With time short, Congress tries to seal auto deal

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

JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS | December 6, 2008 08:31 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

California State Assembly Member Nancy Skinner, right, speaks to auto workers and supporters during a demonstration outside the office of of Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., Saturday, Dec. 6, 2008, in San Francisco. Top executives from the Detroit automakers spent two consecutive days on Capitol Hill pleading for $34 billion in loans to help the industry survive. GM and Chrysler said they needed a combined $15 billion to help them maintain their operations through early 2009. Ford wants access to a line of credit of up to $9 billion but only if market conditions deteriorate. (AP Photo/Ron Lewis)

WASHINGTON — Racing to seal a deal with the White House, Democratic congressional leaders dispatched aides Saturday to draft an emergency $15 billion aid package to pull Detroit's Big Three automakers from the brink of collapse.

Capitol Hill leaders prepared to sell yet another bailout to a skeptical Congress. It is an uphill battle: The anger is fresh over how the Bush administration used the $700 billion Wall Street rescue fund and lawmakers are questioning whether the once-mighty auto giants can survive.

Still, with Washington spooked by massive job losses that provided the latest evidence of a deepening recession, the White House said it was in "constructive discussions" with lawmakers in both parties on the assistance. House and Senate Democratic staff aides worked through the weekend to hammer out details, with votes on the plan expected in the week ahead.

The emerging measure would speed short-term help to General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC, while empowering the government to order a wholesale restructuring of the industry and imposing tight restrictions on the Big Three, according to congressional officials and others close to the talks. They described the developing plan on condition of anonymity because the details were not final.

It is designed to tide over the companies _ particularly GM and Chrysler, which have warned that they are just weeks from going bust _ through March, when Barack Obama is president and a new Congress could consider a longer-term solution.

A breakthrough on the long-stalled rescue came Friday when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif, yielded to President George W. Bush on a key point: allowing the aid to come from an existing fund set aside for the production of environmentally friendlier cars.

White House press secretary Dana Perino said that was central to any agreement, along with requirements that the carmakers swallow tough business decisions and taxpayers be protected.

"Taxpayers should not be asked to finance assistance for automakers without a strong likelihood that they will be paid back," Perino said in a statement Saturday.

Story continues below
advertisement

Pelosi said the House would consider legislation in the upcoming week that would include rigorous oversight and strong taxpayer protections. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he aimed for votes on "a responsible plan to help the millions of Americans who rely on a healthy auto industry for their livelihoods. "

"We will need support and cooperation from Republicans to determine when that vote happens and whether it will succeed," Reid said in a statement.

But no Republicans were participating in the weekend negotiating sessions, led by aides to Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader, said he looked forward to seeing the bill. "As we consider this legislation, our first priority must be to protect the hard-earned money of the American taxpayer," McConnell said in a statement.

The emerging plan remained a tough sell. Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said Saturday he was "disappointed" with the still-unwritten rescue because it did not require major union givebacks or debt restructuring moves.

"Before we even contemplate making a loan to these companies, we need to put in place specific and rigorous measures," Corker said in a statement.

Auto state lawmakers were cautiously optimistic.

"There's still a long ways to go. We're working all weekend here," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. He said there was a "good chance" Congress would act in the coming week _ "but far from certain" given that the legislation has been neither written nor reviewed by lawmakers.

Pelosi, a close ally of environmentalists, had steadfastly refused to tap an existing $25 billion auto loan program _ meant to finance the production of more fuel-efficient vehicles _ for emergency aid to the carmakers. But Bush would not agree to use money from the $700 billion Wall Street bailout to help the Big Three. With time running out on the current Congress and the automakers' situation increasingly dire, the window for an agreement was quickly closing.

Pelosi was seeking concessions in return for changing her position, people close to the talks said. She wanted legislative language insuring that the program to modernize plants and develop green cars would be replenished early next year _ perhaps in an economic recovery bill that lawmakers are expected to prepare for Obama shortly after he takes office Jan. 20.

The speaker also was pushing to bar the automakers from using any of the funds to pursue a legal challenge to states seeking to establish tougher auto emission standards, although that would likely run into resistance in the Senate.

House and Senate aides also were haggling over how the government-led restructuring should take place _ either under a powerful "car czar" or a board _ and who should name the official or team overseeing it. The White House wants a trustee named by Bush to wring concessions from the automakers and their unions before any loan money can be released, congressional aides said, while Democrats want Obama to choose an overseer.

