As I write, passage of the $15 billion dollar bailout package for Detroit auto makers is far from a done deal. But should it pass, know that it did so because Democrats yet again folded like cheap lawn chairs.
There had been language in the package to force the car companies to drop lawsuits against California and other states which sought to enact tougher-than-federally-required emission standards on new cars.
The car companies said "no" to that.
The Democrats said "okay."
Which means, one way or another, your tax dollars will be used to sue your legislators to keep them from forcing the Big Three to make more consumer-friendly cars.
And by the way, that bailout money is being tapped from the cash that was supposed to fund the retooling of factories to make more fuel-efficient vehicles.
We've just run out of orifices for which the Dems to violate us.
If the Democrats had stood firm, what exactly would the car companies have done? Just slipped off quietly in the night like that old lady dying at the end of Titanic? And if they had, then we'd know their clack about a "new way of doing business" was just the empty promise of alcoholics trying to fake like they're sober between benders.
There is a slight provision "requiring" the car companies to respect the state-imposed limits. But that means little if courts rule against states.
Meanwhile, Republicans are looking to get "give backs" from the Unions. And they should. But the Democrats capitulating on both sides is hardly a compromise. Particularly when it's the Dems who are trying to help out Detroit.
But if they couldn't hold their ground on something as important as Iraq, are we surprised by their current lack of spine?
It's always funny to me when people accuse President-elect Obama of abandoning the left and moving toward the Center now that he's got the White House. Based on the ineffectiveness of the current Democratic congress, Obama can't get to the Center quick enough.
Just today, GM said that they must delay building their plant for the Volt.
GM just wants to blame someone else for their constant systemic failures and congress goes along. Anyone paying attention knows that the Volt was a car body wrapped in an excessive and huge marketing campaign. Of the 26 new models, the domestics are working on (and 26 are excessive and demonstrate lack of leadership), one would believe that the Volt would be the highest priority funded program.
Same old games, same old management, same old UAW and the same results. If this is not a perfect example of the constant and flawed calculation of GM (and Chrysler) that marketing is more cost effective than true innovation then nothing is. Innovation creates demand for products so less marketing is required to “push” bad product onto consumers. Look at some of the new vehicles and their specifications. Pretty much same old cars from the same old lines. Look at the marketing and associated “spec spin” one must believe there are 1000’s of people trying to figure out how to put lipstick on those pigs.
We need to help them, BUT they, must be restructured with outside trustees to avoid the blind spot that GM, Chrysler, the UAW and the congress possess. All the marketing and PR in the world will never fix this mess. Innovation? Change? Anyone?
We should at least demand some common sense.
Unless the Demcrats elect new, credible leadership, we and Obama are in for a very disappointing four years.
Unions kill jobs. How much proof do you need? What investors will pony up hundreds of millions of dollars to build a factory in some rust belt state or Michigan so they can do business in a hostile environment and be subject to a Union stranglehold monopoly on their work force? Anybody know the answer? NO NEW MANUFACTURING JOBS IN MICHIGAN, OHIO, AND ANY OF THOSE ANTI BUSINESS PRO UNION JURISDICTIONS! UNIONS = NO JOBS!
By the way, in Germany today, a very popular gift for the Holidays is a nicely wrapped copy od Das Kapital. May be that's why they have health insurance, like any other industrialized nation.
But here we don't want commie stuff. We really love to see a few people getting incredibly wealthy from us. Who knows, in this land of opportunity, we may gat to be like one of them one day. Right?
How about some facts, number one the non regulation of the GOP that they have been pushing since the criminal Ronald Reagan and his screw the public Supply Side Economics, a huge farce form to git go.
The auto makers spending 50 million last year to grease the palms of the GOP to gut clean air standards and safety regulations, so soon we forget about the Ford Explorer and its track record.
Oh yah lets take even more money out of the American Workers pocket and put them out of work or better yet give the jobs to the third world for 250$ a month. That is a real smooth move exlax.
The American Worker is to blame for everything by your thought process, can you explain why in hell do the top three coporate crooks at Ford walked off with 14.98 million as their compensation, how in the hell does one justify that.
