The Daily Show With Jon Stewart M - Th 11p / 10c Carmageddon '09 - Lemon Aidcomedycentral.com

Daily Show Full EpisodesEconomic CrisisPolitical Humor

Ousted GM CEO Rick Wagoner is being posthumously hoisted onto a cross by Michigan’s Governor Granholm and the Detroit News, which is running a piece today entitled “GM Workers Upset That Wagoner Became Sacrificial Lamb.” Huh? Better him than them, right? “Here we got past all the bad media, all that fury during congressional hearings, and now they want him to resign,” says UAW Local 599 (Flint) Chair, Terry Everman. “It’s really a setback, because you don’t know what new direction GM will take.” And it’s not just the uncertainty that has workers in a kerfuffle over the Wagoner pink slip. “It just didn’t seem appropriate for the administration, rather than the board, to dictate,” says OnStar Manager, Bryan Bateman. “I think Rick was a sacrificial lamb in all this. I think he took one for the company.” Except that Red Ink Rick should have been dumped years ago, and the irresponsible board members that kept him around have been canned by Obama as well. Oh, yeah, and GM turned its fate over to the feds the second it took public bailout money. But, hey, one man’s sacrificial lamb is another man’s tasty entrée. To (you guessed it) more government intervention on behalf of the General. Of course.

Mega dittos from our neighbors to the north. The Globe and Mail reports that the Canadian government is also playing hard man re: GM and Chrysler’s call on federal bailout bucks. Yada, yada, yada, restructure, union concessions, new plans, bankruptcy. And then, this:

Chrysler was unable to meet its Canadian payroll today without a $250-million advance on a $1-billion bridge loan from Canadian taxpayers. To qualify for up to $4-billion in long-term aid, Chrysler has to conclude now-stalled negotiations with the CAW on a cost-savings contract and complete the Fiat deal.

To stave off an immediate crisis, the federal and Ontario governments offered the bridge loans—including up to $3-billion for GM—to allow them to continue operating while they work to satisfy U.S. and Canadian government demands.

Ronald Reagan once said that the scariest words in the English language are “we’re from the government and we’re here to help.” For troubled auto suppliers though, there are scarier things than government assistance. Specifically, government assistance administered by GM and Chrysler. Automotive News [sub] reports that the the newest automaking branches of the federal government will be in charge of allocating the $5 billion in supplier aid, and that they’ll be using the money to settle old scores. According to AN‘s breezy prose, GM and Chrysler may “pass over” suppliers that have sought to protect themselves from OEM bankruptcies by demanding payment in fewer than 45 days or arguing that insolvency worries allow them to break contracts with the automakers. After all, the government didn’t think the supplier rescue money would go to the most in-need firms, did it?

President Obama concludes his remarks on the auto industry:

“But there is something I want everyone to remember. Remember that it is precisely in times like these—in moments of trial and moments of hardship—that Americans rediscover the ingenuity and resilience that makes us who we are. That made the auto industry what it once was. That sent those first mass-produced cars rolling off assembly lines. That built an arsenal of democracy that propelled America to victory in the Second World War. And that powered our economic prowess in the first American century.

Because I know that if we can tap into that same ingenuity and resilience right now; if we can carry one another through this difficult time and do what must be done; then we will look back and say that this was the moment when America’s auto industry shed its old ways, marched into the future, and remade itself, once more, into an engine of opportunity and prosperity, not only in Detroit, and not only in our Midwest, but all across America.”

Ironic counterpoint courtesy of CBS News and several recently laid-off employees of a Western Michigan GM dealership.

Irony is the discrepancy between expectation and reality. Hypocrisy is the discrepancy between publicly stated intention and privately implemented execution. I’ll let you decide where President Obama’s statement on the federal government’s intervention in the “U.S. car industry” falls. No matter what you call it, there’s a huge disconnect between the President’s assertion that “We have no interest in running GM; we have no intention of running GM” and the fact that Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) is running GM. I mean, you can’t get much more interventionist than forcing the automaker’s CEO to resign and moving to replace the entire Board of Directors.

Students of history may recall the Works Progress Administration (WPA). Born in the heart of the Depression, 1935, the agency created some three million federal jobs, sucked-up $11 billion worth of taxpayer money (back when $11 billion was a lot of money) and built hundreds of roads, bridges and buildings That said, the WPA did sweet FA to decrease unemployment figures. And its inefficiency was legendary (nicknamed the “Whistle, Piss and Argue”). But the WPA was an integral part of a sea change in federal government power and scope. And now, it’s back! The Detroit News mentions, almost in passing, that Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) is creating a “Director of Auto Recovery for Auto Workers and Communities.” The man tipped to spread the love: Edward Montgomery, a “top labor economist” and former deputy labor secretary. Eddy’s tasked with “working to leverage all resources of government to support the workers, communities and regions that rely on the American auto industry.” His official PTFOA remit after the jump.

Reuters reports that the Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) is taking a “hard line” on the next round of federal bailout bucks for Chrysler and GM. As we’re in the political realm, “hard line” means taxpayers will fund the automakers for the next 60 days while the PTFOA rolls up its sleeves and takes greater control of Chrysler and GM’s business. The implication: they’ll force the unions and bondholders to take a buzz cut and accept a government mandated debt-for-equity swap. Oh, and re-org GM’s Board of Directors to better suit their, uh, tastes.

“We have unfortunately concluded that neither plan submitted by either company represents viability and therefore does not warrant the substantial additional investments that they requested,” said a senior administration official, who asked not to be named.

From the moment Chrysler announced a deal with Getrag to build paddle shift transmissions in Indiana, TTAC flagged it as a disaster in the making. That was back in late ’07. By then, ChryCo sales were tanking. The idea that the ailing American automaker needed—or could afford—700K new transmissions per year was incredible. And so it didn’t come to pass, taking taxpayer credits and grants with it. And now IBJ.com (no really) reports that Indiana Rep. Dan Burton met with U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and demanded that ChryCo refund Tipon County $10M before they get their next round of bailout bucks.

County officials told Chrysler they want the company to honor an agreement to cover all the county’s cost if the plant is not completed. In addition to the $5.5 million in bonds sold to Chrysler, Tipton County wants the company to provide $4.2 million for other bonds and $300,000 in county economic development funds used for infrastructure improvements.

Unbelievable. And yet, there it is, in The Detroit News‘ unsigned editorial: “President Barack Obama’s promise of aid to the auto industry is welcome, but it would also be helpful to the Detroit automakers if he stopped badmouthing them. The president late last week said he expected to provide additional assistance to the struggling manufacturers, but he added that they couldn’t expect to rely on building more sport utility vehicles and depend on continued low gasoline prices.” Yeah, we pointed out the fallacy of President Obama’s pandering to the “Detroit’s comeuppance is due to the fact they were (are?) greedy bastards who forced Americans into SUVs” shibboleth. But we (and by that I mean and I) don’t support the Motown bailouts. Never have. Never will. And, as far as I know, I don’t live on Planet Claire. “While Obama acknowledged the huge slump in auto sales that is hampering the recovery of the auto firms, he still implied that they’re not making vehicles the public wants. That’s just not true.” A genuine WTF moment, n’est-ce pas?

I know, huh? Anyone who spent five minutes thinking about Motown’s $42.4 billion (and counting) feast at the federal bailout buffet would figure out that the beneficiaries are using tax money to discount their products—to support an unsustainable small market share. OK, that last bit’s a bit technical. But the bailout = discount = unfairness media meme is just gaining traction in the MSM. And it’s no small point. As I’ve pointed out here before, those federally-sponsored new car discounts effectively punish automakers who didn’t run their companies into the ground and threaten their products, profits and jobs. The Detroit News wakes-up to the story this morning. Chrysler, you are the weakest link.

The news that the Presidential Task Force on Autos (PTFOA) has decided to “loan” Chrysler and GM more money arrived well ahead of the March 31 (Tuesday) deadline. No less a personage than the president confirmed that Uncle Sam would turn a deaf ear to the 60 percent plus of America voters who oppose Motown Bailout III (Don’t forget the DOE tour). The announcement removed any possibility that GM bondholders and/or the unions would satisfy the previous loan’s conditions for a major debt for equity swap, or that GM would get its brands sorted out. To counter-spin this wholesale lack of “progress,” Bailout III will claim that new, piano-wire like “strings” are attached. Such as?

Remember when the press/GM shareholders were after Car Czar Bob Lutz to take a haircut on his salary given that The General was well on its way to the bailout buffet. “I gave at the office,” Maxium Bob didn’t joke. And then they took away his corporate jet and he quit. Just like that. NSFW this. I’m outta here. Obviously, Detroit News columnist Daniel Howes doesn’t enjoy Lutz-like perks. But today’s column echoes the Czar’s imperious indignation. Danny’s mad as hell at president Obama for suggesting that Motown should make [more] concessions after its next bailout bonanza. What’s the biggie? Did Daniel forget to notice the word “after”? Yup. That and the fact that Detroit’s woes are entirely self-inflicted.

Sacrifice? What, exactly, has this town and its investors been experiencing the past three-plus years? Spring break? This notion, aired during the congressional inquisitions late last year, picked up by Team Obama and wielded by whoever’s trying to score points, that Detroit Auto hasn’t yet “sacrificed” in a (losing?) effort to fix itself is absurd.

So what, you ask, has Detroit done to qualify for this cry of basta? Jump!

Now that the Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) has pre-capitulated on re-upping Chrysler and GM’s bailout bucks, an obvious concern arises: now what? Chrysler offers a tri-branded line of non-competitive products whose sales have been propped-up by federally-funded discounts plus plus plus. GM is still in over-branded, over-dealered, over capacity hell. So, if both companies score big bailout bucks ($22B), what will they spend it on? Building cars? Inventories are already swelled and, here’s the kicker, sales are still declining. As we approach the end of the month, Automotive News [sub] is using the “T” word: “The sales numbers for March, due next week, are likely to reveal another tumultuous month. New-car sales could be down as much as 40 percent, according to J.D. Power and Associates. And the monthly sales rate will continue to flirt with lows not seen in 27 years.” Interesting choice of words; who’s about to get NSFWed here?

The pitchforks are out for bailout-funded Wall Street bonuses, and today’s NPR Morning Report highlights GM’s longstanding perk: free company cars with free gasoline. The Product Evaluation Program entitles 8000 white-collar employees to a new GM vehicle every six months. Drivers are to report problems back to the mother ship ASAP, and currently pay a $250/month administration fee. Current morale at the Tubes likely isn’t all that great, so any benefit is nice. However, it’s now at taxpayer expense, so what’s this fuss all about?

President Obama wasn’t indulging in hyperbole last Sunday when he told 60 Minutes that “the only thing less popular than putting money into banks is putting money into the auto industry.” The Freep reports that a new Polk survey shows that 61 percent of Americans now oppose giving GM and Chrysler more money. More tellingly, support for a continued bailout of the auto industry peaks at only 16 percent in the manufacturing-heavy Great Lakes region and drops to as low as 4 percent in favor in New England. And there’s little room to argue that lack of support is based on ignorance or misperception. About the same percentage of people who opposed more loans also recognized that denying them would have dire economic consequences. One Polk analyst describes the emerging consensus on Detroit’s predicament as “it’s a problem, but it’s not a problem for taxpayers.” Cold.

With what one hopes is feigned incredulity, the Freep‘s Sarah Webster marvels at how political the issue of GM’s bankruptcy has become. “I must confess,” writes Walker with a conveniently wide-eyed naiveté, “I was quite surprised when the issue of whether General Motors Corp. or Chrysler LLC should file for bankruptcy took a turn to the political when the automakers first approached the federal government for a rescue package last fall.” Yeah, it’s a shocker alright. But why is Walker so surprised?

We’ve been hearing a lot recently about GM bondholders’ unwillingness to take the haircut offered by The General—a precondition for federal loans. Ha! Got you! It was supposed to be a precondition. Uncle Sam blew through the first deadline as if that check box didn’t even exist. As the The Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) prepares to dish-up a second helping from the bailout buffet, GM bondholders are tooling-up for next week’s PR war. The “unofficial committee’s” letter to the PTFOA [full text via Reuters] kicks off with the Cerberus defense: ” . . . many of these bonds are owned by average citizens, who purchased them to support their own retirement and college expenses and other critical needs.” As we said when Chrysler’s owners assumed this position, bullshit. As the letter acknowledges, 80 percent of this debt is held by institutions. Meanwhile . . .

From: Harry Wilson

Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 12:52 PM

Friends — I’m sorry for the mass email — as some of you know, I recently joined Steve Rattner and Ron Bloom on the President’s Auto Task Force. While the work before us constitutes an extraordinary challenge, Eva and I are excited to be able to give back in this way at this time.

I’m writing because our primary challenge right now is that the work is complicated and massive, and our team is quite small. We are looking to add people with the following sets of experience:

I think it’s important to realize that the Detroit bailout is no longer an ideological battle. At the beginning of this $40 b-b-b-billion boondoggle (and counting), Motown-fed politicians defended the bailout by screaming “jobs! jobs! jobs!” even though the automakers themselves were screaming no such thing (aware as they no doubt were that those jobs! jobs! jobs! were doomed! doomed! doomed!). Now, you hear very little regarding “saving the middle class.” In fact, the rhetoric claiming we need to shell out for the domestics because “we must protect America’s industrial base” has also gone away. Now, Detroit’s new New Deal rests on a green platform (i.e., EVs), and depends entirely on “viability.” In other words, getting our freaking money back. Only not.

Well, you knew it would. But does it really matter? Now that both Chrysler and GM depend entirely on federal tax money for their survival, who cares if they don’t sell anything? OK, back up. America’s zombie automakers need to sell enough vehicles to maintain some sort of credibility as “viable” companies. But then they can just use the federal “loans” to subsidize lower prices and keep moving the metal, as Chrysler has done. Until, of course, they can’t. Because the general public is well and truly fed-up. First, James Brown sang “Living in America” not “Paying Taxes to Support Detroit.” At the same time, the MSM’s “will they/won’t they file for C11” coverage has buyers nervous about American Leyland’s warranties and residuals. And the two failing automakers have decided to go radio silent on the whole issue (don’t want to scare the horses or queer the lobbyists’ pitch). Bottom line: falling sales and lost “consideration.” As documented by a survey of 40,000 car buyers over the last two months by CNW Research [via Automotive News, sub]:

Troubled Assets Relief Program. TARP. And there I was thinking that the point of the fund was to provide “relief” for financial assets. You know; to defend and protect America’s financial institutions. But no. Ever since President Bush allowed technically bankrupt American automakers to raid the fund, the definition of the word “assets” has been… flexible. And now, it includes auto suppliers. Of course, in Bailout Nation, where the Chief Executive must form a 25-plus-member, multi-million dollar (hey, these ARE lawyers) Presidential Task Force on Automobiles to make a decision, you need a whole new level of bureaucracy to bail out auto suppliers. The AP reports.

The Detroit Free Press rightly points out that ChryCo execs are headed straight for the AIG bonus backlash.

Rep. John Dingell warned Chrysler Wednesday against paying more than $20 million in retention bonuses, and called for a 95% tax on all bonuses paid by companies receiving any money through the Troubled Asset Relief Program…

“While I recognize these are different from the AIG bonuses, it is still dumb for them to pay out these bonuses at this time,” said Dingell, a Dearborn Democrat. “Chrysler should think long and hard about the optics of executive bonuses, especially at a time when UAW workers and retirees are making remarkable concessions.”

Yes, I’m going to open this can of worms. Detroit News columnist Daniel Howes did so this morning—although his thoughts on Bonusgate somehow didn’t make it to the paper’s homepage. Howes’ main argument: how can the Obama administration claim that they had to pay $165M worth of executive bonuses because they were legally obliged to do so—when they’re happy to force Chrysler and GM to renegotiate legal contracts with the unions and bondholders as a precondition for double dipping at the bailout buffet? And you know what? He’s right, even if he somehow forgets the seven million [taxpayer] dollars ChrCyo and The General are spending for lobbying our legislators and, by extension, commander-in-chief.

Perpetuating this double standard — one set of rules for troubled Wall Street firms with a demonstrable record of fat campaign contributions and another for automakers with union labor and little clout in Washington — is arbitrary, indefensible and deserves the backlash buffeting Congress and the Obama administration.

And then, of course, Howes goes too far.

The Financial Times carries the crazy news that General Motors is planning to celebrate its next bailout check by throwing more money–-your money—on the hood of its moribund metal. I repeat, GM wants to increase sales and reduce profits by using your taxes to reduce its prices to sell its cars that it wouldn’t be making–-couldn’t be making—if GM didn’t get some $30 billion of your tax money. This would [almost] explain GM’s otherwise inexplicable decision to increase production during the second quarter by 45 percent: they really do believe they’re going to sell a shit load of cars. Which they might if they slash, say, 50 percent off sticker. Hell, why not? It’s not their money. As TTAC, commenter lw points out, “the new owners are not interested in profits.” Wait! Don’t tell me! GM announces it’s “Thank You America” sale.

The New York Times has an interesting piece today comparing automotive rescue plans to earlier government intervention in the railroads. As apt a comparison as it might be, the piece ultimately advocates exploring an option for the auto rescue based on Conrail, the government-owned rail holding company created in 1976. If the American Leyland model worked for trains it might just work for autos, right? “The ideological debate already in progress,” says Wharton prof Peter Cappelli, “is whether government should actually direct the auto companies, stepping into management, or passively give them more loans, and then get out of the way.” Hows that for a choice?

The Freep reports that Obama’s Car Czarlet, Steve Rattner, is steering his Presidential Task Force On Autos away from earlier considerations of bankruptcy for GM. “Bankruptcy is not our goal,” Rattner tells the Freep after a week of Kool-Aid sampling in Detroit. “I’ve been in and around bankruptcy for 26 years as part of my private-sector work. It is never a good outcome for any company, and it’s never a first choice.” And by turning away from bankruptcy restructuring, the PTFOA has eliminated the only real possibility for comprehensive, radical changes to Detroit’s business model. The result? Don’t expect a single major turnaround effort to tackle Detroit’s unsustainable posture.

At least that’s the latest media meme…

Followers of the Motown meltdown may have detected a strong whiff of mafioso about the whole enterprise. Did I say enterprise? That sounds a bit too industrious, even though the automakers have been working hard to turn $7 million worth of your hard-earned taxes into about $35 billion in additional bailout bucks. On the other hand, we have the term “criminal enterprise.” As in you pay me my money or I’m gonna hurt you. If you still don’t pay, I’m gonna NSFWing kill you. (Organized crime may be organized but it’s not terribly clever.) To wit [via Automotive News]:

Chrysler LLC said today it may close its plants in Canada unless it gets sufficient labor concessions as well as government aid and resolution of a tax dispute.

In case you were thinking the recent CAW agreement with GM shows the way out of that particular part of ChyrCo’s Mexican standoff (also a NAFTA member!), Co-Prez “Tommy Gun” LaSorda’s got news for you, after the jump.

Talk about ROI… The Washington Post reports that General Motors and Chrysler are using $7M of their $17.4B federal “loan” to lobby for their next snootful of bailout bucks.

