Pelosi and Reid Back an Auto Bailout

As the NYT reported yesterday, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have written Hank Paulson requesting he provide relief to the auto industry using TARP funds. First, in her statement on the meeting with the auto industry, Pelosi emphasized what I did in my first post on this–the need to preserve manufacturing in this country.

It is essential that we preserve our manufacturing and technology base in this country.

In addition, in their letter, Pelosi and Reid stress accountability and energy efficiency–pushing precisely the kind of goals that many commenters described in this post.

Were you to determine that the automobile industry is eligible for assistance under EESA, we would urge you to impose strong conditions on such assistance in order to protect taxpayers and maximize the potential for the industry’s recovery.  An automobile industry that is forward-looking and focused on ingenuity, competitiveness, and the creation of green jobs for the future is essential to its long-term viability.  Other taxpayer protections should mirror those required of financial institutions currently participating in the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), such as limits on executive compensation and equity stakes to provide taxpayers a return on their investment upon the industry’s recovery.  Any assistance to the automobile industry should reflect the principles contained in EESA that guard against the need to recoup costs to the taxpayers.

We must safeguard the interests of American taxpayers, protect the hundreds of thousands of automobile workers and retirees, stop the erosion of our manufacturing base, and bolster our economy.  It is our hope that the actions that Congress has taken, and that the Administration may take, will restore the preeminence of our domestic manufacturing industry so that it can emerge as a global, competitive leader in fuel efficiency and in new and path-breaking energy-efficient technologies that protect our environment. [my emphasis]

While Pelosi and Reid seem convinced the auto industry needs this bailout, they seem intent on placing conditions on it–with the goal of energy efficiency paramount.

I am pessimistic that Paulson will respond to Pelosi and Reid’s request–he has thus far resisted GM’s requests to be considered for funds under TARP–and that Treasury has the capability to offer the kind of oversight that this would require. Read more

Share this entry

The Dying Auto Industry: Should We Save It?

While we’ve all been distracted by the election, the American auto companies (and, to a lesser extent, the auto industry more generally) has been brought to the edge of collapse. I’m going to do a few posts on why that happened (CW oversimplifies the issue dramatically), what to do about it, and–in this post–whether we should save it.

Why to Save It: To Salvage Our Non-Financial Economy

Different people have different reasons to argue for saving the Big Two and a Half. Some people talk about nationalism, some people talk about the sheer number of jobs tied to the auto industry. But the most compelling reason, IMO to save the US-owned auto industry, is to reverse the trend toward an increasingly financial-based economy.

Kevin Phillips, among others, has written a lot about how unstable economies become as they become more and more dependent on the house of cards of financial-driven economics. We have seen about the risks of such a shift in the last few months and years. Our economy has been largely built on consumer spending driven by credit card debt and the housing industry–and by the "profits" of real estate-related debt (and, in the auto industry, more debt-driven spending as I’ll explain later). But that growth was largely illusory and largely reliant on the goodwill of other nations to the dollar economy.

Our economy increasingly relied on finance (at the expense of agriculture and manufacturing and other productive industries) for several reasons: it’s what we did well, the developing world was increasingly competitive in other sectors, and our own government made conscious policy decisions that favored finance. You could say that even while manufacturing was disappearing because NAFTA and other policies our government adopted made us increasing uncompetitive, our government refused to let finance fail.

And look where that got us.

The biggest reason I can offer for salvaging the US auto industry is because, given the lessons of the financial meltdown, we need to return our economy to one that better balanced making stuff with financing stuff. Sure, we should have bailed out textiles before it all went overseas. We should have slowed the loss of electronics. But because we didn’t save those industries doesn’t mean we shouldn’t now–particularly given the lesson of the financial collapse–work to save what manufacturing we have left.

We need to save the auto industry because cars are one of the few things we make anymore–and we need to focus our economic recovery on the things we make rather than on the bubbles we finance.

Read more

Share this entry

Yes

This morning I asked,

Did McCain Reverse Course on His New Economic Plan to Wait for Obama’s New Plan?

 It appears the answer to that question is, "yes."

On a conference call just now, McCain policy adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin said that Sen. McCain would address the economy tomorrow — "he never intended to speak about the economy today," according to Holtz-Eakin.

"He will in fact talk about economic conditions and those harmed most deeply harmed by them," Holtz-Eakin said.

And he’ll unveil new proposals.

I guess McCain just needed to take a peek at what the smart kid had answered before he finished his own take-home test.

Share this entry

Did McCain Reverse Course on His New Economic Plan to Wait for Obama’s New Plan?

There’s been a fair amount of coverage of the way the McCain campaign promised–then reneged on their promise–to deliver new proposals to fix the economy.

Despite signals that Senator John McCain would have new prescriptions for the economic crisis after a weekend of meetings, his campaign said Sunday that Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, would not have any more proposals this week unless developments call for some.

The signs of internal confusion came as the campaign was under pressure from state party leaders to sharpen his message on the economy and at least blunt the advantage that Democrats traditionally have on the issue in hard times.

[snip]

On Saturday, his advisers were considering a range of economic ideas, one indicated. On Sunday, on the CBS News program “Face the Nation,” Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a confidant of Mr. McCain, confirmed a report on Politico.com that Mr. McCain was weighing proposals to cut taxes on investors’ capital gains and dividends. “It will be a very comprehensive approach to jump-start the economy,” Mr. Graham said, “by allowing capital to be formed easier in America by lowering taxes.”

But McCain advisers later said they did not know why Mr. Graham said that. One noted that Mr. McCain’s economic plan already would cut capital gains and dividend tax rates, by extending President Bush’s 2003 tax cuts. At the phone bank, Mr. McCain declined to answer a question from a reporter about what he was considering.

“We do not have any immediate plans to announce any policy proposals outside of the proposals that John McCain has announced, and the certain proposals that would result as economic news continues to come our way,” said a campaign spokesman, Tucker Bounds. Mr. McCain’s policy adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said, “I have no comment on anything, to anybody.”

(See also TP’s smackdown of Politico’s crappy "reporting" on this head fake.)

Meanwhile, hidden behind the quiet facade of a campaign that doesn’t have this turmoil, look what Obama’s doing this morning:

Toledo, OH

Today in Toledo, OH, Senator Obama will deliver a major policy address to lay out his economic rescue plan for the middle class. Our economy is facing its greatest uncertainty in over 70 years, we have lost 760,000 jobs this year and the unemployment rate is expected to reach 8 percent. Families, who saw their incomes decline by $2,000 in the economic “expansion” from 2000 to 2007 now risk seeing deeper income losses. Retirement savings accounts have lost $2 trillion. Millions of homeowners who played by the rules have seen their housing values plummet and are having a hard time making their mortgage payments. And credit markets are nearly frozen, preventing businesses large and small from accessing the credit they need to meet payroll and create jobs.

Read more

Share this entry

From Pollan to the President

I’ve been arguing for a while that Michigan–the state with the second greatest agricultural diversity after California–ought to use innovations in sustainable agriculture as part of its plan to drive economic recovery.  Agriculture is going to have to be more sustainably produced in the future, and MI is uniquely suited to lead in developing the policies and technology to accomplish this goal.

But then, we should be talking about how to pursue this sustainable future more widely.

Which is what Michael Pollan does in this long letter to the next President, recommending a number of changes to our food policies. Here are Pollan’s comments on the ties between our food and the petroleum that goes into it. 

