Freedom on Four Wheels
Americans get our kicks on Route 66 and regard the anywhere, anytime road trip as part of our modern birthright, but will our love affair with the automobile continue? The Big Three automakers alternate between inattentive and needy, and we’ve turned a cold shoulder to their showrooms lately, but Democratic lawmakers and some TPM commenters cringe at the spectre of millions of unemployed auto industry workers. And so does President-elect Obama. The Wall Street Journal says Obama trade adviser Daniel Tarullo will, “lead the auto-company transition efforts” (transition efforts?), while Automotive News (sub) is already calling him the Car Czar. What are the Big 2.8 transitioning to, and what will Obama have to promise Bush to bail out Detroit before Congress goes on another well-deserved vacation?
Democrats Plot Detroit Rescue (sub)
The president-elect doesn’t want to take office Jan. 20 with the auto industry — long the backbone of the nation’s industry — in a shambles, according to aides. “He wants to prevent a situation like Lehman, where you flail yourself into an uncontrolled bankruptcy,” a senior Obama aide said Tuesday, referring to the sudden and damaging collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. “This can’t wait until Jan. 20.”
Dan Tarullo, a Georgetown University law professor and a top Obama adviser on trade, has been appointed to lead the auto-company transition efforts, according to Rep. Sander Levin (D., Mich.), a key lawmaker involved. Obama aides said Mr. Tarullo is one of a number of advisers assigned to the issue. Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and former Michigan Rep. David Bonior have been given prominent seats at the table.
I'm ok with bailing them out, but we damn well better include European emission standards and a goal of total hybrid production by a date so near the CEOs crap themselves. They do a pretty bad job deciding what lines to push without daddy or Japan holding their hands, so lay it all out in writing before the checks are cut.
November 12, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wagoner, Lutz & Co are great at promising delivery dates. Meeting them - not so much.
November 12, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am going to go the other direction and say put the Big 3 on life-support, but with no strings! I repeat, no strings. They know they are behind the power curve and are in for a dreadful amount of re-tooling worldwide (GM has lots of offshore assembly lines) We have to keep them alive while they do it. Three or four years then we are out of there and they can name some assembly lines: Obama 1, Obama 2. etc. Obama will have a historical legacy as the President who saved American heavy industry.
Or not.
November 12, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
You wondered on your other thread in a reply to my comment whether Pelosi and Reid have the votes. After seeing your further research here, I'd say they are fully prepared for that. Looks pretty clear to me that main point in them doing something now is to have the responsibility fall on Bush and the GOP if nothing is done and there's bad results from that, and not have the blame go to Obama. It's partly to help Obama. Of course if Bush and some GOP go along, and something gets passed, that's an ok result to them, too, as it's still the Dem iniative. That's why they are currently sending out talking points about "we need Bush and some GOP in order to do this."
November 12, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
p.s. I think there are going to do like they did with the bailout bill, make it so options can be changed later, drag it out somehow. Like I said, I'm no fan of the way Congress always seems to attend to problems a day late and a dollar short, wait until there is actually a fire going on, and then slap something together. But I think that the leaders also know that is their great flaw, and therefore, when they do these last minute, in a rush, pieced together "we have to do something now or things will fall apart," they sort of draft things so that lots of questions remain on purpose, like it's a bill that's never complete, things amended over time. Big downside: it's not helpful for those who are at the receiving end, because they are never sure where they stand, and they get lobbyists in there to affect how things get interpreted and changed. Am I making any sense? What I am saying is that everything's done piecemeal on purpose, no one wants to do big sweeping bills on purpose any more, they whittle it down to enact something over time whenever they can.
November 12, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's something to be said for preventing the failure of the American auto industry, but it's all in how it's done. I think Robert Reich is pointing in the right direction with one of his latest entries:
November 13, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink