Sunday, November 16, 2008

Meet The Press Debate on the Auto Industry Bailout Plan

Should the government "bailout" the auto industry? That's biggest debate going on in Washington. Did the car companies in Michigan bring upon themselves the current crisis, or are they just victims of the downturn like in every other sector of the economy?

Some politicians like Senator Shelby have opposed most of the bailouts:

I haven't seen them yet, Tom. I would--first of all, I think that we would have to see conditions that would fundamentally change the way Detroit does business. They're not building the right products. They did at one time. They've got good workers. But I don't believe they've got good management. They don't innovate. They're a dinosaur, in a sense, and I hate to see this because I would like to see them become lean and, and hungry and innovative. And if they did and put out the right product, they could survive. But I don't believe the $25 billion they're talking about will, will make them survive. It's just postponing the inevitable.

The Senator from Alabama is a bit of hypocrite. How does a member of Congress, that is running historic deficit, talk about "lean"? There are others whom have been pawns of the auto industry, like Senator Carl Levin of Michigan:
Well, this is a national problem, first of all, without any question. We've got at least three million jobs dependent upon this industry surviving. We've got--this is a Main Street problem. We've got 10,000 or more dealers. They, they cover the country in every town of this country. The auto industry touches millions and millions of lives. One out of 10 jobs in this country are auto related. Twenty percent of our retail sales are auto related or automobiles. So this is a national problem.

Secondly, there is, unlike some of the statements that you read, there is bipartisan support for support for this industry to get them through a very difficult problem, including Senator Voinovich of Ohio who is co-chairman of the task force that you made reference to. Other countries are supporting their industries through this difficult period. The European automakers are requesting $56 billion in temporary support, and we expect that they'll be getting it from the European community. This is not a Big Three problem alone. This current crisis is a crisis in the economy where there is no credit available to purchase and where people are not buying cars because they are afraid. They are delaying the major purchases that they need to make because of the uncertainly in the economy. So this is a...

Brokaw nails Levin:
Senator Levin, let me just read to you something that Tom Friedman wrote in The New York Times last week. "The blame for this travesty not only belongs to the auto executives, but must be shared with the entire Michigan delegation in the House and Senate, virtually all of them, year after year, voted however Detroit automakers and unions instructed them to vote. That shielded GM, Ford and Chrysler from environmental concerns, mileage concerns and the full impact of global competition that could have forced Detroit to adapt a long time ago."

At a time when Toyota was producing the Prius and Honda, much more gas-friendly cars, GM, in fact, was turning out the Cadillac Escalade, the Hummers and other big SUVs that were eating a lot of gasoline when a lot of people were raising flags.

Shelby makes a good point on bailing out the inefficient auto industry:
[...]if we let the money go to General Motors, for example, with the same management, the same ideas, it's money wasted. Mark it down and watch it, and it'll be more money. This is just the beginning of, of corporate welfare in a big, big way.

But it's been done before:
SEN. LEVIN: It's not the beginning, Tom. We've done this before. We--we've--we supported Chrysler when it was in this kind of difficulty. People said, "Oh my God, that's corporate welfare." We made money, actually, by supporting Chrysler. We did it with the airline industries in, in 2001. The airline industry was in real trouble. The government came to its support. We've done this in a number of industries; this is not unprecedented. The issue's whether we're going to have manufacturing in America or whether we're going to see the continuation of the loss of millions of jobs overseas.

But allowing them to go into bankruptcy is no solution either:
MR. BROKAW: Let me just ask you both about bankruptcy. Here's from The New York Times, Michelle Maynard writing on Thursday. "A bankruptcy filing by a single Detroit car company could cost the economy $175 billion in the first year of the legal case in lost employee income and tax revenue, the Center for Automotive Research estimated this week. Given the complexity, a GM bankruptcy case could last three years or more.

And, Senator Shelby, 80 percent of car buyers who were questioned said they would not buy a car from a company in bankruptcy because it's a long-term investment, it's not like an airline, it's something that they would have to depend on to get parts and service.

- Read the complete Meet The Press transcript

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

In the case of the auto-makers' bailout, it's a relief to have a national issue that is so straightforward: American cars tend to break down and fall apart therefore people are not buying them. If GM and Ford don't want to go out of business, they should start making decent cars. To bail them out would be to reward their terrible manufacturing standards.