But the greedy Unions DO share a measure of the blame, along with the greedy CEOs and the greedy management.
Why is this concept so hard to understand??
As for blaming the GOP for non-regulation, perhaps you didn't hear what President Clinton said about this...
"Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
Michale.....
"On Capitol Hill, Mr. Gramm (R) became the most effective proponent of deregulation in a generation, by dint of his expertise, free-market ideology, and perch on the Senate banking committee.
He led the effort to block measures curtailing deceptive or predatory lending, which was just beginning to result in a jump in home foreclosures that would undermine the financial markets. He advanced legislation that fractured oversight of Wall Street while knocking down Depression-era barriers that restricted the rise and reach of financial conglomerates.
And he pushed through a provision that ensured virtually no regulation of the complex financial instruments known as derivatives, including credit swaps, contracts that would encourage risky investment practices at Wall Street’s venerable institutions and spread the risks around the world.
From the start of his career in Washington, Mr. Gramm aggressively promoted his conservative ideology and free-market beliefs.
From 1999 to 2001, Congress first considered steps to curb predatory loans — those that typically had high fees, significant prepayment penalties and ballooning monthly payments and were often issued to low-income borrowers. Foreclosures on such loans were on the rise, setting off a wave of bankruptcies.
But Mr. Gramm did everything he could to block the measures. In 2000, he refused to have his banking committee consider the proposals, an intervention hailed by the National Association of Mortgage Brokers as a “huge, huge step for us.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/economy/17gramm.html?pagewanted=3
The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets reported Friday.
Conservative critics claim that the Clinton administration pushed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make home ownership available to riskier borrowers with little concern for their ability to pay the mortgages.
Fannie and Freddie don't lend money, to minorities or anyone else, however. They purchase loans from the private lenders who actually underwrite the loans.
Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent... One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector...
During those same explosive three years, private investment banks — not Fannie and Freddie — dominated the mortgage loans that were packaged and sold into the secondary mortgage market. In 2005 and 2006, the private sector securitized almost two thirds of all U.S. mortgages, supplanting Fannie and Freddie..
In 1999, the year many critics charge that the Clinton administration pressured Fannie and Freddie, the private sector sold into the secondary market just 18 percent of all mortgages.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53802.html
The US, in this view, will pay the price for the misjudgments of the Bush administration. "The last eight years have seen US political and economic leadership reach a nadir in the ratio of cognitive capabilities to destructive capabilities. There is a great unwillingness to recognize this limitation, particularly within American culture. The Bush years have all the appearance of a Greek tragedy. Greed, hubris, and short-sighted pursuit of political advantage have been placed in the pressure cooker and the heat turned on high.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/13/global-economic-crisis-li_n_134393.html
}}}}
Yes, well we never said Obama is always perfect! Even he can make mistakes!
{{{{
Agreed, Obama ISN'T perfect...
But, since you trust him to run your country, isn't it possible that he is RIGHT about FISA and you are wrong??
Or are we back to that situation whereas everyone who agrees with you is right and everyone who disagrees with you is wrong??
Michale.....
Also, FISA lets the governent listen to our phone calls to other countries, which is unconstitutional. Again, our phone calls are not supposed to be listened to unless we are suspected of a crime and then after authorities get a judicial warrant, which is not difficult for them.
Just because we are talking to someone in Dubai does not mean government has a right to listen in. There was a scandal already involving NSA employees listening to the phone calls of our soldiers in Iraq talking to their girlfriends, although I am sure you do not know about any of this.
So I have to say that I think many parts of the FISA BIll are unconstitutional and I hope the courts will strike them down, as they already have many parts of the Bush fight against terror such as denying detainees habeas corpus. I think Obama's vote was a mistake, but of course I still support him. I wish he would prosecute the war criminals in the Bush administration who lied us into war and condoned torture.
That indicates to me that he is right and you are wrong about the Constitutionality of the measures...
Michale.....
Well, if the argument is that 1998 was the hottest year on record then whomever disagrees with me is wrong, according to the GISS.
