$$ vehicle.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 AM on 12/04/2008
photo

"Side note. Number one sell vehicle in November? A truck. Number two selling vehicle? A truck." Yep, keep in mind that for the average consumer that watches ad after ad promoting bigness and useless crap including most trucks are the bozos that buy these trucks. Its not only the manufacturers its the Ad people that promote all this so called need for trucks. And these aren't just trucks it is the image that people buy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 12/04/2008
- MNmommy I'm a Fan of MNmommy 374 fans permalink
photo

Somebody needs to kidnap Jack Welch and hold him for a year so that he can't be spewing his union busting nonsense in the media.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 AM on 12/04/2008
- JenMI I'm a Fan of JenMI 15 fans permalink

Agree....now here's a guy with no connection to the real world...unless it's Wall Street.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 12/04/2008

Kid*nap anyone with whom you don't agree?

Sil*ence the opposition?

Lib*eral fa*s*ci*s*m from the Obama*nation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:16 AM on 12/04/2008
- rini I'm a Fan of rini 34 fans permalink
photo

You do realize that this sort of thing is not half as common on this site as it is on conservative sites.

Don't even begin to talk about violence and coercion after what happened at the Palin rallies.

BTW - Obama believes totally in democracy and rule BY the people. Fascism is kinda the opposite. It's kinda like when the government thinks it can increase the powers of the executive branch and hold people without trials....(sorta like Gitmo.)

Sorta like the past eight years.

Don't tell me about liberal fascism. Obviously, you have been in a coma for the past eight years.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 AM on 12/04/2008
- Samalabear I'm a Fan of Samalabear 64 fans permalink
photo

Michael Moore's blog made perfect sense. He talked about it again on Countdown last night. I hope that no more bailout money goes to Wall Street until Obama gets into office. Maybe -- just maybe -- any other players screaming for help -- or more help -- they can get the same grilling as the auto manufacturers. If you haven't read the Moore blog or watch his interview on Countdown -- enjoy the part where he talks about GM asking for $18 billion when the company is only worth $3 billion. His analogy -- if I have a house that is worth $100,000, ask for $700,000 and agree to put the house up as collateral, what do you suppose the bank would say? Like something out of a comedy.

A lot of Moore's ideas I head for years when I used to transcribe hearings for the New York State Legislature -- great ideas regarding mass transit and building mass transit cars over here again and such. But, no, everyone was in love with oil and cars and trucks. These people were marginalized and not taken seriously. This was during the Reagan era and, of course, this all goes into the mess that we're paying for now. So, I really hope someone listens this time. This would be great for GM and great for the country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 AM on 12/04/2008
photo

The auto companies have indeed made some very poor choices. On the other hand, car sales WORLDWIDE for most manufacturers (including Toyota and HOnda) are way down, because this is a world-wide recession (depression?). The Detroit auto industry is important to this country for many reasons: they make vehicles for the military, they employ thousands, their suppliers employ thousands.....other industries depend on them for their existence. To agree to LOAN them money, under certain conditions, seems to me to be prudent. If Detroit goes down, we will be buying cars from foreign manufacturers forever. The auto industry is being pushed to the edge arguably for failures of managerial judgments that pale in comparison to the stupidity of the banking industry's, who were given huge sums by the Feds.
And one other thing: I am tired of hearing how the Big Three shouldn't be assisted because their CEOs flew to D.C. on corporate jets. That seems like an exceedingly poor way to make a decision crucial for the future of America.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:10 AM on 12/04/2008
- melpol I'm a Fan of melpol 7 fans permalink
photo

People all over the world are buying less automobiles but it is not the fault of the industry but only the fault of the economy. If it was only the American brand whose sales were off the blame would be on them, but every auto maker in the world has the same problem. The only solution is to cut costs until the market returns to normal.

It is not fair for the taxpayers to support automobile manufactures. We sympathize with them but if the economy is bad they must cut their staff in order to make ends meet. They say that they cannot do that because they have a contract that obligates them to their employees.

The only solution for them is to tear up their employee contracts by going bankrupt and starting over again. With a smaller overhead they can wait until the economy recovers and again become a profitable organization.

Giving the auto industry the 35 billion that they are now asking would pay their expenses until the economy recovers. But that is just a welfare check. Cutting expenses was always the answer when the economy went bad. Lets be practical instead of giving away the taxpayers money.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 12/04/2008

Why are the banks and WS firms handed billions, no questions asked, while the Big 3 are scoffed at and asked for business plans?

If any group needs scrutiny, its the banks and WS.

The looting will continue, meanwhile Americans are laid off, and record numbers are using food stamps, along with record foreclosures.

The base of America ---its citizens are going down -- while the banks and WS get handed free cash. Citizens have to fill out forms, stand in lines, get refused, but banks get automatic billions.

Last, if Americans cannot afford to buy, then what is the point of making cars on bailout money? Like everyone NEEDS and can afford the payments on a $54,000 GM Tahoe flexfuel? We need cars that are affordable on realistic terms, not 72 month loans or leases.

Prices across the board are too high to be affordable if Americans stop using credit, which is not only unavailable, but priced at interest rates that are at killer levels.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 12/04/2008
- baghdadjoe I'm a Fan of baghdadjoe 37 fans permalink

The US government, through the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department, has a special relationship with the big banks and has for decades. It's their responsibility to ensure that the US Dollar remains a viable currency.

Detroit has no such special status. US automakers are just failed businesses that need to "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps" - if they can, or go out of business. After all, that's what these executives have been telling everyone else for decades. Surely free market Darwinism applies to them too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 12/04/2008
- Harpseal60 I'm a Fan of Harpseal60 5 fans permalink
photo

We can't continue to just bail out every bozo that comes along looking to be rescued.

They got themselves into this mess, let them get themselves out of it. Lets give them a taste of what it feels like to be screwed. It's the same feeling that most of us feel when we are pulling out of the car lot with our new auto purchase.

These guys have NO new ideas, let them go under. Then we can start a entirely new way to manufacture autos, using all the latest fuel saving inventions (which the oil company's have been working hard to keep at bay. This will make jobs for those who would lose theirs and will also profit us as we will be buying cars that are not only green, but are better made.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 12/04/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect