House Rep Carson Introduces Bill to Make New GM Liable for Old GM's Vehicles

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Political interference in New GM? As Mass. Rep. Barney Frank’s Norton constituents will tell you, it’s not who you know—no, wait, it is. The Ad Hoc Committee of Consumer Victims of GM and Chrysler—the consortium of lawyers trying to make New GM liable for Old GM’s vehicles—must not know any pols senior enough to bend GM to their will. Oh wait! They do! Indiana Representative Andre Carson, who’s just introduced an as-yet-unnumbered bill to do what GM’s suits and a federal bankruptcy judge won’t. It’s not unnamed though: “The Jeremy Warriner Consumer Protection Act of 2009.” Warriner is an Indiana resident who lost both legs in an accident in his Jeep; his product liability lawsuit fell afoul of Chrysler’s “transformation” in bankruptcy. The odds of the bill’s passage may not be high, but its existence proves that the fate of Government Motors lies in the hands of elected officials, rather than the US consumer. As if you didn’t know.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Join the conversation
4 of 12 comments
  • Signal11 Signal11 on Jun 27, 2009

    That guy looks like Uncle Phil, if Uncle Phil lost about 100 lbs.

  • Indi500fan Indi500fan on Jun 27, 2009

    His grandmother held the House seat for years, even though she was functionally illiterate and in her last term, completely senile and wheeled into the Capitol only for close votes. Upon her death, Andre was appointed by the local Dem org, although he has won a subsequent election against a token Republican.

  • Conch101 Conch101 on Jun 29, 2009

    May be I am out of step here but with millions of vehicles still on the road from the old GM/Chrysler and a proven record of a lack of ability to correct problems with those vehicles for years after they were made isn't the idea of allowing these companies to walk away from the problems they have created an issue for people? My expectation is that if I bought my car prior to the bankrupcy shouldn't I be entitled to the same protection against defects that someone who bought after the backrupcy? I agree that multi million dollar payouts for driver issues should be prevented but when you set the stage for the companies being able to ignore known problems since they are not liable for them and someone dies as a result don't you think someone needs to be held accountable? They may be tugging at the heart strings but if it was your brother, sister, parent or child that was killed because the company walked away from thier responsibility how would you feel. If the companies don't want to be responsible for what they created my suggestion is they return the billions we gave them to stay a float and sell off thier pieces and start over.

  • Injuredbygm Injuredbygm on Aug 14, 2009

    Our family was injured from a product defect in our 1994 Suburban . Our medical bills have reached over $6 million. We're in the midst of litigation & GM gets to run away. We have lost our careers, our life savings, our home & our health. GM knew in 1987 about the problem - we have copies of their own research. GM had a fix for the problem in 1987 - we have copies of that research, also. THEY FIXED THE PROBLEM IN THEIR 2006 MODELS. They knew for 19 yrs & chose to do nothing. We only want replaced what they stole from us.