If the argument is whether Republicans supported the initial financial community bailout, it is much more a matter of interpretation as 1/3 did and 2/3 did not in the House of Reps. The Bill passed with Republican help. Without Republican support it would have failed.
The entire FISA bill is not bad and I can not say I am an expert on it. The language where it gives the FBI wide use of national security letters to spy on us without a judicial warrant is very anti-democratic. There have already been widespread abuses and the Congress said it would take the power away if the program ws not supervised more closely
They are treasonist, have we not yet had enough of them?
I'm reading alot of comments that seem like scapegoating of unions.
While taking health care costs would help, bigger issue is the early retirement, and legacy payments etc.
Also, while unions are at fault, so are big 3, their management isn't as good as Toyota, which has led with the legendary TPS, and taking away their state-level subsidies isn't the answer considering they are multi-country corporations that have invested heavily in the US, and also hire a massive amount pf population.
The Republicans were not demanding that the Big 3 tie executive compensation there to the executive compensation packages at Toyota and Honda, where the executives are paid far less. In many cases, just ten percent of what U. S. execs were paid. Personally, I think the guys who made the disastrous decisions on what to build should be the first to have to cut back to the Honda and Toyota executive compensation packages, not the little guys who build them.
Let them die, and start over with new leadership and new goals. It will be painfull at first, but it will lead to better times ahead.
Staying the course with only slight corrections only delays the inevitable!
Detroit as it is today is like beating a dead Horse. It is over for these fools!
Maybe the Senate did this to give George the chance to clean up his legacy...save Detroit and the Unions...better than all the other mistakes he made on his watch. How do you know that maybe this is the way it was supposed to go down so that next week Paulson/Bernanke/Bush can "give" Detroit the money with "no strings or concessions"????. You have a huge number of companies that stand to go under, not just the Big Three. If we can use our tax dollars and we do, to subsidize foreign car companies in this country..ie, Mercedes in Alabama...state of Alabama gave them the land, put in all the infrastructure, had the State of Alabama pay for training, bought 2500 Mercedes vehicles for State use, got Federal funds to pay for a good portion of it....cost to you and me per job created...$175,000.00. Thank you Senator Shelby. Germany, Korea, China, Japan aren't reciprocating...where is the sense in this model?
Where once this country industrial landscape is 30, even 40% unionized, it is now just 10%, the rag tag auto industry. They have touted fear that the country will break, but look, we are still here. They continue to bring the economy down. The Big3 is not profitable because all funds are diverted to Union pay,perks and pensions. So why bail them out.
Fear mongering - that's all it is.
Also, why did you THINK there are less union workers now? The last 30 years have seen every union-busting trick in the book. The firing of the air traffic controllers. Moving jobs overseas and to non-union states "because it's the only way we can compete against cheap foreign labor," instead of imposing tariffs as other countries have. Looking the other way on illegal immigrants, only going after them when politicians want to make people angry. Labor is not the villain here.
Well, I guess you could say that, but it's a moot point. The right to organize and collectively bargain is the law.
How much money is diverted to corporate waste/CEO bonuses vs extra labor costs?
What I simply cannot be fathomed is this:
If their overall agenda is to reduce wages, eliminate unions, outsource American jobs, and import cheap foreign labor, whom do they think are going to consume and pay taxes when they finally manage to crush the middle class?
I also don't think you got the gist of what JR was saying, Realpolitic. He was saying that if it had passed, without the reforms that would assure longterm viability, which was one of the concepts that Obama talked about conditioning these funds to, then that would have represented a failure on the Dems' part, a capitulation. I agree with him.
That is the most amazing transmogrification of political reality I have ever seen. You are laying the pro-corporate wimps that make up the Democratic Party leadership on Liberals? Obama will cure the problem by becoming more Centrist? Even you can't believe that and I know your hatred of everything Left is utterly unreasoning. The Liberal wing of the Democratic Party has not had any power for a long time. The triangulation, the selling out of the public interest for the benefit is classic Centrism courtesy of the DLC. If Obama tacks rightward you'll get more of the same.