More bailout for Auto industry- 21 Billion this time

[anothersta]

President Obama believes U.S. automakers have not yet achieved a viable restructuring plan and is calling for a "set of sacrifices from all parties involved," including management, labor, shareholders and suppliers.

A day before his administration is set to respond to a request to continue a bailout of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, Obama appeared on CBS' "Face The Nation" on Sunday and warned that major concessions are necessary to ensure the companies remain viable once the economy recovers.

"Everybody's gonna have to come to the table and say it's important for us to take serious restructuring steps now in order to preserve a brighter future down the road," Obama said.

In the wide-ranging interview, Obama also said he would continue to press Congress to make permanent the middle-class tax cuts contained in the economic stimulus package (PL 111-5) and expressed concern about the effect violence from Mexico's battle against drug cartels could have on border communities.

On foreign affairs, Obama ruled out sending U.S. troops into al Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan but added he expects the government there to be accountable as the United States increases military and civilian aid to Pakistan and in Afghanistan.

Obama's comments on the auto industry were broadcast a day before he is expected to announce his plans to reconfigure their businesses. GM and Chrysler have asked for an additional $21.6 billion in aid, on top of the more than $17 billion the government has provided the companies to stay afloat since December.

The administration is in a tight spot, eager to show it is sensitive to the concerns of unionized workers and the manufacturing sector after allowing Wall Street executives to collect millions of dollars of bonuses from bailout funds. Yet administration officials privately acknowledge the strong public sentiment against what some perceive as rewarding auto executives for bad business decisions.

A CBS News poll of 1,142 adults conducted March 12-16 found mounting frustration with such bailouts, with only 18 percent of respondents saying the government should provide the companies more assistance; 76 percent said the government should not.

Obama said the automakers have not yet made the case for the additional funds, though he acknowledged the belt-tightening GM and Chrysler have undertaken since they first asked for relief.

"They're not quite there yet," Obama said. "What we're trying to let them know is that we want to have a successful auto industry ... but it's got to be one that's realistically designed to weather this storm and to emerge, at the other end, much more lean, mean, and competitive than it currently is."

GM and Chrysler employ some 140,000 workers in the United States. The companies have until Tuesday to submit restructuring plans to the government but are not expected to meet that deadline. The plan Obama is expected to announce on Monday will take up whether bankruptcy is a viable option should the companies fail to restructure arrangements with unions, shareholders and creditors.

Under terms of the government's first round of assistance to GM and Chrysler, the companies are pressing the United Auto Workers to accept stock in exchange for half of the payments the companies are supposed to make into a union-run trust fund to cover the cost of retirees' health care.

Obama is expected to sound themes of shared sacrifice -- a message he said he delivered to CEOs of the nation's largest banks last week.

"It's very difficult for me as president to call on the American people to make sacrifices to help shore up the financial system if there's no sense of mutual obligation and mutual help," Obama said.

But, he added, he needs to convince the American public that an economic recovery is predicated on the success of banks and other players in the financial sector.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20090329/pl_cq_politics/politics3087615

[ahippiechic]

That's just F'in great....

[anothersta]

Okay, I just heard a rumor (and it's JUST a rumor) that the gov may go the unions and tell them the GOV can provide their healthcare so it won't be an issue anymore. ROFLMAO

So, the unions might have to deal with GOVERNMENT healthcare.

I've decided, I wouldn't mind paying 21 billion for that LOL You love the dems so much UAW? Good thing, they may be your new health care provider. Enjoy!

This would be a lesson to all: Be careful what you vote for cause you might just get it.

[atprm]

Ok, so the economy is failing -- I dont see anyone mandating that Obama step down.

The banks are failing - I don't see the sitting jackass mandating that the bank heads step down

Obama requiring that Rick Wagoner step down is BULLSCHIT!!

[meltodd69]

Ok, so the economy is failing -- I dont see anyone mandating that Obama step down.

The banks are failing - I don't see the sitting jackass mandating that the bank heads step down

Obama requiring that Rick Wagoner step down is BULLSCHIT!!

I was thinking the same thing!
Why is it that the auto industry is being treated like an unwanted step-child and the banks do what they want? I don't understand.

And I don't know alot about Mr. Wagoner but doesn't Obama have enough on his plate trying to run a country. Seems wrong to me that the government is now telling companies who can sit at their helm.
What's next? I mean just about everyone got a Stimulus check, that was kinda like a bailout IMO, not a good one but still the government gave us money. Are they now going to try to tell every household what to do?
I can see the government telling these companies how and what they can spend this money on. But to tell them who they can employ, doesn't seem right to me.

OK now the government wants to provide these auto-workers with health insurance. They won't give me health insurance! I make $8/hr and these guys make I'm guessing, probably on the low side, $20/hr. WTF!!!! :getyou

[Jolie Rouge]

The Obama administration is swaggering over its firing of GM CEO Richard Wagoner and its demand for more restructuring concessions from GM and Chrysler before they dole out more money. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/29/AR2009032900708.html

But the bottom line is, despite their threats to withhold the funds, the feds will eventually give them the billions of dollars in taxpayer money they need to prop up their failing businesses.

In other words: KABUKI!


Frustrated administration officials, speaking on condition of anonymity ahead of Obama’s announcement, said Chrysler has been given a 30-day window to complete a proposed partnership with Italian automaker Fiat SpA. The government will offer up to $6 billion to the companies if they can negotiate a deal before time runs out. If a Chrysler-Fiat union cannot be completed, Washington plans to walk away, leaving Chrysler destined for a complete sell-off.

Shawn Morgan, a Chrysler spokeswoman, declined to comment ahead of Obama’s announcement. For GM, the administration offered 60 days of operating money to restructure. Officials say they believe GM can put together a plan that will keep production lines moving in the coming years.

***


Barack Obama rose from community organizer
to auto company usurper.

Only in America.

Ed Morrissey points out that Obama has also cooked up a new government-backed warranty program:


Vehicle owners can expect the same kind of efficiency and expertise they receive there in handling warranty issues with their vehicles. Instead of working with dealers on the warranties, the government will now have to get involved, which will mean extensive paperwork for every warranty claim as the Directorate of Auto Warranties will have to account for every single penny, or at least those pennies that don’t get earmarked for Auto Warranty Bike Paths by Rep. Jim Oberstar.

And let’s not forget what this will do for Detroit’s competitiveness. Now that warranties will get funded by Uncle Sam, what do you suppose will happen to them? They’ll get shortened, and if they become uncompetitive, it will literally take an act of Congress to get longer warranties offered by Detroit. But that’s not what will really happen. If the Directorate of Auto Warranties discovers that the competition offers longer and more robust warranties, the Directorate will simply get Congress to pass laws outlawing them. After all, we can’t have a bunch of furriners undercutting Uncle Sam, can we?
Why, that would be downright unpatriotic!
***

Update: 11:21am Eastern… Barack Obama, auto repairman-in-chief, is on TV promising to guarantee that your GM/Chrysler car gets serviced and repaired.

Only thing he forgot to promise: the free tire gauges! http://www.nowpublic.com/world/obama-energy-plan-revealed-tire-gauge

Here’s the transcript of his prepared remarks. An excerpt, including the announcement of a new “Director of Auto Recovery” :idea:
http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN3034089620090330


It is my hope that the steps I am announcing today will go a long way toward answering many of the questions people may have about the future of GM and Chrysler. But just in case there are still nagging doubts, let me say it as plainly as I can — if you buy a car from Chrysler or General Motors, you will be able to get your car serviced and repaired, just like always. Your warranty will be safe. In fact, it will be safer than it’s ever been. Because starting today, the United States government will stand behind your warranty.

AUTO SALES SUPPORT

Therefore, to support demand for auto sales during this period, I’m directing my team to take several steps. First, we will ensure that Recovery Act funds to purchase government cars go out as quickly as possible and work through the budget process to accelerate other federal fleet purchases as well.

Second, we will accelerate our efforts through the Treasury Department’s Consumer and Business Lending Initiative. And we are working intensively with the auto finance companies to increase the flow of credit to both consumers and dealers.

Third, the IRS is today launching a campaign to alert consumers of a new tax benefit for auto purchases made between Feb 16 and the end of this year — if you buy a car anytime this year, you may be able to deduct the cost of any sales and excise taxes. This provision could save families hundreds of dollars and lead to as many as 100,000 new car sales.

Finally, several members of Congress have proposed an even more ambitious incentive program to increase car sales while modernizing our auto fleet.

I want to work with Congress to identify parts of the Recovery Act that could be trimmed to fund such a program, and make it retroactive starting today.

DIRECTOR OF RECOVERY I am designating a new Director of Recovery for Auto Communities and Workers to cut through red tape and ensure that the full resources of our federal government are leveraged to assist the workers, communities, and regions that rely on our auto industry.



Call it the Federal Unionized Bureau of Auto Repair: FUBAR.
http://twitter.com/victorlams/statuses/1418305097


ine Scariest Words in the English Language Amended

After a decades-long reign as the most terrifying of phrases, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" relinquished its hold on the top spot this morning, thanks to the appearance of a fresh newcomer brought up from a farm team—The Akron Creepy Statists, presumably—by President Barack Obama:


The United States government will stand behind your warrantee...

Speaking from his retirement home in Sweden about his dethroning, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" mourned the changing nature of government expansionism that makes it impossible for him to compete in the Obama era.

"Believe me, I would have loved to guarantee warranties when I was in my prime. But back then, you had to go to other countries to find government interference on that level," he said, wistfully recalling the time he spent in Latvia during much of the 1980s after being run off by the American administration of the time. "These young whippersnappers just don't know how good they've got it."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/03/nine_scariest_words_in_the_eng.asp

[anothersta]

One thing I haven't been able to find out is this (although I haven't done much diggin' yet). Was his teleprompter there? I thought I was going to laugh myself to death when he said the warrantees were even MORE secure now because the gov would be backing it.

I wanta know who the funny one is. I'm thinking the teleprompter cause it tells him to say alot of funny stuff.

[atprm]

Call it the Federal Unionized Bureau of Auto Repair: FUBAR.
http://twitter.com/victorlams/statuses/1418305097

:rolling :rolling :rolling :rolling :rolling :rolling.


in the meantime -- we are extremely worried for our jobs here. :(

[FauxHoChic]

He is toying with them, the big bad auto makers, making those horrible SUV's. So, he has them by the short and curlies and will force them to make clown cars.

[justice250]

And when they make Obama Clown Cars (OCCs) and no one buys them. We have just wasted all that money. What is Obama trying to prove? Gas here is less then $2 a gallon. What happens when an OCC gets hit by a semi truck? Obama think about that?

[atprm]

fill up now... our gas shot up to over $2.25 a gallon in the last 2 weeks.

[atprm]

He is toying with them, the big bad auto makers, making those horrible SUV's. So, he has them by the short and curlies and will force them to make clown cars.

that said -- he rides his Kenyan ass in a CADILLAC limo made exclusively for him!

[FauxHoChic]

fill up now... our gas shot up to over $2.25 a gallon in the last 2 weeks.

