Friedman: GM, Not NHTSA, Most To Blame For Recall Crisis

Cameron Aubernon
by Cameron Aubernon

It was a long day for David Friedman and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration during congressional testimony Tuesday, admitting before a Senate panel that his agency has more work to do to improve itself, and that General Motors made “incredibly poor decisions” as far as recalls were concerned.

Automotive News reports Friedman and the NHTSA came under harsh criticism before the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation committee’s consumer protection subcommittee during this second round of testimony. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri made the deputy administrator aware of the panel’s overall frustration with the excuses for why the NHTSA did not act swiftly in forcing GM to recall vehicles affected by an out-of-spec ignition switch now linked to 19 deaths and 31 injuries.

In turn, Friedman deflected criticism of the agency by placing the blame upon the automaker, proclaiming the execs “were more worried about [the NHTSA] getting information about problems than they were about actually fixing problems.” He added that a “new normal” has since been established upon all automakers, whereupon any defect is immediately reported to the agency, and that it would have “zero tolerance” on those who fail “to act quickly and aggressively” on reporting such flaws.

Regarding the original case, Friedman said that his agency lacked “ample information” in 2007 to determine whether or not a defect was to be found in the aforementioned ignition switch, despite a report by a House committee issued earlier in the day stating the opposite.

After testimony, Sen. McCaskill stated she found Friedman’s statements troubling, proclaiming he was more concerned with rebutting the news media than with taking responsibility for his and his agency’s role in the GM recall crisis.

Cameron Aubernon
Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 12 comments
  • Wmba Wmba on Sep 17, 2014

    This is a pretty incomplete post compared to sources like Reuters. NHTSA has only 51 investigators. However, if they could argue for funds like EPA, then they could expand into frivolous areas like engine design. Next thing you know, vehicle manufacturers could be forced to use an EPA designed combustion chamber. Just what we all need - a Government 4 valve head. Think I'm kidding? From Society of Automotive Engineers July 23 2014. " As part of its effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy for model years 2017 through 2025 light-duty vehicles, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has begun developing an advanced test engine to demonstrate fuel-saving and emissions-reducing technologies. The test engine is intended to help establish the feasibility of meeting fuel standards through improvements to combustion chamber geometries, fuel injection strategies, fuel composition, valve timing, and intake conditions. In development of the engine, the EPA is using ANSYS FORTÉ CFD software, giving its engineers the ability to quickly and inexpensively make multiple design iterations. ANSYS acquired FORTÉ as part of its acquisition of Reaction Design earlier this year." This is incredibly ridiculous. As if the EPA boy engineers know as much as the real engine designers at established manufacurers. Now they'll start sticking their oar in and creating a fuss on issues they don't understand the basics in. I mean, WTF is going on?

  • Erikstrawn Erikstrawn on Sep 18, 2014

    The NHTSA is between a rock and a hard place. If they had used their authority to force GM they'd be accused of onerous regulation. Since they didn't they're suffering accusations of being worthless and inept. A bureaucracy is very much a "pick your battles" environment, and GM has a lot of powerful backers. Once there was enough evidence (and unfortunately enough deaths) that the ignition switches were undeniably the cause, the NHTSA had the evidence and drive to intervene. Politically the NHTSA had to wait for GM's incompetence to destroy the will of their supporters.

  • Formula m How many Hyundai and Kia’s do not have the original engine block it left the factory with 10yrs prior?
  • 1995 SC I will say that year 29 has been a little spendy on my car (Motor Mounts, Injectors and a Supercharger Service since it had to come off for the injectors, ABS Pump and the tool to cycle the valves to bleed the system, Front Calipers, rear pinion seal, transmission service with a new pan that has a drain, a gaggle of capacitors to fix the ride control module and a replacement amplifier for the stereo. Still needs an exhaust manifold gasket. The front end got serviced in year 28. On the plus side blank cassettes are increasingly easy to find so I have a solid collection of 90 minute playlists.
  • MaintenanceCosts My own experiences with, well, maintenance costs:Chevy Bolt, ownership from new to 4.5 years, ~$400*Toyota Highlander Hybrid, ownership from 3.5 to 8 years, ~$2400BMW 335i Convertible, ownership from 11.5 to 13 years, ~$1200Acura Legend, ownership from 20 to 29 years, ~$11,500***Includes a new 12V battery and a set of wiper blades. In fairness, bigger bills for coolant and tire replacement are coming in year 5.**Includes replacement of all rubber parts, rebuild of entire suspension and steering system, and conversion of car to OEM 16" wheel set, among other things
  • Jeff Tesla should not be allowed to call its system Full Self-Driving. Very dangerous and misleading.
  • Slavuta America, the evil totalitarian police state
Next