In the last three months of 2008, just as slumping auto sales pushed the two Detroit carmakers closer to bankruptcy, GM spent about $3.9 million on lobbying, according to a review of its most recent disclosure forms. Chrysler and its parent company, Cerberus Capital Management, reported spending about $3.4 million.

The Post forgets to account for the lobbying parity between the artist formerly known as the world’s largest automaker and the Crisis Corporation. Lest we forget, Cerberus has another huge mouth to feed at your expense: GMAC. Which received a $6B bailout and a last minute waiver of the Fed’s rules for bank incorporation. And how, pray tell, do the automakers’ owners justify using your money to get more of your money?

Ford gets props from anti-bailout folks for being the only Detroit automaker to not seek TARP bailout loans. But as several stories today indicate, Detroit’s putative last man standing is still seeking government sugar, if only in less direct ways than its hapless competitors. Automotive News [sub] reports that Ford is requesting the German government to extend its cash-for-clunker rebate, threatening temporary plant shutdowns if the handout sunsets at the pre-arranged 600K unit mark. “The bonus is smart, simple, and it works,” says Ford sales poobah Ingvar Sviggum. “Here is my appeal to the German government: The bonus is good for the auto industry, the country and for the consumer. So please stay with it. If the scrapping premium is not extended, there will be a dramatic decline in demand in the second half of the year as a result.” Just over 200K of the rebates have been claimed, leaving about 400K still to be claimed in the measure’s original run. But, y’ know, extend it anyway. Or else.

I was wondering how to report this aerial photograph of two members of the bailout bestowing Presidential Task Force on Autos (PTFOA) returning one of Chevy’s plug-in electric/gas hybrid Volt mules to the paddock. I stumbled upon this description of the death of a black hole at WonderQuest.co. Seemed appropriate.

According to Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, our space vacuum teems with invisible particles that flash into and out of existence like virtual fireflies.

Suppose a pair of particle-antiparticles pops into being, conveniently enough, within effective range of the black hole’s gravity.

This time the bearer of good news is retired General Wesley Clark and his “ Growth Energy” K-Street advocacy group. The special K says increasing the ethanol blend limit to E15 could create 136,101 new jobs and inject $24.4b into the US economy annually. How? According to the firm’s appalling report, bumping the federal blending mandate to E15 would double the “demand” for ethanol. As the report notes, in the mother of all Freudian slips “6 bgy of production capacity would be required to produce 20.4 bgy of ethanol (including current reserve capacity). This level of expansion could be met by the construction and operations of 60 100 bgy corn ethanol plants (emphasis added).” Of course they meant 60 100 mgy plants, but numbers have just become so darn confusing since billion became the new million.

Delphi and Visteon were spun off from GM and Ford respectively at the turn of the millennium, in hopes of cutting costs and improving efficiency. But rather than creating healthy, solid companies they could rely on as major suppliers, the Detroit OEMs used the spin-offs to dump unwanted assets, UAW workers and fixed-cost obligations on their new partners. And now GM and Ford are reaping the bitter harvest of their ill-advised spin-offs. Visteon, which has never turned a profit, just had its stock delisted last week after losing $663M in 2008. Delphi has been in Bankruptcy since October 2005, and, having lost $1.48B last year, it is barely surviving on cash infusions from the General, which really could have used the dough. And both suppliers are threatening to take down America’s two largest automakers.

The Presidential Task Force on Automobiles (PTFOA) rolls (flies?) into Motown today for a pow-wow with the ow-ow brigade. But wait! There’s more! Photo op alert! The AP tersely reports that “members of the government’s auto task force will test drive a General Motors Corp. electric car and tour a Chrysler LLC pickup truck factory on their Detroit-area visit Monday.” Whoa! GM has an electric car? Ohhh. They mean the electric – gas hybrid Hail Mary known as the Chevrolet Volt. The Detroit News—which previously linked their Volt-driving headline to a story on GOP opposition to more bailout bucks that forgot to mention either cart or pony (oops!)—is [now] a bit more forthcoming.

Students (student?) of Sunday TV magazine shows will know that the Republican Party is beginning to realize the political advantages of throwing Detroit to the lions—I mean, upholding their responsibilities as guardians of the public trust (and purse). “The best thing that could probably happen to General Motors, in my view, is they go into Chapter 11,” Senator John McCain said on Fox News Sunday. Which would help GM reboot (not that John would ever say anything so hip), reorganize (not that John knows what that would entail) and renegotiate its labor contracts (ah-ha!) and emerge “stronger, better, leaner.”

According to the silver-lining seeking scribes at The Detroit News, the Presidential Task Force on Automobile is taking the long-term view on the Motown meltdown. Hang on. Didn’t DetN scribes Gordon Trowbridge and Christine Tierney read Daniel Howes latest column? You know, the one where Mr. Howes called bankruptcy deniers “deluded.” And yet, less than twenty-four hours later, the word “bankruptcy” appears in the DetN’s Task Force article exactly none times. Instead, there’s a hopeful assumption that the Obama admin wants YOU to support Chrysler (maybe), GM (definitely) and Ford (maybe) for as long as it takes to . . . well, we’ll get to that in a minute.

The federal auto task force that arrives in Detroit on Monday has spent the past two weeks meeting with a range of industry players, pushing its work beyond the automakers’ immediate cash crisis and strongly hinting at a longer term goal… the group’s focus appears to extend far beyond the balance sheet, looking more deeply into the question of what a successful U.S. auto industry would look like in the long run.

Yeah, that’s what I want: a gaggle of professional politicians deciding what the American auto industry should look like under a new five-year plan. So, how much is this boondoggle going to cost me? As the DetN points out, it’s not all about money (even though it is). DC’s going to make sure there’s plenty of green in that mean, mean, mean; mean green.

Everyone’s favorite feel-good broadsheet, SubPrime Auto Finance News, reports that 13 members of congress have written a letter to Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, and Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, requesting another raid on TALF, the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility. The congressional bagmen “applaud the joint efforts of the Federal Reserve Board and the Department of Treasury to promote liquidity in consumer loan markets through the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility.” Because making $200B available was an interesting start. “However,” continue the servants of the public trust, “we are concerned that the program may not sufficiently address the problems facing the domestic automobile industry.” Oh dear.

I’m not using the poker definition of the word “hit” here—despite the obvious metaphor of GM drawing on 20 in a game of 21. (Three decades ago.) I’m speaking here in the Britney Spears sense of the phrase. Well, actually, it’s not me. It’s none other than House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi. According to The Detroit News, Nance told reporters today that she supports a strong manufacturing sector. “But this isn’t endless,” she said. “And there has to be a sign of viability and it has to come soon.” Spears fans will recognize Ms. Pelosi’s cry for a pistonhead portent as an echo of Ms. Spears lachrymose lament. So, what sign of viability does the D.C. politician want; you know, as GM has already submitted its official viability Powerpoint presentation? If she’s looking for some kind of sales turnaround, well, uh, anyway . . . “The White House’s top auto advisers will travel to Detroit next week to meet with all three domestic carmakers, Obama administration and auto industry sources said Thursday.” Huh?

CAUTION! PROFANITY AHEAD! Automotive News [sub] reports that the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) is telling the world what it’s going to tell The Presidential Task Force on Automobiles on Friday: don’t blame US for this shit. It’s essentially the same message NADA gave Congress back when GM and Chrysler first proffered their $19.4B begging bowl: don’t fuck with us. Let the market decide how many goddamned dealers Detroit can afford (even though US tax money is propping-up their dead man walking metal makers). At the same time, NADA plans to ask the Task Force a simple question: where’s OUR goddamned bailout? “NADA leaders also plan to urge government policies that would ease credit for vehicle inventory financing at dealerships. A lack of floorplan financing and unreasonable terms by lenders are forcing dealerships to curtail orders from automakers and in some cases shut down, NADA contends.” You know, this has the makings of a pretty good operatic score, in both senses of the word . . .

Covering Detroit’s massive health care liabilities is perhaps the single greatest challenge facing those working on the auto industry bailout, reports the Washington Post. Detroit retirees in particular represent a huge commitment, as current health care benefits include dental, vision and prescription drug benefits for the low price of $11 per month. And as the automakers burn through their cash, they must come up with some way of maintaining or cutting benefits in the face of rising health care costs. GM currently carries $20B in health care obligations, over ten times its market capitalization. Chrysler owes $10B and Ford owes $3.2B of its total $13.2B VEBA commitment this year alone. With bailout plans calling for automakers to inject equity rather than tight cash into the VEBA system, a number of unintended consequences are being forecast.

OK, first Chrysler Co-Prez Jim Press flies to Geneva (first class?) to schmooze with . . . not Fiat. Oh no. Press told the press that their alleged small car partner had already been to Auburn Hills and called it good. So no need to hang out with what the company’s touted as Chrysler’s savior. “No formal meetings planned,” to use the proper PR parlance [via Automotive News]. So . . . how’s that “satisfying the government’s conditions to score another $5 billion from the federal bailout buffet” thing doing? Great! “Jim Press said today that the automaker was ‘hopeful’ the automaker had all the criteria necessary to receive additional U.S. government loans.” Automaker, automaker, let me come in! Tell me exactly who owns shares in ChryCo. No? Well, then, let’s have a closer look at Press’ hopes, dreams and fears re: Chrysler’s progress on Uncle Sam’s loan criteria, shall we?

In a Letter to the Editor in today’s New York Times, Cerberus CEO Mark Neporent fights back against the widely-held opinion regarding his employer’s relationship with Chrysler: you bought it, you pay for it. And yet, the CEO refuses to divulge the “retirement plans, charitable and educational endowments and individuals” who’ve invested in Chrysler, who he claims to be protecting (with our money). Until Cerberus names names, the equity firm’s insistence that taxpayers should be on the hook for their mismanagement of a dying car brand lacks any hint of credibility. And man, does it piss me off.

Why Can’t Cerberus Foot the Bill?” (editorial, Feb. 23) imposes an unfair double standard by suggesting that Chrysler’s shareholders should be treated differently from the shareholders of General Motors or Ford.

Cerberus’s investors are pension and retirement plans, charitable and educational endowments and individual family savings. Our investment guidelines limit the amount of capital committed to any single investment.

A UAW workers writes:

REMEMBER WORLD WAR 2? who did America & the World turn to in that time when Japan & Germany were murdering millions of people in the world – The WORLD turned to the Americans for help and how did America help win the war against Japan – I’ll tell you who it was, The Big 3 Auto Companies that’s who- FORD – GM & CHRYSLER – they rebuilt and retooled all their factories and plants so that they could build Tanks – and Jeeps and Trucks and Troop Carriers -Boat Guns and Ship Artillery Cannons – and many types of Weapons and other Equipment – Do you think that when World War 3 comes that Japan and other companies will retool their factories to help America – NO THEY WILL NOT. After 9/11 in New York, Who was it that gave 10 million dollars each? There was only 3 companies that gave that much and guess what else they gave? They gave Fleets of Cars and Trucks / SUVs’ and Building Spaces – It was the Big 3 -FORD -GM & Chrysler that’s who it was – I’ll tell you who else gave, it was USA Harley Davidson Motorcycles they gave 1 million dollars and a fleet of new Motorcycles for N.Y. Police Department – and with all that giving during one of our nations darkest time- Honda & Toyota and all the other foreign car companies DID NOT GIVE ONE PENNY to the people of the United States of America for 9/11 or Hurricane Katrina. Ford- GM & Chrysler Did.