Ours is $1.90, it shot up like .10 overnight, but it's holding, I'm sure it's on an upward trend, again. I'd like to know what large families are expected to do, 5 of us barely fit into the Nitro as is. I only wish I'd bought a bigger vehicle.

[atprm]

Workers say Obama treated autos worse than Wall St
Autoworkers say Obama's 'tough love' more tough than love, they get worse treatment than banks

* Jeff Karoub, AP Business Writer
* Monday March 30, 2009, 8:17 pm EDT

DETROIT (AP) -- Many assembly line autoworkers reacted with skepticism and anger Monday to the Obama administration's tough tactics, which stoked long-simmering feelings that the people who put the country on wheels get treated differently than the wizards of Wall Street.

"It's the age-old Wall Street vs. Main Street smackdown again," said Brian Fredline, president of UAW Local 602 at a plant near Lansing. "You have all kinds of funding available to banks that are apparently too big to fail, but they're also too big to be responsible."

"But when it comes to auto manufacturing and middle-class jobs and people that don't matter on Wall Street, there are certainly different standards that we have to meet -- higher standards -- than the financials. That is a double standard that exists and it's unfair," Fredline said.

Many workers -- not generally known for their affection toward executives -- even sympathized with Rick Wagoner, who was forced to step down as chief executive of General Motors Corp. He was by turns called a "sacrificial lamb," "scapegoat" and "fall guy."

"We knew someone was going to have to take the proverbial `bullet,' and it would have made it a lot easier to accept that had the CEOs of the banks also been required to give up their jobs," said Jim Graham, president of a union local in Lordstown, Ohio, where GM produces the Cobalt and Pontiac G5 fuel-efficient cars.

While CEO oustings haven't been widespread among the banking industry, the government did in September reserve the right to remove senior management at American International Group Inc. as part of its agreement to give the insurer $85 billion in emergency aid. AIG Chief Executive Robert Willumstad stepped down as part of that company's bailout package, and the government hand-picked his successor.

Also, banks don't have the union and legacy costs that the automakers do, which make their products more costly versus foreign rivals.

President Barack Obama said he was "absolutely committed" to the survival of a domestic auto industry that can compete internationally. He raised the possibility of controlled bankruptcy for one or both of the troubled automakers.

Obama said the administration will offer GM "adequate working capital" during the next 60 days to produce an acceptable reorganization plan. The government gave Chrysler LLC 30 days to overcome hurdles to a merger with Fiat SpA, the Italian automaker.

Many workers say the government hasn't dictated such terms to insurance giant AIG or the banks in which it's taken an ownership stake. Obama's actions come amid public outrage over bonuses paid to business leaders and AIG executives.

"To see the very people that drove this economy into the ground be rewarded through bonuses while receiving tax dollars is just galling," said Dan Maloney, a machine repairman at auto supplier Delphi Corp.'s plant in Rochester, N.Y., and a union local president. "In light of that, the administration is taking it out, I believe, on the automotive sector."

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm called Obama's moves "a bit of tough love," yet recognized a disconnect between the financial and auto industries.

"Yes, I do think that there has been a different look at those who manufacture than those who make money by flipping paper and I'm hopeful that the financial industry gets as tough a scrutiny as the auto industry has," she told reporters after an event Monday in Macomb Township, about 20 miles northeast of Detroit.

Despite Granholm's criticism and what many workers saw as the president's unduly harsh treatment, Obama's actions might not have a lasting effect on voters.

"It will be accepted, grudgingly perhaps, but accepted by anybody and everybody with a brain in their heads," said Bill Ballenger, editor of a Michigan political newsletter and a former Republican state lawmaker.

Still, Bill Rustem of Public Sector Consultants, a Lansing-based nonpartisan think tank, said Obama's actions carry some risk.

"I think this could have some impact four years from now if the state's economy doesn't begin to turn around," he said. Michigan's unemployment rate rose to 12 percent in February, marking the eighth straight monthly increase.

Workers watched Obama on large-screen TVs in the lobby bar of a hotel in Detroit's Renaissance Center, home to GM's headquarters. Several wearing GM badges declined to comment afterward, but one man whose fortunes are nearly as tied to GM as its employees expressed hope for the future of the company and industry.

"It's definitely a move in the right direction," said Tony Keros, who owns a restaurant and real estate development firm in the building. "Something has to happen."

In Ohio, Graham agreed that Washington just might get it right -- if only because the stakes are too high to fail.

"They understand that there are literally millions of people who depend on the auto industry -- whether directly or indirectly -- and a ripple effect of eliminating a General Motors, Chrysler or Ford would be devastating to an economy that's already been devastated over the past eight years," he said.

Associated Press writers Ben Leubsdorf in Clinton Township, Tim Martin in Delta Township, Ben Dobbin in Rochester, N.Y., and Thomas J. Sheeran in Cleveland contributed to this report.

[Jolie Rouge]

GM, Chrysler are fresh meat, yet critics chew at Obama
Clifford Atiyeh
March 31, 2009 10:46 AM


What a day yesterday.

General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner steps down (because President Obama told him to), the White House announces a bailout cutoff for GM and Chrysler (within 60 and 30 days, respectively) and a state warranty program should both automakers fail, Chrysler CEO Bob Nardelli says a Fiat partnership is advancing (but still dependent on $6 billion more in government aid), and Proton - the Malaysian state automaker that owns Lotus - said days after the Tesla Model S launch that it will retrofit its cars with electric powertrains and sell them in the US under the pre-WWI name "Detroit Electric."

Today Ford said it would cover monthly payments of up to $700 for up to a year on all its cars should customers lose their jobs (except Volvo, which could slip into a ill-fated tangle with the Chinese). GM just followed suit by offering up to $500 per month for nine months. Incredible.

Yesterday turned GM and Chrysler into steaming slabs of fresh, raw meat that columnists and editorial boards could have savaged. But many opinion pieces in the largest metro dailies refrained, and surprisingly, placed more skepticism on the Obama administration.


William J. Holstein of the New York Times on GM's increased quality and lithium-ion push:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/opinion/31holstein.html?_r=1&ref=opinion


"Mr. Obama has not only failed to understand these contributions, he has also deprived G.M. of Mr. Wagoner’s presence on the board. Much of Mr. Wagoner’s knowledge and experience could simply be lost. With Mr. Lutz also about to retire, the two executives most responsible for G.M.’s transformation are gone."

The editorial board of the Los Angeles Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-gm31-2009mar31,0,6194721.story


"But we're more comfortable letting the companies' stakeholders decide what the firms should look like in the future, rather than having the administration decide what's best for them and the car-buying public."

Eugene Robinson from the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/30/AR2009033002442.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1&sub=AR


"It is worth pointing out, however, that the $17.4 billion the federal government has lent GM and Chrysler since the bottom fell out of the automotive market last fall is dwarfed by the more than $1 trillion we've poured into the financial sector."


And then there's rather oversimplified arguments, such as how the Globe's Derrick Jackson compares an Escalade Hybrid to a Prius as reason for GM's failure:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/31/gm_reshuffling_wont_solve_the_problem/


"It is too late. The engines from Japan are passing 50 miles per gallon. GM still brags about a Jurassic that gets 20."

But GM's poor decisions stem far deeper than introducing a new Escalade right as full-size SUV sales plummet. Paul Ingrassia of the Wall Street Journal explains: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123846435523672235.html


"There was a "can't do" mentality that accepted too many brands, too many dealers and too many workers as immutable facts of life that could only be changed slowly and gingerly, if ever. That might have worked had Americans continued buying big pickups and SUVs at a record-setting pace for another decade or two. But that prospect never was realistic, even before car sales collapsed nine months ago."


It's worth noting that Toyota still sells the Land Cruiser and Sequoia, two overweight trucks that don't even crack 20 miles per gallon on the highway. But Toyota has been smart enough to leverage other segments - namely, non-hulking cars - instead of ignoring them. So too, will GM and Chrysler.

All they need is 30 to 60 days, right?


wait a minute... the car makers in trouble are Union shops right?? Toyota is not... are we sure we are fixing teh "right" problem?? Are we sure that having a dictator in the white house is a good thing??


http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandreviews/overdrive/2009/03/gm_chrysler_are_fresh_meat_yet.html

[Jolie Rouge]

“The Obama Autoworks: At GM and Chrysler, politics is now Job One”
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=14631


WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123846388674472223.html

Responding to their plea for $21.6 billion more in taxpayer cash, President Obama yesterday declared "the end of that road" for GM and Chrysler. In the next breath, he seemed to put Washington and Detroit on a new road of politicized industrial policy. So pick your poison.


APThe Administration can be commended for at least promising some tougher medicine. Chrysler got a 30-day ultimatum to sell itself to Italy's Fiat. Having written a $4 billion check to Chrysler in December, taxpayers will still be on the hook for another $6 billion if the deal comes off. On cue yesterday, the companies said that was likely.

GM's CEO Rick Wagoner got the Presidential boot over the weekend, and GM was given two months to reorganize, or get forced into a "quick and surgical" bankruptcy. For once, we agree with Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, who called Mr. Wagoner "a sacrificial lamb." The Administration needed someone to take the fall to sate the anticorporate furies it has helped to unleash. Mr. Wagoner wasn't solely responsible for GM's bad business decisions, but only recently did he promote the kind of radical restructuring the company has long needed. We only wish someone in Washington would also be shown the door, starting with those at the Federal Reserve whose oil-price bubbles also helped to break the car makers.

Sacking a CEO for appearance sake was the easy part. Good luck trying to get the unions to make concessions on wages and legacy costs, and bondholders to agree to reduce the debt burden. A senior Treasury official told us the Administration isn't holding its breath and considers "surgical bankruptcy" the likeliest outcome. In that event, "a shiny new GM" would emerge, said the official, who didn't want to be identified. Asked why GM wasn't forced into Chapter 11 immediately, the official said the Administration wanted to avoid "years of uncontrolled chaos" and needed time to set the stage for "the more surgical process."

Even the Treasury's mention of bankruptcy counts as progress of a sort. President Bush did his legacy no favors by signing off on the bailout in December. Bankruptcy then would have saved taxpayers $17.4 billion (and counting), and started to put those companies or their assets to better use.

However, the United Auto Workers may take a different message from the firing of Mr. Wagoner and from Mr. Obama's speech. To wit, that GM is now politically too big to fail. Listen to Mr. Obama: "We cannot, we must not, and we will not let our auto industry simply vanish." No mention that Ford took no bailout. Or that a third of American auto workers, some 100,000, are employed by successful "transplant," or foreign, car makers in dozens of U.S. plants.

Union leaders outlasted Mr. Wagoner, refusing even to make the kind of concessions that Ford has wrested from them. They'll be even less likely to accept retiree contributions in stock now that the share price has tanked and they assume their Democratic friends will protect them.

Bondholders with $28 billion in GM debt are in for a rougher road. The Administration will offer them pennies on the dollar, nowhere near the 33 cents the ad hoc creditor committee has been seeking in a prepackaged bankruptcy. But Treasury figures the lenders may yet prefer something in a debt-for-equity swap, rather than little or nothing in Chapter 11.

Bankruptcy or not, the larger problem here is Washington's industrial policy. Even if Chrysler merges and GM restructures, Mr. Obama wants the companies to make the kind of cars the political class favors, whether or not consumers want to buy them. "The United States of America will lead the world in building the next generation of clean cars," the President said yesterday. He didn't mention a goal of profitability. To that end, Treasury tapped Fiat's know-how in small vehicles for Chrysler and wants GM to move in this direction.

Yet the Treasury's own "viability summary," released yesterday, points out that "GM's product portfolio is more vulnerable to CAFE [fuel-economy] standard increases than the portfolios of many of its competitors." Only nine of GM's "top 20 profit contributors in 2008" were cars; the rest were SUVs and trucks, which are politically incorrect on Capitol Hill and with the green lobbies. Chrysler has a similar problem. Even GM's much-vaunted electric Volt car is "too expensive to be commercially successful," according to Treasury.

In other words, Mr. Obama's industrial policy vision runs directly counter to a strategy that would get the companies back to profitability as soon as possible. To help them sell those unwanted cars, Mr. Obama yesterday was already pledging that taxpayers will cover new-car warranties. And he urged Congress to pass a new "incentive program" (read: subsidy) for "cleaner car" purchases.

All of which is to say that the taxpayer commitment to the Obama autoworks is only getting started. We're glad the Administration is at least talking a tougher line on bankruptcy than Mr. Bush. But the better route would have been to use Mr. Obama's political capital now, at the start of his term, to use bankruptcy to force the companies and their union to make the hard decisions that politics may still let them avoid.

From now on, GM and Chrysler are Mr. Obama's companies, and taxpayers should hold him accountable for every dollar they are forced to spend to save jobs for the UAW and to make cars that Americans don't necessarily want.

-----


Unfortunately (well, for all of us, not necessarily for the President), the Administration seems ready and willing to show themselves “successful” at “fixing” the auto industry by forcing up gas prices to $4 and more per gallon, a move that will coerce more Americans into buying the kinds of cars Obama and the green lobby would like to see us driving.

This “manufactured consent,” to borrow a phrase, will have the effect of stripping many Americans of choice, driving more workers who can’t afford to purchase newer “green” vehicles back toward the cities (effectively driving them towards heavily-Democrat controlled voting precincts), and creating a gap between the rich and poor — with those wealthy enough still publicly spouting the green line at us while privately they continue to enjoy their towncars, hummers, private jets, ATVs, boats, and SUVs.

This is not fiscal responsibility, nor even real fiscal policy; instead, it is social engineering enacted under the cover of a “fixing” a financial crisis, one that the government itself has been instrumental in creating. And I’m the kind who resents being socially engineered.

– Which won’t make a difference, sadly, until at least several million others of voting age remember to resent it, as well — and until we all begin insisting on rejecting candidates from either party who would have us surrender our freedoms to their bureaucratic ambitions.

[Jolie Rouge]

It seems that throwing billions upon billions of taxpayers dollars has resulted in .....

GM's new CEO says bankruptcy is 'more probable'
By KIMBERLY S. JOHNSON and TOM KRISHER, AP Auto Writers
41 mins ago

DETROIT – General Motors Corp.'s new chief executive said Tuesday that more of the automaker's plants could close and bankruptcy is "more probable" as GM works to meet new, tougher requirements for government aid.

In his first news conference as CEO, Fritz Henderson said he expects the company would "need to take further measures" beyond the five plants the company said it would shutter when it submitted a restructuring plan to the government last month.

GM also is likely to offer another buyout program to workers as it looks to cut labor costs, Henderson said.

President Barack Obama said Monday that GM's initial plans to become viable didn't go far enough. He gave the company 60 days to make more cuts and get more concessions from bondholders and unions or it won't get any more government help.

The Obama administration also asked former CEO Rick Wagoner to resign, and Henderson took over as CEO on Monday.

Henderson said that although GM would prefer not to use bankruptcy protection to save itself, it is "certainly more probable" than in the past.

The company, he said, has until June 1 to accomplish changes sought by the government, or it will be in bankruptcy. The 60-day deadline should be enough time, but if it becomes evident that the changes can't be made by the deadline, GM could go into court sooner, he said.

"It doesn't have to take 60 days. If it's quite clear that we're not able to accomplish what we need to do in terms of operational restructuring, reduction of debt on the balance sheet and what we need to do to accomplish these broad parameters of having a viable business, this will be a management judgment" reviewed by the Obama administration's autos task force, he said.

Henderson also said GM is still talking with potential buyers of the Hummer brand, and a decision on the brand's fate will come in the next few weeks. GM said in a viability plan filed with the government in February that it would make the decision in the first quarter, which ends Tuesday.

In an effort to increase sales, GM launched a program called "Total Confidence" that will make car payments for customers who lose their jobs through no fault of their own.

GM will make up to nine payments of $500 each to qualifying customers. Consumers must qualify for state unemployment benefits to be eligible for the program.

The program starts Wednesday and runs until April 30.

Ford Motor Co. announced a similar program Tuesday, which will take over customer's payment of up to $700 a month for a year in the event of job loss.

Shares of GM fell 32 cents, or 11.9 percent, to $2.38 in midday trading. Ford shares fell 6 cents, or 2.2 percent, to $2.70.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090331/ap_on_bi_ge/gm_henderson

[Jolie Rouge]

Uncle Sam and the perils of ownership
April 23, 2009

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/04/023391.php

The government's large stake in banks including J.P. Morgan and Citibank gives rise to a basic conflict of interest when the government seeks to extract concessions from them as secured lenders in the auto bailout. How is the government resolving the conflict in the negotiations over Chrysler's restructuring and possible integration with Fiat?

The government appears to be acting as an advocate of Chrysler in its negotiations with the banks, and even of specific interests within Chrysler. If the government were operating under the loose rules of professional responsibility that govern attorneys acting as advocates, the banks could require the government to step aside from the proceedings. The government being the government, however, it is free to demand concessions from the banks that are substantially inimical to the banks' interests.

There is a surreal quality to the Wall Street Journal's report on the government's role in the Chrysler negotiations if one is aware of the conflicts of interest in the government's position: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124034225632440083.html


A group of big banks and other lenders rebuffed a Treasury Department request that they slash 85% of Chrysler LLC's secured debt, proposing instead to eliminate about 35% in exchange for a minority stake in the restructured car maker and a seat on its board.

The lenders' counteroffer marks a significant act of brinksmanship as the banks and the Obama administration's auto task force duel over concessions to avoid liquidating the country's third-largest car company.

Chrysler faces an April 30 Treasury deadline to seal an alliance with Italy's Fiat SpA that also requires concessions from lenders, as well as from the United Auto Workers union.

Chrysler owes the lenders, which include Citigroup Inc. and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., about $6.9 billion. But President Barack Obama and his auto team had requested that the banks cut that to $1 billion, while gaining no equity stake in a restructured Chrysler.

In their five-page counteroffer, which was sent to the Treasury late Monday, the lenders said they are prepared to cut Chrysler's first-lien debt by $2.4 billion, or down to about $4.5 billion, in exchange for a 40% equity stake and a Chrysler board seat, according to a copy of the proposal provided by individuals outside the lenders' group.

The lenders also are demanding that Fiat pour $1 billion in capital into Chrysler in exchange for whatever equity stake it would gain. That could be a source of conflict with the Italian auto maker, which has said it instead wants to give Chrysler only technology.

The Treasury shot back, making it clear that the government didn't plan to accept the lenders' proposed terms.

"It is neither in the interest of Chrysler's senior lenders nor the country for them to advance a proposal that would yield them an unjustified return as Chrysler, its employees and other stakeholders are working tirelessly to help this company restructure," the Treasury said in a statement.

"Our hope and expectation is that these lenders take a more constructive position in the coming days that reflects the actual situation that they and the company face," the statement continued.

In making their case for a significantly smaller sacrifice than what the government wants, the lenders have argued that their fiduciary duty to their own shareholders and investors requires them to recoup as much as possible from the car maker. The lenders have told Treasury officials they believe they could recover at least 65% of their loans if Chrysler is liquidated in bankruptcy.

In the restructuring the government is seeking to engineer, the government assumes that the $4 billion it lent Chrysler largely will be wiped out, as will a combined $2 billion Chrysler owes Cerberus Capital Management LP and Daimler AG, Chrysler's last two owners. The government would then put in an additional $6 billion to fund the operations of Fiat-Chrysler.

One senses that the government is not exactly operating as an impartial arbiter of the interests at stake in Chrysyler's restructuring. The Journal reports that one assumption upsetting to some lenders was that Chrysler would pay about $3 billion total to a UAW retiree health-care fund in 2009 and 2010, which is owed about $10 billion and would also get an unknown amount of equity in the new Chrysler even though the fund is behind the banks, Cerberus, Daimler and the U.S. in the order to be paid.

Toward the end of the hard copy of the article in the Journal yesterday comes a memorable sentence that I don't see in the article's online version:


Many of the lenders were angered by the demands made by the head of the administration's auto team, Steven Rattner, who wanted the banks to forgive $5.8 billion of the $6.9 billion owed them in exchange for nothing.

How unreasonable can you get? The article then quotes one of the bank participants in the negotiations: "What the government was asking for was completely without precedent in the history of bankruptcy in the United States. Our reaction to their proposal was, 'Forget it.'"

The article fails to note the conflicts of interest in the government's role in the Chrysler negotiations, perhaps because the government's interest in the banks doesn't appear to affect its position in the negotiations in an obvious way. The Journal makes up for this oversight in Holman Jenkins's column on the government's role in the auto bailouts. The government's conflicts of interest do not escape Jenkins's gimlet eye.

Jenkins asks: Wasn't TARP supposed to be about restoring a healthy banking system? Isn't that a tad inconsistent with banks just voluntarily relinquishing valuable claims on borrowers?

Jenkins responds: Don't ask.

[krisharry]

Forwarding my bailout app as we speak, I'm only asking for a measly $10 million, just a drop in the bucket. LOL

[Jolie Rouge]

I don't even need that much 200 K would pay my mortgage outright, all my families medical bills, credit cards, and leave a little left over for college funds.

[Jolie Rouge]

GM's Pension: A Ticking Time Bomb for Taxpayers?
By Joseph R. Szczesny 2 hrs 5 mins ago

General Motors Corp. may no longer be the world's biggest automaker, but it still operates the country's largest pension fund. The threat to its pension plans has always been an issue, butit took on a new urgency when GM disclosed April 7 that its plans were underfunded by more than $27 billion, with more than half of that being owed to U.S. workers and retirees. Across town, a post- bankrupt Chrysler faces its own pension shortfall. Moreover, a report last week from the Government Accounting Office (GAO) says the pension crisis in the auto industry could create an unprecedented crisis for the federal Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp., a government-sponsored organization to backstop company pensions.


When the two automakers emerged from bankruptcy reorganization the pension problems were seen as a more distant issue, and presumably one that would be eased by economic growth. But the auto industry is facing a slow recovery, and neither the new GM nor the new Chrysler has produced a profit. Christopher Liddell, GM's new chief financial officer, has stopped short of predicting that GM will be profitable this year, while Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne is hoping Chrysler can break even this year. Both GM and Chrysler are also moving to build smaller vehicles, which have traditionally produced smaller profits. The pension funding crisis could begin in 2013, or before either company is fully profitable. (See a 1950 TIME piece on the history of pensions.)


