Brain-Jockey

Give Back the Bucks Before Bailout Redux

Written by Audrie Zettick on December 12, 2008

This latest round of bailout mania was similar to buying new tires for a car that really needs a transmission overhaul.  Nice idea, might be needed, but ultimately won’t make much of a difference.

 

  

At the start of bailout mania, it was common knowledge that the companies in trouble from the financial industry were among the biggest contributors to Federal candidates.  Since 2002, the financial sector has given more than $1.1 billion to congressional candidates. This isn’t a partisan issue, it crosses party lines.  

  

And now comes the auto bailout.  

  

 

Some might claim money doesn’t talk, but in this case, it’s screaming.  According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (which runs the website OpenSecret.org), House members who voted for the bailout received significantly more money than those who did not.

 

  

“House Democrats voting to bail out Detroit’s Big Three have collected 44 percent more money, on average, from auto manufacturers, dealers and unions than Democratic opponents of the bill. Republican supporters have collected 62 percent more than opponents in their party.”

 

 Can’t wait to see the Senate figures.

 

 

 Bankruptcy versus Bailout: Where Money Counts 

 

 

For the automakers, one of the major differences between the option of bankruptcy and the government bailout is the effect on the unions.  Bankruptcy would virtually guarantee that union contracts become null and void and/or must be renegotiated. With a government bailout, there is no guarantee of union concessions.  (As a condition of the bailout, Sen. McConnell fought for a legislative alternative that would have required the unions would lower their wages to equal those of foreign car manufacturers who had plants in the U.S.–it didn’t fly)

 

 

This why we should all be worried about bailout redux: the United Auto Workers PAC gave $1,899,950  to Democrats in the 2008 election ($12,500 was also given to Republicans……this maybe buys a lug nut, not new tires).  

 

 

The money being thrown around by the auto industry itself is more evenly distributed  but GM, Chrysler and Ford still gave significant money.  Auto dealers traditionally give more to Republicans, most likely because their perspective is small business…policies traditionally supported by the GOP.  

 

 

 

Nancy Pelosi, in the 2008 cycle, received  $10,000 from the AFL-CIO  (which includes the United Auto Workers.  Rahm Emanuel received $4,000 directly from the UAW. Might sound paltry until you look at the big picture:    

 

 

“The UAW ranks 16^th in “heavy hitters”  for donations since 1989 — having given $25,188,550 (98% to Democrats)”

 

 

As Politico.com reported, Chrysler, GM and Ford spent $926,500 on federal candidates and political committees in 2008 — $167,500 of it during the period between Oct. 16 and Nov. 24 alone.

 

 

Since analysis shows a trend in how members of Congress vote on this issue based on donations, I call on our elected officials to give back the 2008 donations that appear to be creating a conflict of interest.

 

 

No new tires…..I want a new transmission.