Congress: The auto bailout
Posted: Thursday, December 04, 2008 9:16 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under:
Congress, Economy
The United Auto Workers announced the union would make major concessions in its contract with US automakers in order to help the Big Three lobby Congress for bailout money. "The surprising move by the U.A.W. could be a critical factor in the automakers’ bid not only to get government assistance, but also to become competitive with the cost structure of nonunion plants operated by foreign automakers in the United States."
Video: GM’s CEO Rick Wagoner answers questions as he arrives at a hearing on Capitol Hill on an autos industry bailout.
More: "Labor experts said the ground given by the union underscored the precarious condition of the Detroit companies, as the U.A.W.’s own prospects for survival are also in doubt. ‘It is an historic and awfully difficult moment for the U.A.W.,’ said Harley Shaiken, professor of labor studies at the University of California, Berkeley."
The UAW made the white-collar-vs.-blue-collar bailout argument. "Gettelfinger complained that, after workers agreed to major concessions in 2005 and 2007, the union and the companies were being asked to make significant new sacrifices in order to secure federal aid, while big financial institutions such as Citigroup gave up relatively little to secure much larger amounts of taxpayer money. ‘Are we going to blame the autoworkers, who are by the way 10% of the cost of an automobile . . . or are we going to take a look at what's happened to our economy, to the housing crunch, to the Wall Street bailout and the failures on Wall Street,’ Gettelfinger said during a televised Detroit news conference as union members cheered.”
The good news for the automakers: There's a consensus between congressional Dems and President Bush to bail them out. The sticking point, per Bloomberg: Congressional Dems want to use TARP, while "Bush and congressional Republicans are pushing to use instead some of the $25 billion for the development of fuel-efficient vehicles approved in a 2007 energy bill."
"Adding to their disappointment of failing to secure a filibuster-proof majority in the 111th Congress, Senate Democrats have most likely said goodbye to any hope of holding a three-seat majority on committees as well."
A new kind of Palin effect? Florida GOP Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen hung up on both Obama and Rahm Emanuel yesterday because she thought the calls were hoaxes.
"The prospect of Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.) leaving Congress to become U.S. trade representative has reopened jockeying for a leadership position that had been settled quietly last month," The Hill reports.
It looks like Nancy Pelosi's office is pushing back a bit on Charlie Rangel's public proclamation that Pelosi pledged to support him in keeping his Ways and Means Committee chairmanship. "Rangel on Tuesday boasted to reporters that Pelosi had pledged to support him as chairman despite an ongoing ethics probe and various media articles that have negatively portrayed the New York lawmaker.” More: "But one House Democratic leadership aide said Rangel ‘went too far at interpreting what she said’ publicly.”
“The staffer referred to comments Pelosi made at a forum at Hunter College in New York on Monday. ‘As you know, the particulars of Chairman Rangel’s case are before the ethics committee now,’ she said. ‘We had been assured early on that they would have their work finished by the end of this Congress, which is just a few more weeks. And I think Mr. Rangel, who is a Korean War hero, who has been a great public servant in our country, deserves the opportunity to have his case heard and resolved by the ethics committee. And that, as I say, is not a long way off. It’s just a matter of weeks.’”
“Asked if Rangel would lose his gavel after the ethics panel report is released, Pelosi said she would have to review what the committee finds.”
Meanwhile, the New York Times isn't taking the Rangel complaints about its coverage lying down. The New York Times decides to refute Rangel's angry letter.