Here are the chief questions raised by the potential pension crisis:


Could taxpayers really be on the hook for UAW pensions?


Yes. GM could face a funding crisis in 2013 or 2014 when, under the current projections, the automaker will be required to make more than $12 billion in contributions to its pension funds to keep them solvent, according to the GAO analysis. Chrysler's estimated future pension obligation is $3 billion. If the companies cannot meet their funding obligations they may have to terminate their plans, and the financial responsibilities (up to government limits) would be assumed by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. The funding could easily become a serious challenge for the PBGC, which says it is now facing $168 billion in possible plan terminations across a range of companies, many of them auto suppliers. The PBGC is privately funded, but since it was created by an act of Congress and its board of directors consists of the Secretaries of Labor, Commerce and Treasury, it's possible that the U.S. Government would step in if the agency came up desperately short of funds. Of course, the Obama Administration could allow GM or Chrysler to defer their pension contributions, but there would likely be stiff resistance to another wink-and-a-pass for automakers. (See 10 milestones on the road to GM's bankruptcy.)


Won't a successful IPO of new GM stock resolve the pension funding problem?


No. The actual timing of the initial public offering and the amount of money it raises will depend on market conditions. However, even if an IPO is successful the money would go to the U.S. Treasury to repay it for supporting the company through bankruptcy. In addition to direct aid of $8 billion that GM plans to repay, the government also loaned GM another $49.98 billion in exchange for a 61% stake in the automaker with the understanding the GM would do a public offering of stock as a way for the government to get repaid. The same holds true for Chrysler if and when it gets around to an IPO, which CEO Marchionne has said is unlikely before 2012. (See the 50 worst cars of all time.)


What happens to GM and Chrysler pensioners if the PBGC takes over the funds?


The retirees could face dramatic cuts. The PBGC promises a certain level of benefits, but $35 billion of the two automakers' promised pension benefits fall beyond the PBGC guarantees. In 2010, a single 65-year old retiree is guaranteed a maximum of $54,000 per year under the PBGC guidelines, and many GM retirees have earned benefits in excess of the PBGC limits. Last summer, the PBGC did take over the salaried pension plans belonging to GM's former subsidiary, Delphi Corp. Most of Delphi's 20,000 salaried pensioners, many of whom started out working at GM, saw their pensions cut. Thus, a termination of GM's or Chrysler's pension plans could likely result in pain for both pensioners and taxpayers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100415/us_time/08599198195800/print;_ylt=As115wqSrs1f0.JwQTNBNZjBF4l4;_ylu=X3oDM TBvajZzaTFyBHBvcwMxNQRzZWMDdG9wBHNsawNwcmludA--

[Jolie Rouge]

Bonus-Mania at GM
By Doug Powers • February 14, 2011 03:32 PM

In 2009, when Barack Obama announced that the federal government was assuming a 60% stake in General Motors, the president called the American people “reluctant shareholders” in that company. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-we-are-reluctant-shareholders-with-gm.html
As shareholders, when might we expect a dividend check? The general taxpaying public will probably see Justin Bieber on the cover of AARP Magazine before that happens. Taxpayers were so reluctant to hold a share that GM figured we’d also be reluctant to accept a bonus payment — so instead of insulting us again, they’re just spreading it all around amongst themselves: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110214/ap_on_re_us/us_general_motors_bonuses




DETROIT – General Motors Co. will pay more than $189 million in profit-sharing to 48,000 U.S. hourly workers and millions more in performance bonuses to salaried employees, according to company documents obtained by The Associated Press.

GM will pay most hourly workers more than $4,000 each as compensation for its strong financial performance last year, said a person briefed on the bonuses. The payments come less than two years after the automaker emerged from bankruptcy protection with the help of a huge government bailout. They’re more than double the previous record payment of $1,775 in 1999, at the height of the boom in sales of sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks.
[...]
The person briefed on the payments did not know the total cost of the salaried bonuses, but it’s likely to top $200 million. Most GM salaried workers make more than $100,000. A bonus of 8 percent, the midpoint of the range, would give them roughly $8,000. That means GM would pay out roughly $224 million.

GM’s bailout-buddy Chrysler is getting involved in the bonus action as well. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-02-10/gm-chrysler-salaried-workers-bonuses-said-to-reach-as-much-as-50-of-pay.html

At least this might make the union back off a little and just be thankful to have a good paying job in this rough economy, right? Right? http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2011/02/gm_worker_3000_profit-sharing.html#incart_mce


FLINT, Michigan — A local union official said today that potentially record-breaking profit-sharing checks from General Motors would mean a lot to workers, but wouldn’t make up for contract concessions taken over the past few years.

That’s just a local guy though — I’m sure the UAW president will be satisfied… or maybe not: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41779


UAW president Bob King wants to “reclaim some of the $7,000 to $30,000 in concessions each worker gave up since 2005 to help the U.S. automakers survive.” This would, of course, kill the auto companies again in fairly short order, requiring another massive taxpayer resurrection.

Another massive taxpayer resurrection — unfortunately I think that’s the idea.



comments



Hey, Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in anticipation of being effective in furthering world peace. GM is giving out bonuses to union people in anticipation of future profits. With redistributionist economics, profits and merit are obsolete principles.



---


They’re more than double the previous record payment of $1,775 in 1999, at the height of the boom in sales of sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks.

Other than government rerouting of our money, what “height of the boom” are we at today?

---

I suppose it was too much to expect that they would use those “profits” to pay back some of their government loans.

Yup. Most likely, the govnernment probably didn’t expect to be paid back nor care if it wasn’t. Since the money isn’t theirs to begin with, the government figures it can always get more taxpayer money, sell more bonds, write more IOUS so it can make more loans that won’t be paid back in the future. Its all about what government wants to accomplish – redistributing money to politically favored entities is the rage and being good stewards of taxpayer money hasn’t been nor will it be in the plans of this admin.

---

I am waiting for Obama to be outraged over bonuses being paid to a company that received a bailout http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7945774.stm in 3…2…1…. oh wait .... these are union employees never mind…



http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/14/bonus-mania-at-gm/

[Jolie Rouge]

Bonus-Mania at GM
By Doug Powers • February 14, 2011 03:32 PM

In 2009, when Barack Obama announced that the federal government was assuming a 60% stake in General Motors, the president called the American people “reluctant shareholders” in that company. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-we-are-reluctant-shareholders-with-gm.html
As shareholders, when might we expect a dividend check? The general taxpaying public will probably see Justin Bieber on the cover of AARP Magazine before that happens. Taxpayers were so reluctant to hold a share that GM figured we’d also be reluctant to accept a bonus payment — so instead of insulting us again, they’re just spreading it all around amongst themselves: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110214/ap_on_re_us/us_general_motors_bonuses




DETROIT – General Motors Co. will pay more than $189 million in profit-sharing to 48,000 U.S. hourly workers and millions more in performance bonuses to salaried employees, according to company documents obtained by The Associated Press.

GM will pay most hourly workers more than $4,000 each as compensation for its strong financial performance last year, said a person briefed on the bonuses. The payments come less than two years after the automaker emerged from bankruptcy protection with the help of a huge government bailout. They’re more than double the previous record payment of $1,775 in 1999, at the height of the boom in sales of sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks.
[...]
The person briefed on the payments did not know the total cost of the salaried bonuses, but it’s likely to top $200 million. Most GM salaried workers make more than $100,000. A bonus of 8 percent, the midpoint of the range, would give them roughly $8,000. That means GM would pay out roughly $224 million.

GM’s bailout-buddy Chrysler is getting involved in the bonus action as well. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2011-02-10/gm-chrysler-salaried-workers-bonuses-said-to-reach-as-much-as-50-of-pay.html

At least this might make the union back off a little and just be thankful to have a good paying job in this rough economy, right? Right? http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2011/02/gm_worker_3000_profit-sharing.html#incart_mce


FLINT, Michigan — A local union official said today that potentially record-breaking profit-sharing checks from General Motors would mean a lot to workers, but wouldn’t make up for contract concessions taken over the past few years.

That’s just a local guy though — I’m sure the UAW president will be satisfied… or maybe not: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=41779


UAW president Bob King wants to “reclaim some of the $7,000 to $30,000 in concessions each worker gave up since 2005 to help the U.S. automakers survive.” This would, of course, kill the auto companies again in fairly short order, requiring another massive taxpayer resurrection.

Another massive taxpayer resurrection — unfortunately I think that’s the idea.



comments



Hey, Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in anticipation of being effective in furthering world peace. GM is giving out bonuses to union people in anticipation of future profits. With redistributionist economics, profits and merit are obsolete principles.



---


They’re more than double the previous record payment of $1,775 in 1999, at the height of the boom in sales of sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks.

Other than government rerouting of our money, what “height of the boom” are we at today?

---

I suppose it was too much to expect that they would use those “profits” to pay back some of their government loans.

Yup. Most likely, the govnernment probably didn’t expect to be paid back nor care if it wasn’t. Since the money isn’t theirs to begin with, the government figures it can always get more taxpayer money, sell more bonds, write more IOUS so it can make more loans that won’t be paid back in the future. Its all about what government wants to accomplish – redistributing money to politically favored entities is the rage and being good stewards of taxpayer money hasn’t been nor will it be in the plans of this admin.

---

I am waiting for Obama to be outraged over bonuses being paid to a company that received a bailout http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7945774.stm in 3…2…1…. oh wait .... these are union employees never mind…



http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/14/bonus-mania-at-gm/

[Jolie Rouge]

Congrats taxpayers! Not only are your involuntary contributions to the Federal gov't funding its lawsuit against AZ for daring to defend itself from invasion (Uh, doesn't the Constitution mandate the Feds do that? Never mind...). Now your bailout of GM is creating 1,000 new jobs - in MEXICO! That's right. You get to fund new jobs in Mexico, AND the theft of American jobs by illegals right here at home


Thanks For The Bailout Suckers; GM to invest extra $540 million in Mexico to build motors
Reported By breitbart.com

US giant General Motors will invest $540 million to produce two low-emission motors in central Mexico, the company announced here Thursday, accompanied by President Felipe Calderon.

The latest project for GM in Mexico would create 500 direct and another 500 indirect jobs in its plant in Toluca, Calderon said.

GM has four plants in Mexico, and has invested some $5 billion here since 2006, Calderon said.

GM was left reeling by an industry slump when the global economic crisis hit. It received 49.5 billion dollars from the US Treasury and emerged from a bankruptcy restructuring in 2009.

It successfully returned to public trading last November by raising 23.1 billion dollars in an initial stock offering — the largest in history.

http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=14524

One more reason to NOT buy any GM products. “Buy American” – Obviously no longer applies to them.