That would allow the automakers to get federal aid before agreeing to any concessions, although Democrats are proposing placing restrictions on the money, including limits on executive compensation.

The Big Three executives spent two consecutive days on Capitol Hill this past week pleading for as much as $34 billion in loans to help their industry survive. But they made clear that $15 billion would be enough to keep them running until the end of March 2009. GM has indicated it needs about $10 billion to last that long, while Chrysler chief executive Bob Nardelli said his company would need $4 billion. Ford's chief executive, Alan Mulally, said Ford did not anticipate needing any federal cash during that period.

___

Associated Press writers Ken Thomas and Ben Feller contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Racing to seal a deal with the White House, Democratic congressional leaders dispatched aides Saturday to draft an emergency $15 billion aid package to pull Detroit's Big Three auto...
WASHINGTON — Racing to seal a deal with the White House, Democratic congressional leaders dispatched aides Saturday to draft an emergency $15 billion aid package to pull Detroit's Big Three auto...
 
Comments
46
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 Next › Last » (2 pages total)

The reason we stopped buying American made cars was because (as with so many others that have posted on this blog) we spent so much time and money and none of the manufacturers were willing to help us with the cost. They are in such dire financial straits now because they built them as cheaply as possible and as soon as they were sold the 'proud new owners' were on their own. What the big 3 need to do is 1) have some pride in what they're building and 2) back up that pride and their vehicles with warranties that the owner can COUNT on. I would like to buy either a Ford Ranger with a stepside bed, or a Chrysler PT Cruiser but I won't even consider it until I know the motor and the tranny in both vehicles have the same 5 stars their crash test rating supposedly has.
All 3 need to make responsibility and trustworthiness job ONE!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:48 PM on 12/07/2008

Well, for one thing, The PT Cruiser is manufactured at Toluca Car Assembly in Toluca, Mexico. For another, they quit making the convertible in 2007, and I believe the 2009 is the last model year.

Consider buying a GMC Sierra. We've owned two and have had only minor problems. We traded the 2000 in on a 2004 when it had 120,000 on it. Our 2004 has 110,000 miles and it's still going strong. We'll keewp this one until the wheels fall off.

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

Neither had a motor or tranny problem - rear gate latch, and a rpoblem with one of the gauges on the dashboard that was fixed under warranty.

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

My husband and I bought American made cars for more than 20 years; we stopped buying American cars when we were going to have to replace a 2ND tranny in a Ford Taurus that we hadn't even owned 5 years. We sold the damned thing to a salvage yard for $125 and went out and bought a cute little red Honda Civic; that was in 2002, this year we added a Honda Element. Why? Because over the 6 years that we have had the Civic we have received notices of recalls on it and all we had to do was take it to our Honda dealer and have the WORK DONE FOR FREE!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:47 PM on 12/07/2008
- feo I'm a Fan of feo permalink

More cars are produced in Ontario than anywhere else in North America. What is the Canadian govt doing about this problem?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 AM on 12/07/2008
photo

Feo the problem isn't GM Ford or Chrysler it is America not buying if Canada was in the situation as America if in fact GM of Canada couldn't meet payrole then the government would have to ointerveen but billions of dollars sent to Detroit isn't a Canadian problem If GM Ford or Chrysler wanted to locate their Head offices in Canada I would think it would be a good idea but we could ship to the USA and all their cars would be imports but befor 1918 we were not GM and we shipped Chev and Buicks around the world and to the USA

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:18 PM on 12/07/2008

Throw in power windows and its a deal..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 AM on 12/07/2008
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:10 AM on 12/07/2008

I hope your kidding right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 AM on 12/07/2008
photo

It's only Mindy with yet another virus link.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 AM on 12/07/2008

"What would it take to get you to into this deal today, Mr. Congressman?"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 PM on 12/06/2008

DON'T PROVIDE A BAILOUT WITHOUT MORE SERIOUS CONDITIONS ON STRUCTURE

CLEAR THE DECKS IN THE EXECUTIVE OFFICES, AND THE UAW,

BAILOUTS are complex, but Try something outside the box like this to save the U.S. Auto Industry - - -

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/11/solution-for-detroit-gm-friends.html

