Thursday, June 11, 2009


I guess I have been kind of waiting to see exactly how all of this was going to play out, but, silent I can no longer be.

You may ask yourself what cars and politics have in common. Well, up until the end of 2008 about the only thing that they had in common was that politicians sure like to regulate what the average gas mileage a line of cars was. But, then everything changed. Now, they are so intertwined that you can't tell where one ends and the other begins.

I was reading over at the Gateway Pundit about the closing of Chrysler dealerships. It seems that any dealership that gave money to the GOP was in danger. If you examine the 789 dealerships that were closed, they gave money to the GOP over the Democratic Party at a ratio of 42-1 (for every dollar given to the Democratic Party, $42 was given to the GOP). Now, I am actually hearing on CNN Headline News that Congressional hearings are being held about the closing of these dealerships.

Another thing that directly ties these two things together is the fact that in bankruptcy proceedings, without regard to the actual bankruptcy laws, the United Auto Workers (UAW) Union is actually gaining ownership in Government Motors and Chrysler/Fiat. Now, I must ask, "Why in the world should one of the biggest contributors to the problems that these two companies are facing should actually gain from this?" The answer is actually quite simple. The UAW has been one of the biggest contributors to the Democratic Party and to the king liberal himself. It is a reward for their loyalty.

I know I have included a letter from Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) before, but, one I just received puts all of this into perspective.

Dear Friend,

The bankruptcy filing of General Motors last week didn’t have to be this way.

GM could have – and as many of us argued at the time, should have – declared bankruptcy last December. Our bankruptcy laws exist to give troubled companies a chance to restructure their business models and get out from under crushing debts.

But now, after we lost $50 billion in a misguided bailout scheme, the bankruptcy GM is entering is not even real bankruptcy. It’s a political bankruptcy, brokered by the Obama administration to reward the very people who helped to destroy the company in the first place.

Under the agreement, investors and creditors were wiped out, while the federal government, the Canadian government, and the labor bosses will own 90 percent of the new company.

Going forward, GM won’t be able to make the tough business decisions necessary to get back to profitability. They will be second-guessed and overruled by politicians in Washington. Meanwhile, as GM becomes a government program, car companies that are succeeding will have to compete at an unfair disadvantage – all because the labor bosses funneled millions of dollars to Democrat candidates over the last few election cycles.

It isn’t fair, and it needs to stop.

Broken companies and greedy labor bosses shouldn’t be rewarded for their failures. Washington needs to get out of this quagmire before politicians do to our auto industry what they’ve already done to our financial system.

A free auto market will help revive our industrial economy, and give GM its best chance to succeed.

As always, freedom will work…if we let it.

Jim DeMint

United States Senator

(I have to say something here, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is actually the Senator from the district in which I vote, but, I get more information out of Sen. DeMint's office than I do from his, so, I do use Sen. DeMint more often.)

I for one, am of the belief that these two companies should have filed for bankruptcy if they were in trouble to begin with. Just as the financial companies should have. That's the beauty of capitalism. If a company is managed poorly, it fails. The bankruptcy system allows these companies to restructure and try to recover. Airlines have done it in the past. Some have survived. Some have perished. Either way, the unions have had to make concessions so that the companies can survive.

The UAW has made no discernible concessions. They say that their people get paid an average of $28 per hour while Toyota and other foreign companies building cars in the United States pay their employees an average of $30 per hour. This is true. However, the one thing they don't want you to know is this: the foreign companies do not have to deal with the UAW. But, because of the UAW, the average cost of building one vehicle for GM, Chrysler, or Ford is up around $75 per hour. There are some people who actually make more money by not working than they ever did when they were actually producing something for the company, plus, the companies actually spend more money, per hour, on people who don't actually work for them anymore than they do on the production workers themselves. I don't know about you, but, this just seems totally backwards to me.

You combine this with the fact that the federal government loves telling the car companies what kinds of cars they need to make and it is no wonder that they are having financial problems.

A recent report showed that GM had 20 vehicles that actually made a profit. Now, when you consider that GM includes GMC, Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac, Hummer, and SAAB, 20 vehicles making a profit is not all that many. But, of those 20 vehicles, 11 of them are trucks and SUV's. These are the very vehicles that Democrats want to get rid of. They want the company to build vehicles that are "more environmentally friendly". In other words, they want the company to build cars that only a handful of people actually want to buy.

The king liberal has also stated that he had no desire to run these companies. However, actions speak louder than words. He has actually forced the GM CEO to resign. He has assigned a CAR CZAR. What in the world is that if it isn't someone in HIS administration to tell these companies what they can and cannot do?

What is happening in this country is EXACTLY what the founders and writers of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence didn't want to happen. However, the king liberal looks at the Constitution as a restriction. He feels that instead of telling what it's limits are, it should say what the government SHOULD do.

CARS and POLITICS. They shouldn't be synonymous, however, today, they are.