[Jolie Rouge]

President Obama's auto bailout claims: 'Phony accounting'?
Wed Jun 8, 6:45 am ET

New York – The Washington Post fact-checks the president's recent speech about Chrysler's bailout repayments, and takes issue with... almost all of it http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/president-obamas-phony-accounting-on-the-auto-industry-bailout/2011/06/06/AG3nefKH_blog

Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler is not impressed with President Obama's short, rousing defense of the 2008-09 auto bailout, particularly Obama's claim that "Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency." Such "chicanery," says Kessler, conveniently ignores taxpayer loans to Chrysler before Obama's inauguration. The fact checker gives the president three "Pinocchios" (out of four), and calls the Friday speech "one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech," with "virtually every claim" requiring an asterisk. Is Obama really relying on "phony accounting" to sell his rescue of GM and Chrysler?

Yes, Obama is trying to sell a lemon: Kessler's "devastating critique" is spot on, says Ed Morrissey at Hot Air. If you count the very relevant $4 billion that George W. Bush handed Chrysler before Obama's inauguration, taxpayers actually lost $1.3 billion on the Chrysler bailout. There would be no need for this "trumped-up rhetoric" if the bailout were really a "success."

"Obama's auto-bailout speech 'one of the most misleading...'" http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/07/wapo-fact-checker-obamas-auto-bailout-speech-one-of-the-most-misleading-collections-of-assertions/


No, Kessler swung and missed: "No one's perfect," so you can't blame "anointed fact checkers" like Kessler for "muddying the facts" sometimes, says White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer. In this case, "it is not only factually accurate for President Obama to note the full recovery — and then some — of the funds he decided to commit to Chrysler," but also the dire consequences for the auto industry and the economy if he had not acted so decisively.

"Fact checking the fact checker" http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/06/07/fact-checking-fact-checker

Obama wasn't just misleading, he was also ungracious: The president's claims that Republicans wanted to do nothing to help save GM and Chrysler is "especially disingenuous," even for Obama, says Daniel Foster at National Review. What about Bush's $4 billion in aid, which "Obama supported" as a candidate? The president only made that disappear "when it became rhetorically convenient to do so."

"The Washington Post fact-checks Obama on the auto bailouts" http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/269037/iwashington-posti-fact-checks-obama-auto-bailouts-daniel-foster

http://news.yahoo.com/s/theweek/216056;_ylt=AnTjY.rSe91VQWvPtcO.Ay_9wxIF;_ylu=X3oD MTJjOWZxMGJ2BGFzc2V0A3RoZXdlZWsvMjAxMTA2MDgvMjE2MD U2BGNwb3MDMgRwb3MDNQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNw cmVzaWRlbnRvYmE-

June 07. 2011 12:57PM
White House defends auto bailout accounting
David Shepardson/ Detroit News Washington Bureau

Washington — The White House defended Tuesday its accounting of the government's $85 billion auto bailouts after a fact-checker accused the Obama administration of "misleading" the public.

White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer rebutted the Washington Post's analysis of recent comments on the auto bailouts that the newspaper headlined "President Obama's phony accounting on the auto industry bailout."

On Friday at a visit to a Chrysler plant in Toledo, Obama touted the government's agreement to completely exit Chrysler. "Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency — and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule," Obama said.

The Post argued that was misleading since the Bush administration loaned Chrysler $4 billion.

In total, Chrysler repaid $11.2 billion of the $12.5 billion total bailout — including interest payments. That includes all of the $8.5 billion advanced by the Obama administration. "Let's be clear: Had President Obama not taken action, Chrysler would have liquidated and that money would have been gone. Instead of losing all $4 billion of those dollars, we have recovered more than 70 percent of them for taxpayers, in addition to all of the funds committed by President Obama," Pfeiffer wrote. "Given those facts, it is not only factually accurate for President Obama to note the full recovery — and then some — of the funds he decided to commit to Chrysler, but it is an accurate description of the circumstance he faced."

The Post called the math "chicanery."

"Under the president's math, Chrysler paid back 100 percent of Obama's loan and less than 70 percent of Bush's loan. A more honest presentation would combine the two figures to say U.S. taxpayers got back 90 percent of what they invested," the paper wrote.

Last week, a White House report noted the most recent estimate of the government's overall auto bailout losses is $14 billion — down from more than $40 billion at one point. Most of the losses are expected in the government's $49.5 billion bailout of General Motors Co. At current stock prices, the government would lose about $12 billion on the GM bailout.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110607/AUTO01/106070423/1361/White-House-defends-auto-bailout-accounting


comments

Don't payments on loans go to the oldest debt first? so the payments Obama is counting towards his loans are really payments on earlier loans from the taxpayers...

---

The auto industry would not have failed without the bailout. The companies would have gone into Chapter 11, restructured on a better basis, no taxpayer bailouts, no screwing over bond holders and stronger than they are now. Ford did it without bailouts...but Ford had and has better management.

[Jolie Rouge]

GM's Pension: A Ticking Time Bomb for Taxpayers?
By Joseph R. Szczesny 04-15-2010

What happens to GM and Chrysler pensioners if the PBGC takes over the funds?

The retirees could face dramatic cuts. The PBGC promises a certain level of benefits, but $35 billion of the two automakers' promised pension benefits fall beyond the PBGC guarantees. In 2010, a single 65-year old retiree is guaranteed a maximum of $54,000 per year under the PBGC guidelines, and many GM retirees have earned benefits in excess of the PBGC limits. Last summer, the PBGC did take over the salaried pension plans belonging to GM's former subsidiary, Delphi Corp. Most of Delphi's 20,000 salaried pensioners, many of whom started out working at GM, saw their pensions cut. Thus, a termination of GM's or Chrysler's pension plans could likely result in pain for both pensioners and taxpayers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20100415/us_time/08599198195800/print;_ylt=As115wqSrs1f0.JwQTNBNZjBF4l4;_ylu=X3oDM TBvajZzaTFyBHBvcwMxNQRzZWMDdG9wBHNsawNwcmludA--

Finally: Delphi retirees break through Obama stonewall on UAW bailout
By Michelle Malkin • June 12, 2012 08:42 AM

I have been reporting to you about how President Obama’s UAW bailout threw tens of thousands of nonunion autoworkers under the bus since September 2010. It’s the real-life horror story of some 20,000 white-collar workers at Delphi, a leading auto parts company spun off from GM a decade ago. As Washington rushed to nationalize the U.S. auto industry with $80 billion in taxpayer “rescue” funds and avoid contested court termination proceedings, the White House auto team schemed with Big Labor bosses to preserve UAW members’ costly pension funds by shafting their nonunion counterparts. In addition, the nonunion pensioners lost all of their health and life insurance benefits. The abused workers — most from hard-hit northeast Ohio, Michigan and neighboring states — had devoted decades of their lives as secretaries, technicians, engineers and sales employees at Delphi/GM. Some workers have watched up to 70 percent of their pensions vanish.

It is important to keep telling the story of their continuing legal nightmare because the White House keeps telling fables about the “success” of the pro-worker auto bailout. The Delphi workers are fighting Chicago-style collusion and corruption. And their most recent court battle exposes, once again, the fantasy of Obama’s commitments to real fairness and transparency.

The latest from the Delphi Salaried Retirees Association:

Delphi Salaried Retirees Receive 62,000 Pages of Documents from Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation in Lawsuit

Emails and reports finally released 20 months after federal judge first ordered PBGC to participate in lawsuit’s discovery phase. PBGC states it will produce a second batch of documents by end of June

Retirees believe Obama’s Auto Task Force directed PBGC to unjustifiably and illegally terminate pension plan in 2009

Government officials’ refusal to disclose how decision was made ignores Obama directive that “transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”


Release Date: Monday, June 11, 2012

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Twenty months after Federal U.S. District Judge Arthur Tarnow ordered in September 2010, that salaried retirees of auto parts maker Delphi Corp. were entitled to conduct discovery in their lawsuit against the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, the PBGC on Thursday finally made its first document production, turning over approximately 62,000 pages of emails and documents. The pension agency said it would make a second production of a similar size by month’s end. The materials concern the PBGC’s 2009 termination of the pension plan of more than 20,000 current and future salaried Delphi retirees during the auto bailout, resulting in the reductions of earned pensions by as much as 70 percent.

“Given the president’s statement on his first day in office that ‘transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency, (see it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72g7qmeP1dE), why did we have to pry this information out of a government agency led by an Obama appointee?” said Dennis Black, chairman of the Delphi Salaried Retirees Association (DSRA). “Our legal bills are several million dollars to get to this point. Citizens shouldn’t have to hire lawyers to fight against taxpayer-paid lawyers just to find out how and why onerous government policy decisions were made.”

Having already reviewed more than 100,000 pages of discovery from non-governmental parties involved in the matter, the retirees are confident they can prove the PBGC illegally terminated the Delphi salaried retiree pension plan in 2009 under pressure from President Obama’s Auto Task Force, which reported to the U.S. Treasury Department. The retirees’ rights under federal labor law (ERISA) and the U.S. Constitution were trampled, according to the retirees’ lawsuit.

TOPPING UP PENSIONS OF UNION-REPRESENTED DELPHI RETIREES

Union-represented Delphi retirees were treated differently than salaried retirees when the PBGC terminated the Delphi pension plan in 2009. Monies from U.S. taxpayers were provided by the Auto Task Force in its $50 billion bailout of GM so the automaker can today top-up the lower PBGC pensions being paid to union-represented Delphi retirees, making their pensions whole.

“Some say this was done because GM was contractually obligated to honor its 1999 labor agreements with labor unions,” said Charles Cunningham, chair of DSRA’s legal committee. “But GM’s bankruptcy court found in 2009 that the ‘new’ GM was not obligated to honor any of ‘old’ GM’s contracts. We want the government to re-examine its discriminatory treatment of us vs. the union-represented Delphi retirees.” We are glad that the Union workers received this “top up” and have been spared the harm and suffering the salaried workers have had to endure. All we want is equal treatment with those people, most of whom we worked side-by-side during our careers.”

Vice President Biden recently told a TV news reporter in Youngstown, Ohio, “We were able to help the hourly folks.” (See it [here]).

“Boy, that statement by Mr. Biden sure caught our attention,” said Black. “For the last three years, the Obama Administration has stated both publicly and in court that it didn’t make any decisions regarding the pension plans. Is the vice president taking credit for something they didn’t do, or is he admitting that the Administration did in fact manipulate the bankruptcy process for the benefit of only the hourly workers?”

SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL BELIEVES AUTO TASK FORCE PLAYED A ROLE

In a major recent development, Christy L. Romero, the congressionally-appointed special inspector general (SIG) of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) wrote to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee chair Darrell Issa that “SIGTARP believes that the Auto Task Force played a role in the pension decision.” She added that three Obama Administration appointed officials of the Auto Task Force — Ron Bloom, Matthew Feldman and Harry Wilson — have refused to be interviewed. “These individuals’ failure to speak to SIGTARP on this issue poses a significant obstacle to SIGTARP’s ability to complete its audit,” said Romero.

“This statement by SIGTARP supported what we’ve believed for a long time,” said Black. The retirees also welcomed the reaction of U.S. Congressman Mike Turner (OH), who recently wrote to Chairman Issa, saying: “Because the SIGTARP does not possess testimonial subpoena authority, I am requesting that the [Committee] interview these individuals concerning the role they played in the decision to take the retirement and health benefits of these retirees.”
U.S. TREASURY ALSO REFUSING TO PROVIDE INFORMATION

The retirees also are battling in federal court the U.S. Treasury Department, to which the Auto Task Force officials reported, to gain similar information as part of the lawsuit’s discovery phase, and are hopeful that Treasury will be ordered to cooperate in discovery as well.

