Auto industry bailout is capitulation at any speed
By KEN MIDKIFF
Published Friday, January 2, 2009
(http://www.columbiatribune.com/2009/Jan/20090102Comm002.asp)

In case you’ve been in a coma or lost in the desert or have been somewhere with no TV, radio or newspapers, the Big Three, as they’re called, of the automobile industry - GM, Ford, Chrysler - are hankering for a bailout and are asking Congress to pony up somewhere in the neighborhood of $35 million. Their claim was that unless the money is forthcoming, all three of them will go down the tube along with millions of jobs.

After at first coming to town on corporate jets - not a good idea when you’re claiming to be broke - and then, a month or so later, driving or riding to D.C. in hybrid vehicles, they came to our nation’s Capitol with their hands out. Even with the scaled-down transportation, Congress balked at the amount, with the U.S. Senate refusing to go along with the U.S. House (whose motto is, apparently, we’ll spend your money on damned near anything) and so President George W. Bush finally agreed to use some of the "Toxic Assets Recovery Plan" monies to loan Chrysler and GM about $13.4 billion with another $4 billion or so in March if the auto industry comes up with plans to get real and obtain a bottom line that is not sucking mud.

While there are all sorts of explanations as to how the Big Three got into this sorry state, one thing cannot be ignored: The U.S. auto industry has vehemently opposed every attempt to make the industry more responsive to consumers’ needs and wants.

It is by now common knowledge that every time there was a bill introduced to raise the fuel standards, the Big Three reacted as if someone had shoved cattle prods up their collective derrieres and would send in hordes of lobbyists to oppose the measure. Congress would then routinely vote it down. Even the bill that passed this year won’t require new fuel standards for several years. Consequently, most of the autos and trucks manufactured by the Big Three get about 12 miles per gallon - downhill with a tailwind and belching smoke all the way.

From seat belts to air bags to turn signals, the knee-jerk reaction of Ford, GM and Chrysler was to oppose any and all. No matter about public safety or convenience, the general response to Congress was: "Don’t tell us what to do." Of course, when Congress did tell them what to do, the automakers bragged about the "improvements" and promptly raised their prices.

Now, akin to those "rugged individualists" out West, the auto industry is pleading, "Give us the money and go away" a common cry by those who like the government’s money but don’t like any restrictions or prohibitions.

At this point, it is assumed that government money flowing to Chrysler and GM (for now, Ford doesn’t need any help, which didn’t stop it from going to D.C. for a handout) will have some strings attached but as targets, not requirements. The House bill, which Bush is using as a template, gives some indication of those strings: The automakers will need to promise to manufacture cars and trucks that get better gas mileage, manage things a bit better, seek concessions from the United Auto Workers, which is not at fault for much of anything as members will build whatever comes down the line, and keep knee-jerk negative reactions to consumerism to a minimum.

And, for goodness sake, stop objecting to turn signals.