Bailout Watch 226: Senate Reaches Compromise on Bailout Bill

bailout watch 226 senate reaches compromise on bailout bill

MSNBC is reporting that auto-state senators’ aides say they’ve reached a compromise to throw money at “speed emergency loans” to Chrysler, Ford and GM. And speed is the drug of choice here. After The Big 2.8’s CEO shot themselves in their collective feet in front of a Senate committee charged with rubber-stamping the $25b deal, Republicans and Democrats knocked some heads together. The peacock people say the as-yet-unnamed legislators plan to present their proposal at a mid-afternoon news conference today (Thursday). The plan: the president’s plan. The bi-polar, I mean partisan, I mean bi-partisan group will attempt to “divert” money from the already approved $25b Department of Energy Loans– to tide Detroit over until the incoming prez can do his part to subsidize the failing automakers with taxpayer funds. But folks, as this Bailout Watch originally postulated, this is NOT a done deal. Far, far, from it. And I’ll tell you why…

The New York Times reports that Representative Henry A. Waxman has just waxed Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan. The California Democrat will replace Dingell as the chairman of the influential Committee on Energy and Commerce. That’s the committee that cranked-out the original $25b Department of Energy loans upon which the compromise crew have their beady eyes affixed. Waxman is a tree hugger’s tree hugger. As we saw during the Senate hearing on the previous bailout– or is that the ante-penultimate bailout?– the Democrats are FULLY committed to forcing Detroit to increase vehicular efficiency.

They didn’t like the previous compromise on Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE standards). They ain’t gonna like this usurpation one bit. It could very well be payback time for Detroit’s anti-CAFE lobbying. Curiouser and curiouser.

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 6 comments
  • Conslaw Conslaw on Nov 20, 2008

    I don't see what they're making a big deal about. I'm as much for energy efficiency as the next guy, but I know that if the D3 aren't around to make ANY cars, they sure as hell won't be around to make energy-efficient cars. Early next year, President Obama will have the opportunity to revisit what's left of the $700 billion TARP fund, and he'll have to come up with a comprehensive energy plan. The energy plan will be a multiple hundred billion dollar plan itself. At that time, he can propose before a Democrat-dominated congress that they take $25 billion out of TARP and put it into the energy plan.

  • Geo. Levecque Geo. Levecque on Nov 20, 2008

    The News says that the new date for the Detroit 3 is Dec.8th to provide a proper Business plan to the Banking committee, guess they are hard at work, throwing something together that will pass muster eh?

  • 285exp I am quite sure that it is a complete coincidence that they have announced a $7k price increase the same week that the current administration has passed legislation extending the $7k tax credit that was set to expire. Yep, not at all related.
  • Syke Is it possible to switch the pure EV drive on and off? Given the wonderful throttle response of an EV, I could see the desirability of this for a serious off-roader. Run straight ICE to get to your off-roading site, switch over the EV drive during the off-road section, then back to ICE for the road trip back home.
  • ToolGuy Historical Perspective Moment:• First-gen Bronco debuted in MY1966• OJ Simpson Bronco chase was in 1994• 1966 to 1994 = 28 years• 1994 to now = 28 yearsFeel old yet?
  • Ronnie Schreiber From where is all that electricity needed to power an EV transportation system going to come? Ironically, the only EV evangelist that I know of who even mentions the fragile nature of our electrical grid is Elon Musk. None of the politicians pushing EVs go anywhere near it, well, unless they are advocating for unreliable renewables like wind and solar.
  • FreedMike I just don’t see the market here - I think about 1.2% of Jeep drivers are going to be sold on the fuel cost savings here. And the fuel cost savings are pretty minimal, per the EPA: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&path=1&year1=2022&year2=2022&make=Jeep&baseModel=Wrangler&srchtyp=ymm&pageno=1&rowLimit=50Annual fuel costs for this vehicle are $2200 and $2750 for the equivalent base turbo-four model. I don’t get it.
Next