OBAMA RHETORIC DOESN’T MATCH ADMINISTRATION’S HANDLING OF DELPHI SALARIED PENSION PLAN

Given the retirees’ long legal fight over the past three years, they view as empty promises these remarks by President Obama in the White House on Jan. 21, 2009: “For a long time now there’s been too much secrecy in this city. The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this Administration stands on the side, not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known … the mere fact that you have the legal power to keep something secret does not mean you should always use it … the Freedom of Information Act is perhaps the most powerful instrument we have for making our government honest and transparent, and of holding it accountable. And I expect members of my Administration to not simply live up to the letter, but also the spirit of this law.” (See this at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72g7qmeP1dE )

[Jolie Rouge]

continues...




And Black noted that, while running for president in May of 2008, Mr. Obama told a Gresham, Oregon, audience (see it on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHJzTdCsiGk): “Pension protection is something we should put at the top of our priority list. Right now, bankruptcy laws are more focused on protecting banks than protecting pensions and I don’t think that’s fair. It’s not the America I believe in … If you work hard and play by the rules, then you’ve earned your pension. If a company goes bankrupt, then workers need to be our top priority, not an afterthought.”

“We worked hard and played by the rules,” said Black. “Fair and equitable treatment is all we ask from our federal government. We’ve shown the Administration several proposals for restoring our pensions without Congress having to appropriate any taxpayer funds, but they continue to ignore us. Many Delphi salaried retirees and their families have endured bankruptcy, foreclosure, breakups and worse. Their children, grandchildren, former business associates, friends and neighbors know that they have suffered long enough.”

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/06/12/finally-delphi-workers-break-through-obama-stonewall-on-uaw-bail/#comments


comments


Citizens shouldn’t have to hire lawyers to fight against taxpayer-paid lawyers just to find out how and why onerous government policy decisions were made.”

As much as the money, or the absence thereof, this is really at the core of the issue. Apply it to the gov. agency of your choosing.

What really enables this entire injustice is, at the same time the DOL and EBSA ( Employee Benefit Security Administration ) seem unwilling or impotent to DO anything about it?

Nearly every action the Administration has taken is in direct violation of the ERISA Act of 1974. Normally, and I’ve spent half my life involved in these types of disputes on behalf of clients, once you mention the DOL the former employer stops playing games and comes across w/ the money.

Hope & Change my friends…

..

Trouble is FDR’s socialist policies didn’t bring us out of the depression and we are stuck with his legacy costing us hundreds of billions a year that we really can’t afford. You know, Oblather is right on track for that one.

And as for illegal, the entire auto bailout scheme was basically illegal. Quite frankly we should have let GM, and especially Chrysler, fall. I know the cost, but the economy would recover and we would be much better off for it. We’re not going to get to healing if we keep avoiding the pain.

...


As Washington rushed to nationalize the U.S. auto industry with $80 billion in taxpayer “rescue” funds and avoid contested court termination proceedings, the White House auto team schemed with Big Labor bosses to preserve UAW members’ costly pension funds by shafting their nonunion counterparts.

Enough is enough. Under no circumstances should Obama, his handlers and his personal operatives, escape criminal prosecution. Election or appointment to a national political office should grant no one free licence to engage in criminal activity. This is just bizarre. We must compel Congressional leadership to sack-up and steel themselves to investigate and prosecute this administration to the fullest extent of the law.

The public trust of the nation and even the world depends on asserting the rule of law here in these crony schemes as well as the Subprime debacle. And that is just the purely financial malfeasances…. Fast and Furious is still to be resolved.

..

If the Democrats believe that stripping pension benefits from non-union workers is legal, and changing stock ownership by caveat is also “a good thing”, then perhaps the next administration should eliminate the pension benefits (in the same manner) for short duration government appointees, or those who only served in the Obama mis-administration, and funnel it instead back to those from the private sector, who had theirs stolen/misappropriated by the Obamao-ist state-sponsored thug-heads.

Why should limited-service politicos, Democrat Party acolytes and thugs, be rewarded with the dividends from private sector (non-union) employees whom have worked, and saved for years?

It seems to me that what Obama’s crowd has done to auto industry investors, is akin to foreclosing someone’s home without legal authority when they are a few short years away from having it paid off, and tossing them into the street without due process or method for legal recourse/relief.

..

This piece over at American Thinker is pretty telling, and somewhat relevant. http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/a_pre-revolutionary_situation.html

And Charles Payne just happens to cover this in his morning commentary. http://www.wstreet.com/member/commentary.asp?con_id=27106

The Telling part of Payne’s commentary is close to the end. For employee, self employed and retiree, net worth is lower in 2011 than it was in 2007. BUT — for the non-working loafer, net worth is actually higher in 2011 than in 2007 by a very large percent.

..

Must reading for you readers (and maybe even some commenters) if you want to understand why LOTE is the central disease fueling the kabuki. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-%E2%80%98lesser-two-evils%E2%80%99-con-game

Let’s stop paying for the same real estate over and over again. Let’s make this election count for a change.

...

This reminds me of when all those Chrysler dealers were screwed out of their family businesses when Obama closed mostly Republican dealerships. This man’s corruption knows no limits! He has broken every covenant between a President of the United States and The People! Treason is the word I am using and it fits. I don’t want this creep just defeated…I want him in jail. I know prison won’t happen, but there must be some way to humiliate him!!! A landslide would help.

..


[R]emarks by President Obama in the White House on Jan. 21, 2009: “For a long time now there’s been too much secrecy in this city. The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this Administration stands on the side, not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known … the mere fact that you have the legal power to keep something secret does not mean you should always use it … the Freedom of Information Act is perhaps the most powerful instrument we have for making our government honest and transparent, and of holding it accountable. And I expect members of my Administration to not simply live up to the letter, but also the spirit of this law.”

This from the person who has fought relentlessly for over 3 years to keep his birth, academic and voting records secret.

[Jolie Rouge]

Did Obama admin officials lie to Congress about Delphi pension termination?
posted at 10:01 am on August 7, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

I don’t know about you, but I’m beginning to detect a pattern from the Obama administration. When called to testify before Congress, executive branch officials say, “No, no, no” … but their e-mails later say, “Yes, yes, yes“: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/07/emails-geithner-treasury-drove-cutoff-of-non-union-delphi-workers-pensions/


Emails obtained by The Daily Caller show that the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Timothy Geithner, was the driving force behind terminating the pensions of 20,000 salaried retirees at the Delphi auto parts manufacturing company.

The move, made in 2009 while the Obama administration implemented its auto bailout plan, appears to have been made solely because those retirees were not members of labor unions.

The internal government emails contradict sworn testimony, in federal court and before Congress, given by several Obama administration figures. They also indicate that the administration misled lawmakers and the courts about the sequence of events surrounding the termination of those non-union pensions, and that administration figures violated federal law.


Read through all of The DC’s report, but the key e-mail exchanges appear to be those between Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation staffers Joseph House, Karen Morris, and Michael Rae. The PBGC has the only statutory authority to close down a pension fund, and Obama administration officials have repeatedly claimed that the PBGC made the Delphi decision on the non-union pension independently. However, the meeting called to determine the status of that pension didn’t include PBGC officials — who got disinvited from the event:


Morris had written earlier that day that the PBGC team would “probably get invited to the Monday meeting at tomorrow’s meeting,” and that the Monday meeting would involve “talks” on the GM and Delphi portions of the bailout plan. Those strategies, she wrote, including “pension issues,” would be “kicking off” that Monday.

But after the Friday meeting, House emailed PBGC staffers Karen Morris and John Menke. “We’ve been disinvited,” he wrote. “It’s for the best.”

“Who uninvited us?” Morris replied.

“Treasury,” House responded.


Treasury official Matt Feldman then starts coming into the picture as “a facilitator” of the Deplhi decision, to us the DC’s characterization:


In another series of emails between PBGC’s John Menke and Karen Morris, Feldman — an Obama administration official — emerges as the facilitator of the Delphi pension termination. Menke wrote of the need to obtain a “rubber stamp” from Treasury Department officials before the cutoff was finalized, and from others who were supposed to be excluded from the decision-making process.

Menke emailed Morris on July 14, 2009, laying out details of the final deal that was to deny 20,000 non-union Delphi workers most of hteir pension benefits.

“Terry [Deneen], Joe [House] and Greenhill seem inclined to tell Feldman that this does it for us,” Menke wrote. “Terry is taking it up to Board reps meeting this afternoon and expecting to get a head nod, which he will then have Greenhill convey to Treasury.”


Very obviously, Treasury was at least involved in the decision-making, if not the ultimate decider of the Delphi pension termination. A Treasury spokesman insisted to the DC that the PBGC made the decision on its own, but it looks pretty clear that the PBGC was at least coordinating efforts with the Obama administration. To the extent that any officials testified differently, we may be seeing more subpoenas and Congressional hearings in the near future. One question in particular will be why the PBGC terminated the non-union pension while taxpayers absorbed the union pension obligations, and whether that outcome was coordinated all along by the White House.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/07/did-obama-admin-officials-lie-to-congress-about-delphi-pension-termination/


comments

Unless Romney’s willing to smack Obama with this, it won’t effect undecideds.

Romney has to say Obama authorized the killing of 20,000 non-union pensions and for the public to pay for the union ones.

Anything more complicated, forget it.

..

Story sure smells like perjury, grand jury, charges, trial, and prison for some administration folks. Screwed bond holders will be next to sue if they haven’t already.

..



One question in particular will be why the PBGC terminated the non-union pension while taxpayers absorbed the union pension obligations, and whether that outcome was coordinated all along by the White House.

Gee, wonder why the Obama administration would choose to reward union members (with taxpayer money) and screw over non-union members?

Hmmmmmmmmm. Quite a mystery there.\

...



Did Obama admin officials lie to Congress about Delphi pension termination?

Oh hell, YES! And let’s remember that the e-mails contradict sworn testimony. Meaning Obama officials lied to Congress. Scooter Libby went to jail for less. The 20,000 non-union people who lost their pensions deserve an investigation and a full explanation.


What amazes me - if this were attached to the Bush ( or any GOP ) administration - certain people here at BBS would be raising the roof with their outrage... and rightly so. But since it is dealing with the Dem controled Obama Administration ... not even the whisper of crickets or hint of curiousity.... JMHO JR.

[Jolie Rouge]

8/7/2012

Did They Lie?

Is water wet?

Non-union pensioners got screwed. By the Obama Admin. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/07/did-obama-admin-officials-lie-to-congress-about-delphi-pension-termination/ http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/07/did-obama-admin-officials-lie-to-congress-about-delphi-pension-termination/ It has been readily apparent all along that the GM bailout was a bailout for their union cronies. Every step of the way, even in bankruptcy, the unions were given consideration they were not entitled to, ie. Placing union interests before secured creditors.

http://patterico.com/2012/08/07/did-they-lie/

[Jolie Rouge]

Breaking News today at the Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/07/emails-geithner-treasury-drove-cutoff-of-non-union-delphi-workers-pensions/#ixzz22uMJcStB



Emails obtained by The Daily Caller show that the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Timothy Geithner, was the driving force behind terminating the pensions of 20,000 salaried retirees at the Delphi auto parts manufacturing company.

The move, made in 2009 while the Obama administration implemented its auto bailout plan, appears to have been made solely because those retirees were not members of labor unions.

The internal government emails contradict sworn testimony, in federal court and before Congress, given by several Obama administration figures. They also indicate that the administration misled lawmakers and the courts about the sequence of events surrounding the termination of those non-union pensions, and that administration figures violated federal law.

Delphi, a 13-year old company that is independent of General Motors, is one of the world’s largest automotive parts manufacturers. Twenty thousand of its workers lost nearly their entire pensions when the government bailed out GM. At the same time, Delphi employees who were members of the United Auto Workers union saw their pensions topped off and made whole.

The White House and Treasury Department have consistently maintained that the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) independently made the decision to terminate the 20,000 non-union Delphi workers’ pension plan. The PBGC is a federal government agency that handles private-sector pension benefits issues. Its charter calls for independent representation of pension beneficiaries’ interests.


Ace sums up: http://minx.cc/?post=331715


So the Administration made a ruthless decision to benefit its union allies over non-union workers. And then claimed they had not made this decision at all; an “outside” group, the PBGC, had made the decision.

But it turns out Treasury “disinvited” the PBGC from discussions about the pensions, thus blocking them from making any of the decisions they are in fact supposed to handle. They weren’t even allowed in the room.

And now the Obamahoods who looted the pensions of these non union employees, are now calling Mitt Romney the reverse Robin Hood for stealing from the 99%?….

The audacity.

For two years now, Michelle Malkin has been reporting on The Delphi Economic Horror Story: http://townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/2010/09/22/the_delphi_disaster_an_economic_horror_story_obama _wont_tell/page/full/


The White House believes it can win back depressed and economically stressed voters by turning President Obama into the storyteller-in-chief again. But victims of Obama’s Chicago politics don’t want to hear any more of his own well-worn tales of struggle and sacrifice. They’ve got their own tragedies to tell — heart-wrenching dramas of personal and financial suffering at the very hands of Obama.

Consider the real-life horror story of 20,000 white-collar workers at Delphi, a leading auto parts company spun off from GM a decade ago. As Washington rushed to nationalize the U.S. auto industry with $80 billion in taxpayer “rescue” funds and avoid contested court termination proceedings, the White House auto team schemed with Big Labor bosses to preserve UAW members’ costly pension funds by shafting their nonunion counterparts. In addition, the nonunion pensioners lost all of their health and life insurance benefits.

The abused workers — most from hard-hit northeast Ohio, Michigan and neighboring states — had devoted decades of their lives as secretaries, technicians, engineers and sales employees at Delphi/GM. Some workers have watched up to 70 percent of their pensions vanish.

John Berent of Marblehead, Ohio, lost one-third of his pension: “I worked as a salaried employee for GM (30 years) and Delphi (10 years). After 40 years of dedicated service, I was forced to retire. Then Delphi terminated my health care, life insurance, vision, dental, then terminated the pension plan. Everything I worked 40 years for was wiped out.”

Kelly Fabrizio of Franksville, Wis., saw her pension reduced by 55 percent after working 30 years at Delphi/GM: “I am truly scared for my future. Every day I wake up, shake my head and say out loud — This Is Not How It Was Supposed To Be.”

Roger Hoke of Columbus, Mich., and his wife were both longtime Delphi workers. His pension shrunk by more than 40 percent: “After 33 years with GM and another 10 with Delphi, what did I do wrong to deserve such a fate?”

Bruce Gump, a former Delphi worker, testified at a hearing Examining the Delphi Bankruptcy’s Impact on Workers and Retirees, December 2, 2009.

You can listen to the whole thing, but starting especially at 3:21:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cperlcDkKCk


A woman who was forced into retirement at age 54 and had been working 30 years of dedicated service has lost all of her healthcare insurance and will lose more than half of her pension. She could barely afford to purchase a high deductible insurance policy to provide some protection for herself and her self employed husband. Two weeks later she found out she might have cancer. Because of the high deductible policy that she had she had to bare the entire burden of the costs of the tests to determine if she would live or die.

Anyone on the Romney campaign want to follow up on that story? Or any of the 20,000 or more other tragic stories coming out of the Dephi disaster, Obamahood orchestrated?

Charles Cunningham, a former Delphi worker, also testified at the hearing examining the Delphi Bankruptcys Impact on Workers and Retirees in December 2, 2009. He hit the Obama administration on its lack of transparency.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FPV-O8NQA3A


We believe that further significant evidence concerning the discrimination against the Delphi salaried retirees exist in the Treasury and automotive Task Force documents related to the GM and Delphi bankruptcies. We’ve requested these documents under the FOIA over two months ago, but the production of these documents by the Treasury has not been forthcoming. In fact, a written request for these documents was also sent by Senator Enzi following a Senate Hearing on pensions on October 29, 2009. To date, this request has also been ignored……This is not transparency. This is not what we would expect from our government. I think it’s outrageous that we don’t know why we were treated in this manner…and our Congressional Leaders can’t know it.

Nearly three years later, we finally know the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Geithner, likely on orders from the White House, was the driving force behind the horrendous Delphi disaster that victimized 20,000 workers.

I bet a large number of these folks wouldn’t mind appearing in a Romney ad to tell their stories, either.


http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/much-heart-wrenching-personal-suffering-was-caused-by-obama-administrations-termination-of-delphi-pension-benefits/

[Jolie Rouge]

Auto bailout cost taxpayers $3.4B more than estimated
By Alicia M. Cohn - 08/14/12 09:14 AM ET

The federal government's bailout of the auto industry will cost $3.4 billion more than previously thought, according to revised estimates this week from the Treasury Department.

The department now says the taxpayer burden is $25.1 billion, up from the last quarterly estimate of $21.7 billion, Reuters reported Monday.










The 2009 federal bailout of General Motors and Chrysler continues to play a key role in the presidential election, particularly in the critical swing states of Michigan and Ohio.

President Obama has touted the bailout as a successful accomplishment in his first term. Romney has argued that the auto bailout was not such a success. He says many jobs were lost — particularly in Michigan and Ohio — which have still not been recovered. The high cost to taxpayers can only help Romney's argument.

Democrats have repeatedly reminded voters of Mitt Romney's advice to "Let Detroit go bankrupt," the title of a 2008 op-ed that the Republican candidate wrote for the New York Times. In contrast, Obama's campaign released a TV ad in May calling the intervention into the failing companies "the right thing to do."

"Had we listened to his advice at that time, GM and Chrysler would have gone under and we would have lost probably a million jobs throughout the Midwest," Obama said of Romney in an ABC News interview earlier this year.

Romney has said that the struggling GM and Chrysler car companies needed to go through a "managed bankruptcy" process and that that is exactly what they eventually did. Obama's team fires back that the bankruptcy was government-managed, which is what Romney opposed.


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/243531-report-auto-bailout-cost-taxpayers-34b-more-than-estimated

"Had we listened to his advice at that time,.... we would have saved billions that only served to delay the inevitable ...bankruptcy. Both companies went through a bankruptcy Mr. President (or did you forget while lamenting the missed bogey putt on hole #9?). Maybe, if they'd have gone through the bankruptcy earlier, they'd be further down the path to recovery? We'll never knw since you don't get to take a mulligan.

..

In the long run, Romney's path would probably have cost less and the industry would have recovered less quickly but ultimately will be stronger.

..

Why can't the MSM actually DO THEIR JOBS and report the truth!! Obama handed over billions just so GM & Chrysler could file for bankrupcy anyways... He didn't "SAVE" the auto industry, he just redistruted our tax dollars to the unions all while screwing the secured bondholders!

[Jolie Rouge]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sk081912dAPR20120817114520.jpg

[Jolie Rouge]

Matthew Boyle of The Daily Caller: ‘Highly confidential’ internal Treasury documents show Obama administration’s deep involvement in Delphi pension


Internal Treasury Department documents described as “highly confidential” and obtained by The Daily Caller show a greater level of involvement in the Delphi pension scandal from senior officials in the Obama administration than has been previously acknowledged.

A July 2009 document prepared by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) titled “Treasury Talking Points re: Delphi” shows coordination between high-level players inside the PBGC and Treasury Department. The document was an attachment to a July 7, 2009 email from PBGC’s Joseph House to Treasury’s Matthew Feldman, Oren Haker and Paul Nathanson.

The talking points show that the PBGC thought the “[v]ast majority of individual’s [sic] covered by Delphi [pension] Plans” were “career GM ‘brethren’ distinguishable only by the 1999 spin-out” of Delphi from its former parent company, General Motors.


Only those “brethren” who were union members, however, saw their pensions preserved in the 2009 auto bailout. Nonunion Delphi retirees lost theirs.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/28/highly-confidential-internal-treasury-documents-show-obama-administrations-deep-involvement-in-delphi-pension-scandal/#ixzz2AhtPUYFm

http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/obama-also-caught-lying-about-abound-solar-in-last-weeks-kusa-interview-with-kyle-clark/

[Jolie Rouge]

See also post # 26& 27 in this thread


Did Obama admin officials lie to Congress about Delphi pension termination?
posted at 10:01 am on August 7, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

I don’t know about you, but I’m beginning to detect a pattern from the Obama administration. When called to testify before Congress, executive branch officials say, “No, no, no” … but their e-mails later say, “Yes, yes, yes“: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/07/emails-geithner-treasury-drove-cutoff-of-non-union-delphi-workers-pensions/




Read through all of The DC’s report, but the key e-mail exchanges appear to be those between Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation staffers Joseph House, Karen Morris, and Michael Rae. The PBGC has the only statutory authority to close down a pension fund, and Obama administration officials have repeatedly claimed that the PBGC made the Delphi decision on the non-union pension independently. However, the meeting called to determine the status of that pension didn’t include PBGC officials — who got disinvited from the event:




Treasury official Matt Feldman then starts coming into the picture as “a facilitator” of the Deplhi decision, to us the DC’s characterization:




Very obviously, Treasury was at least involved in the decision-making, if not the ultimate decider of the Delphi pension termination. A Treasury spokesman insisted to the DC that the PBGC made the decision on its own, but it looks pretty clear that the PBGC was at least coordinating efforts with the Obama administration. To the extent that any officials testified differently, we may be seeing more subpoenas and Congressional hearings in the near future. One question in particular will be why the PBGC terminated the non-union pension while taxpayers absorbed the union pension obligations, and whether that outcome was coordinated all along by the White House.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/08/07/did-obama-admin-officials-lie-to-congress-about-delphi-pension-termination/


comments

Unless Romney’s willing to smack Obama with this, it won’t effect undecideds.

Romney has to say Obama authorized the killing of 20,000 non-union pensions and for the public to pay for the union ones.

Anything more complicated, forget it.