There is much creative talent hidden inside the U.S. Big 3 that has been smothered by mismanagement and the UAW. ... and they actually "make" something, .... unlike Wall Street. However, no point implementing a bailout that does not enable getting rid of the reason the Big 3 are in trouble in the first place.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:06 PM on 12/06/2008
photo

Gee, has it ever occurred to you that UAW members are taxpayers too?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 PM on 12/06/2008

Does anyone remember a man called Tucker that tried to compete against the Big Three back in the fifties? He came out with a winner of a car with many safety features and new ideas added to it. He proved to Congress that he could build his cars and compete with the Big 3 if given the Federal funding. Guess who stopped the Federal funding from reaching Tucker? The Big Three and Congress. The Big Three were allowed to get to big to fail and now look where Congress has gotten us. Funding should be given to American entrepreneurs that, like Tucker, can br given the chance to compete with the Big 3. Then they can be allowed to FAIL.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:44 AM on 12/07/2008

It was a movie. Some truths. The BIG 3 behaved just like the Japanese, Chinese and Korean governments do... so maybe you should let them FAIL!

Regards

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 12/07/2008

Congress and the White House have smothered our economy by mismanagement & lobbyists, we need to clear them out first. You can't only blame the US Big 3 for this mess. Go ahead and buy your Japanese and German cars. Watch your taxes rise to take over their pension obligations and further strain our healthcare system by having Detroit collapse. Watch less taxes coming into your local economy and those local services go down when their dealerships disappear along with their income and sales taxes. Poverty and crime will go up along with more foreclosures, but those Repug Senators that voted against it should be just fine - at least for another two years.

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

OK...WTF is this so-called "existing fund set aside for the production of environmentally-friendlier cars", and WhyTheF hasn't the American public heard one word about it up til now???

If you ask me, it sounds like Booosh and Paulson are hoarding the bailout money and would rather tap into an R&D fund that would most certainly be better spend by the incoming administration.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...IS IT JANUARY YET???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:53 PM on 12/06/2008
photo

fyi:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/83bfe68c-8a8f-11dd-a76a-0000779fd18c.html

I think most people were focused on the election and conventions at the time. :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:21 PM on 12/06/2008

Whoops, Bush was right...again.

How the big 3 can save themselves!!

http://theLIEpolitic.com/2008/12/how-ford-and-gm-can-save-themselves/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:52 PM on 12/06/2008

greenboogers, yellowboogers, bushyboogers...that's some viral infection you got there.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:55 PM on 12/06/2008

March 03, 2007 07:17 pm

" The strange thing is we will never know whether the huge subsidy of the Tupelo Toyota plant is good or bad for Mississippi.
We know the direct subsidy is $350 million right off the bat. That"s the amount Mississippi will borrow to aid the Toyota plant. State officials have yet to disclose the amount of future tax breaks. If the Nissan plant is a guide, the total subsidy will be about a half billion dollars.
That"s a big chunk of change for 2,000 guaranteed jobs. State officials are already hinting the final job number may be close to 4,000 but that"s wishful thinking. Since auto companies have been able to effectively sell jobs,
America is rich and powerful because we have embraced free enterprise. It is not rich and powerful because of huge corporate subsidies. Doesn"t anybody out there believe in the free market anymore? Let Toyota raise its own damn money and compete with every other business in Mississippi.
Government"s role is to support a level playing field. These big subsidies to private companies are exactly the opposite of government"s legitimate role.
Every businessman in this state competes for capital and labor. It is a slap in their faces to take their money and give it to a Japanese multinational so it can hire away their best employees.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:49 PM on 12/06/2008

Yeah, isn't it interesting how they call it a 'subsidy' on the frontend and a 'bailout' on the backend? We're giving those Asian car companies taxpayer dollars to get started, but won't give American companies a LOAN of tax dollars to stay alive. In the meantime, the American car companies are just trying to keep a commitment to the workers (via healthcare & retirement) that made them successful. The Asian companies get a clean slate, no prior committments & tax dollars that they aren't borrowing. Their culture is known for taking care of their elderly - and everyone here complaining about the unions couldn't care less about the American elderly/retirees.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:49 PM on 12/06/2008

interesting...
"Over the past several years, the Government of Japan has engaged in at least four strategies to keep the yen weak and thus to provide an enormous subsidy to Japan's vehicle and auto parts exporters," said Mohatarem.

