Undecided Whether Obama Is A Saviour Or Despot
Mar 30th, 2009 | 3 responses
Candidate and now President Barack Obama vowed he could make the tough decisions.
The one he announced Monday withholding additional federal aid to General Motors and Chrysler was a doozie.
The new tough guy on the block basically fired GM’s chief executive G. Richard Wagoner Jr. for driving too slow in the fast lane. That’s a savings of $1 a year.
At the same time, Obama showed his forgiving side. He allowed GM 60 more days to offer a restructuring plan. He granted 30 days for Chrysler to complete its merger with Fiat.
Then he turned softy, vowing to keep the two Detroit automakers on life support by waving some magic wand. He promised both automakers the government would guarantee their customer vehicle warranties.
“We cannot, we must not, and we will not let our auto industry simply vanish,” he said “It is a pillar of our economy that has held up the dreams of millions of our people. But we also cannot continue to excuse poor decisions. And we cannot make the survival of our auto industry dependent on an unending flow of tax dollars. These companies — and this industry — must ultimately stand on their own, not as wards of the state.”
I can’t help but wonder if a meaner, leaner GM reduces its TV commercials promoting Chevrolet’s SUVs, pickup trucks and minivans. I’ll miss their top pitch man Howie Long, the former NFL defensive tackle whose day job is color commentator for Fox Sports during the football season.
I don’t intend to be flip because the economic impact of the struggling automakers signals a domino wave of financial doom for millions of Americans associated with the designers, manufacturers, suppliers and dealers of GM and Chrysler.
I’ll leave the details of Obama’s dramatic announcement to the comprehensive article in Monday’s Washington Post.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/30/AR2009033001239.html?hpid=topnews)
Instead, I’m more concerned about the precedents Obama is establishing in the wave of bailouts for the auto industry and banking sector
Firing executives and capping executive salaries as part of the strings attached to federal rescue plans is extremely discomforting. This practice historically has been carried out in the bankruptcy courts and should remain there.
In the automakers case, Obama’s car experts convinced the president their restructuring plans were deficient. By that they mean Detroit remains sluggish building smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles as well as rushing to the assembly lines new hybrids and electric-powered models. Detroit’s excuse has been buyers aren’t interested enough to make the sales profitable except in times when gasoline prices soar above $4 a gallon.
Here the president dons his professor’s cap and gown and uses his office as bully pulpit to convince the public it is the right course to get off carbon fuel emissions. He’s right, of course. But the sale of cars is determined by market demands, not presidential decrees. I’d rather keep it that way.
Obama is stepping perilously close to nationalizing banks and perhaps key industrial corporations. It already holds an 80% ownership in American International Group. Yet, he vows the administration has no interest nor ability to run these publicly traded institutions. We must take his word for it.
It is quite daunting that our multi-task president is cramming so many game-changing measures down the public’s collective throat. We scarcely have time to digest one before he throws another bone to the masses. What’s next?
Oh, yes. Health care reform.
Cross posted onThe Remmers Report
3 Responses to “Undecided Whether Obama Is A Saviour Or Despot”
It's more discomforting to think that we must not only save these companies because they are 'too big to fail' but also handsomely reward executive failure. I'm glad we're not choosing to the latter. Trust me, these millionaires will be fine, and if they are indeed good executives, they'll find other jobs.
Save your pity for the thousands of auto workers who will be out of a job because A) the bankers blew the economy up and B) the executives in Detroit couldn't make a car competitive with the offerings from Japan, S. Korea or Germany.
I understand the concerns; however, I'm not clear on what your position is. I can think of at least three possibilities:
1) It is essentially that the government should stay out of things and let GM and Chrysler go to bankruptcy? That's an arguable position with pros and cons, but I'm not sure if that is your position.
2) Or is it that the government should be involved to prevent bankruptcy if possible, but that the plans given by GM and Chrysler should have been acceptable to the government and therefore they should have sent the next chunk of loans; i.e., by not accepting the plans, Obama is being despotic.
or 3) is it that the President's making the right decisions, but they are just worrisome?
It's not like President is planning and carrying out all of these at once. He is drawing on plans he put forward during his campaign, and having them carried out by the appropriate staff and departments.
I sympathize with your complaints about the speed of all this “change” but we truly are in dire need of major shifts in foreign policy, energy policy, financial policy, health care policy and more. Many of these areas have reached crisis levels already because of decades of non or destructive action.