..

Story sure smells like perjury, grand jury, charges, trial, and prison for some administration folks. Screwed bond holders will be next to sue if they haven’t already.

..



Gee, wonder why the Obama administration would choose to reward union members (with taxpayer money) and screw over non-union members?

Hmmmmmmmmm. Quite a mystery there.\

...




Oh hell, YES! And let’s remember that the e-mails contradict sworn testimony. Meaning Obama officials lied to Congress. Scooter Libby went to jail for less. The 20,000 non-union people who lost their pensions deserve an investigation and a full explanation.


What amazes me - if this were attached to the Bush ( or any GOP ) administration - certain people here at BBS would be raising the roof with their outrage... and rightly so. But since it is dealing with the Dem controled Obama Administration ... not even the whisper of crickets or hint of curiousity.... JMHO JR.

Inspector General: Yeah, Obama Treasury Dept. screwed Delphi non-union workers,
but there’s nothing we can do about it
By Michelle Malkin • August 16, 2013 10:58 AM

Loyal readers have followed my coverage over the past three years on how President Obama’s UAW bailout threw tens of thousands of nonunion autoworkers under the bus. It’s the real-life horror story of some 20,000 white-collar workers at Delphi, a leading auto parts company spun off from GM a decade ago.

As Washington rushed to nationalize the U.S. auto industry with $80 billion in taxpayer “rescue” funds and avoid contested court termination proceedings, the White House auto team schemed with Big Labor bosses to preserve UAW members’ costly pension funds by shafting their nonunion counterparts. In addition, the nonunion pensioners lost all of their health and life insurance benefits. The abused workers — most from hard-hit northeast Ohio, Michigan and neighboring states — had devoted decades of their lives as secretaries, technicians, engineers and sales employees at Delphi/GM. Some workers have watched up to 70 percent of their pensions vanish.

Yesterday, the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program released a report on the Delphi mess. You can read it here.

In a nutshell, the report confirms what Delphi workers have maintained from the start: http://www.mydaytondailynews.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/report-feds-didnt-restore-delphi-pensions-because-/nZQCJ/ They were screwed because, in the words of the IG, they had “no leverage.” Clout. Deep pockets. Big Labor crony influence. The IG’s recommendations for action?

Nothing.


The Treasury Department opted not to restore the pensions of salaried Delphi retirees during the General Motors’ 2009 bankruptcy process because they had “no leverage” to hold up GM’s bankruptcy while union retirees did, according to a government watchdog report released Thursday.

The report, by the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, found that while Treasury showed little interest in restoring pensions for salaried employees, it pushed GM to restore the pensions of United Auto Worker retirees in hopes of emerging from bankruptcy within an aggressively short 40-day period without risking a strike or other delay.

The 57-page report, which offered no recommendations, found that the four-member “Auto Team” – a group of Treasury officials tasked with guiding GM through its restructuring after the federal government loaned the company $13.4 billion – “was supposed to be advisory in nature, but often was not. Because Treasury became GM’s only lender and later its largest investor, the Treasury Department had “significant leverage and influence on GM’s decisions leading up to and through the bankruptcy,” the report found.

…

Rep. Mike Turner, R-Dayton, who requested the inspector general’s report, said the report “discredits” the administration’s assertion that it did not influence the bankruptcy process.

“The administration thwarted the bankruptcy process for a politically expedient outcome,” he said. “What we have here is Treasury stepping in and perverting the process of the bankruptcy court, using their influence to make certain that the outcome was politically desirable to the administration and the Delphi salaried retirees losing their pensions. That’s enough for us to continue to push on the congressional side for a resolution to this.”

There’s still a cover-up going on http://oversight.house.gov/release/issa-subpoenas-treasury-for-documents-on-delphi-pension-deal/ — and the Delphi Salaried Retirees Association is calling the White House out: “SIGTARP’s finding that Treasury was greatly involved in the involuntary termination of our pension plan legitimizes our request that Treasury end its coverup. It’s withheld emails and other documents from us for 18 months. We just want our day in court.”

More reax here. https://www.delphisalariedretirees.org/delphi/index.php/congressional-support-articles/851-obama-auto-team-had-big-role-in-delphi-pension-decisions-inspector-general-says

http://michellemalkin.com/2013/08/16/inspector-general-yeah-obama-treasury-dept-screwed-delphi-non-union-workers-but-theres-nothing-we-can-do-about-it/

[Jolie Rouge]

The Fabulous Life of Unions: Designer Golf Courses, Luxury Resorts, and $177 million in Taxpayer Dollars
on September 2, 2013

[Jolie Rouge]

The Fabulous Life of Unions:
Designer Golf Courses, Luxury Resorts, and $177 million in Taxpayer Dollars September 2, 2013
http://grassrootjournal.com/the-fabulous-life-of-unions-designer-golf-courses-luxury-resorts-and-177-million-in-taxpayer-dollars/

[Jolie Rouge]

https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/t1/1525693_225686740888886_1372030571_n.jpg

General Motors is becoming China Motors


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo

General Motors is becoming China Motors. Forget the spin. The evidence is clear and convincing. Did U.S. taxpayers save GM for China? Listen to the candid comments of GM's CEO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo

[Jolie Rouge]

Bailout Outrage: Chinese-Built Cadillacs to Be Sold in United States
Distun Stockton April 8, 2016



General Motors is hiring Chinese workers to build Cadillac autos that will be sold to the American taxpayers who bailed the company out in 2008.

The plug-in hybrid version of the CT6, which is already manufactured in China, will be available in American showrooms this summer, according to Bloomberg News.

There is growing criticism about General Motors’ decision to hire Chinese workers for manufacturing jobs after accepting a huge bailout from American taxpayers. “America invested in GM and GM turned around and stabbed America in the back,” Rick Manning, the president of Americans for Limited Government, told Breitbart News.

Breitbart has already reported on GM’s plan to sell the made-in-China Buick Envision in the United States. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/29/after-taxpayer-bailout-general-motors-plans-rollout-of-chinese-built-buicks-in-america/

Business mogul Donald Trump has made U.S. trade policies with countries like China a central theme of his populist campaign.

In a statement to Breitbart News, Curtis Ellis of American Jobs Alliance explains why:


Cadillac’s marketing people admit they cannot import Cadillacs into China without paying a stiff tariff. The Chinese government does this to encourage companies like GM to manufacture in China and hire Chinese. If our government put the interests of American workers and businesses first the same way China does, our people would not be jobless, our cities like Detroit would not be in ruins, and we would not be running trade deficits in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

http://www.breitbart.com/economics/2016/04/06/bailout-outrage-new-chinese-built-cadillac-coming-gm-showroom-near/

[Jolie Rouge]

Fiat Chrysler has announced that it is laying off 1,300 workers at its Sterling Heights, Michigan plant.

According to Detroit Local 4, the layoffs will begin in July because of a 61 percent drop in sales of the Chrysler 200, a mid-sized car which is manufactured at the facility.

The company reported that it only sold 7,500 units thus far this year, which amounts to half of what it sold during the same period last year. Many workers have been on temporary layoff since February 1 as sales numbers straggled in. But now they are being told the layoffs will be permanent starting in July.

“In order to better align production with demand at its Sterling Heights Assembly Plant, FCA US notified the State of Michigan, the City of Sterling Heights and the UAW today that it intends to return the plant to a one-shift operation, beginning July 5,” the company said in a publicly released statement.

“The Company will place indefinitely laid off employees in open full-time positions as they become available within the Detroit labor market based on seniority.”

UAW Vice President Norwood Jewell said that while regrettable the announcement was not a big surprise. The union rep said:


While today’s announcement of a shift reduction at Sterling Heights Assembly is unfortunate, it is not unexpected. FCA is not the only company experiencing a slow market for small cars. On a bright note, there is a strong demand for larger-sized vehicles. The company has been planning to increase its capacity to build more trucks and SUVs. I believe that in the long term this move will be a positive one for our members and the company.

The announcement comes on the heels of decisions from both GM and Ford to close plants in Michigan and move manufacturing and jobs to Mexico.

Earlier this week Ford Motor Co. announced it was planning to spend $1.6 billion on new facilities in Mexico.

Ford’s announcement came only a few months after GM announced similar plans, in its case a plan to spend a whopping similar plans, in its case a plan to spend a whopping $5 billion on building new facilities in Mexico.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/04/06/slump-small-car-sales-fiat-chrysler-announces-1300-layoffs-michigan/

Ford Motor Co. finally confirmed rumors that the Dearborn-based automaker will hire more Mexicans to staff a $1.6 billion expansion of its factory in San Luis Potosi, Mexico.

Ford announced that the new Mexican facility will start producing vehicles as soon as 2018 and will create up to 2,800 jobs by 2020 in the Mexican state. It is said Ford plans to build 500,000 vehicles in the new factory, doubling the number of vehicles produced south of the border.

Donald Trump immediately slammed the company.

“This transaction is an absolute disgrace. Our dishonest politicians and the special interests that control them are laughing in the face of all American citizens … When I am president, we will strongly enforce trade rules against unfair foreign subsidies, and impose countervailing duties to prevent egregious instances of outsourcing,” he said in a statement. The United States should revise the NAFTA free-trade deal with Mexico “to create a fair deal for American workers,” he said.

The news comes only a few months after insiders began to leak to the press that Ford would join several other large auto-manufacturers in starting or enlarging manufacturing capacity in Mexico.

The newly announced $1.6 billion investment is on top of the $2.5 billion Ford had already earmarked for improvements to its Mexican facilities.

Ford joins rival General Motors, which is investing $5 billion in Mexico, as well as foreign car-makers BMW AG, Volkswagen AG, Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motors.

The auto industry isn’t alone in shutting down U.S. facilities and opening or enlarging facilities in Mexico.

Earlier this year Mondelez bakeries, which makes Oreo cookies, Ritz crackers, and Cadbury chocolates, announced yet another round of layoffs at its Chicago bakery in conjunction with a move to enlarge its bakery lines in Mexico.

Mondelez has already shut down several lines in its Chicago plant and moved several hundred jobs to Mexico.

Several heating and air conditioning companies in Indiana also recently announced the shuttering of U.S. plants in order to move to Mexico. Carrier Air Conditioning announced it was shutting down its facilities in Indianapolis, while UTEC said it was moving to Mexico after shuttering its Huntington, Indiana plant.

All these moves and more have come after President Obama began pushing his Trans Pacific Partnership trade plan, one of the largest multinational trade agreements in history. Often derided as “Obamatrade,” TPP has taken criticism from a variety of political sectors, no less so than from GOP frontrunner Donald Trump.

Trump has been unequivocal on TPP. He is against it.

In February, for instance, Trump called the plan “a terrible deal” for the United States because it is a jobs killer.

“It’s going to allow countries to continue to take advantage of us and take our jobs, take our trade,” Trump said. “It’s bad for us. It’ll allow China to come in through the back door at a later date and continue to really do a number on us, and it doesn’t take into account money manipulation — manipulation or devaluation of currency, which is the single biggest tool that countries use against us,” he said. “It’s a terrible deal.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/04/05/ford-latest-build-billion-dollar-car-plant-mexico/