"Japan's policies provided anywhere from a $2,000 to $14,000 cash windfall for each of the 2.2 million vehicles Japan"s automakers exported to the U.S. in 2006," continued Mohatarem. "This amounts in total to a more than $13.5 billion annual subsidy on imported vehicles and parts used to assemble vehicles in the U.S."

"This unearned windfall, which is documented in the profit reports of Japan's auto companies, has been a major factor in the success of Japanese auto companies in the U.S. It has contributed significantly to the loss of hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs in our auto and supplier industries; it is a major source of the nation's nearly $90 billion U.S. trade deficit with Japan; and it has contributed to the severe economic decline in my home state of Michigan and in many other communities in America," said Mohatarem.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:42 PM on 12/06/2008

It worked for Japan with steel in the 70s.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:40 PM on 12/06/2008

It worked also for Japan on consumer electronics...appliances and etc...

And then every Asian country in the world adopted the same strategy... and we began our slow downward jourrney to a 3rd world country that makes nothing!


Europe seeing the game rstricted Asian imports back in the 1980s to save their industry and today Germany is the number one exporter in the world. We are down to number 3, but much lower if you exclude scrap and raw material and food ( all 3rd world types of exports.. low value added).

Regards

Regards

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:11 PM on 12/07/2008

Of course they never show a profit here! The quality of their cars per dollar of sales price is not a fair comparrison... The price would be higher if they were not being subsidized with paid for healthcare and research and develpment and a home market w/o competition.


And they have a protected market there as does Europe, China and Korea. Then our states build their plants for them (30 billion so far)... Do you think any other country invites competitors in, builds their planst? LOL! Free trade my ASS... we are so dumb! And its not juts Autos.. its every major industry.

Americans are so niave as to how the game is played to win.. for your country and your workers....

Regards

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:08 PM on 12/07/2008
photo

BUSH Administration is giving up nothing as they do not care if the Big 3 go down and America goes into Depression.

This is simply re-labeling funds that were already approved by both parties so they can be used to get the Big 3 through to Obama's term.

NO CREDIT should be given to BUSH or the REPUBLICANS as their primary goal is the destruction of UNIONS at the expense of AMERICA's Financial Security!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 PM on 12/06/2008

hey that's a Toyota Tundra!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:49 PM on 12/06/2008

Big Oil should bail out the Big Three, who contributed to obscene profits with their gas guzzlers. The U.S. Govt. should spend the $35 billion on alternative fuel vehicles (ie., Tesla) and/or public transportation infrastructure (ie., high speed rail).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:40 PM on 12/06/2008

Eh gads... tesla a 140K 2 seater car out the door... 50 built. Range of 150 miles.. maybe... 40K in batteries that last under 5 years.

Big Gas Guzzling cars... Rolls , Bently, Audis, Mercedes, BMWs,Volvo, Range Roover, Lexus, Inifinity, Tundra... Yep only Detroit builds big cars ! LOL...


Toyotas fleet mileage is LT than 20 years ago! Detroits is more... Most Hybrids, most models over 30mpg.

Regards

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 PM on 12/07/2008
photo

There's missing links or gaps between consumer and US automaker products.
Perhaps... like Toyota or Lexus... listen to consumer needs more than being we are the big 3.
I used to drive, Plymouth, Camaro, Malibu, Taurus... even MBZ... well... frequent visits for services...
After switching to Toyota to Lexus... I spend more time enjoying life and not visits for services...
Now... fuel efficiency, environmental concern... I drive hybrid... love it... just love it...
Please make good hybrid or other dependable fuel efficient cars...

The money taxpayers are potentially again... without choice to invest... loan? fine, take equity position as collateral and put monitoring/compliance - watchdog system to protect taxpayers investments... including improve customer relations... I do not have the entire picture to be qualified to comment further...
Submitting my experience and wishes... Of course, NO FAT checks! reverse pyramid...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:42 PM on 12/06/2008
photo

The point is missed ,the air has gone out of the baloon and the money will get you nothing nada zip it will however stave off the people who depend on GM Ford and Chrysler for their cheques . This money will see them in place until the blow hards from the Government see and understand this is their mess.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:18 PM on 12/06/2008
photo

perhaps our government financial committee membership requirement should be...
must have 5 years of financial experience in a bank or CPA or whatever?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:26 PM on 12/06/2008
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

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