After cars, the food system uses more fossil fuel than any other sector of the economy — 19 percent. And while the experts disagree about the exact amount, the way we feed ourselves contributes more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than anything else we do — as much as 37 percent, according to one study. Whenever farmers clear land for crops and till the soil, large quantities of carbon are released into the air. But the 20th-century industrialization of agriculture has increased the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by the food system by an order of magnitude; chemical fertilizers (made from natural gas), pesticides (made from petroleum), farm machinery, modern food processing and packaging and transportation have together transformed a system that in 1940 produced 2.3 calories of food energy for every calorie of fossil-fuel energy it used into one that now takes 10 calories of fossil-fuel energy to produce a single calorie of modern supermarket food. Put another way, when we eat from the industrial-food system, we are eating oil and spewing greenhouse gases. This state of affairs appears all the more absurd when you recall that every calorie we eat is ultimately the product of photosynthesis — a process based on making food energy from sunshine.

[snip]

The F.D.A. should require that every packaged-food product include a second calorie count, indicating how many calories of fossil fuel went into its production. Oil is one of the most important ingredients in our food, and people ought to know just how much of it they’re eating.

[snip]

Read more

Share this entry

McCain’s Housing Surge

Almost no one on the left is talking about McCain’s attempt to seize the economic debate last night (conservatives would be, but they heard it and went into shock). But it’s a funny gimmick that deserves closer attention. Here’s what McCain proposed:

Shaffer: With the economy on the downturn and retired and older citizens and workers losing their incomes, what’s the fastest, most positive solution to bail these people out of the economic ruin?

[snip]

McCain: Well, thank you, Tom. Thank you, Belmont University. And Sen. Obama, it’s good to be with you at a town hall meeting.

And, Alan (ph), thank you for your question. You go to the heart of America’s worries tonight. Americans are angry, they’re upset, and they’re a little fearful. It’s our job to fix the problem.

[McCain babbles about energy independence, taxes, and our debt before he hits his housing plan]

We’ve got to have a package of reforms and it has got to lead to reform prosperity and peace in the world. And I think that this problem has become so severe, as you know, that we’re going to have to do something about home values.

You know that home values of retirees continues to decline and people are no longer able to afford their mortgage payments. As president of the United States, Alan, I would order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes — at the diminished value of those homes and let people be able to make those — be able to make those payments and stay in their homes.

Is it expensive? Yes. But we all know, my friends, until we stabilize home values in America, we’re never going to start turning around and creating jobs and fixing our economy. And we’ve got to give some trust and confidence back to America.

I know how the do that, my friends. And it’s my proposal, it’s not Sen. Obama’s proposal, it’s not President Bush’s proposal. But I know how to get America working again, restore our economy and take care of working Americans. Thank you. [my emphasis]

Mind you, this was McCain’s answer to the first question–he had come into the auditorium, gone immediately to his notepad to write down whatever he was coached on backstage, and then given this answer to the first question.  Read more

Share this entry

Are There ANY Adults Left in the Republican Party?

The RNC just released an ad attacking the bailout their president and their presidential candidate have been pushing. Sure, ostensibly it’s an attack on Obama’s plan to provide stimulus for the economy–but the whole thing is premised on Bush’s bailout.

It turns out, the ad was sent to stations yesterday morning, before the bailout bill failed.

The ad, however, seems to assume that it can safely attack a successful plan. And the reason may be the timing: Though it started airing this morning, the spot was released to stations yesterday morning, ad executives at stations in Michigan and Pennsylvania said.

Kae Buck of WLNS in Lansing said her station received the at at 7:55 a.m. Monday.  Luanne Russell of Pittsburgh’s WTAE said her station received it at 10:49 Monday morning.

The ad taps into deep resentment of the plan, but it comes at a time when the candidate it supports, John McCain, is urging its package, and asking that it not be referred to as a "bailout," but a "rescue."

If I were Reid and Pelosi, I’d condition any further bailout negotiations on the RNC withdrawing the ad and apologizing for it. It’s bad enough Bush fucked up the economy so badly. Now his party wants to use his own failure to beat Democrats over the head for their plans to fix the broken economy.

Update: Just fixed bone-headed grammar mistake in the title.

Share this entry

Barney Promises to Be Really Nice to the Poor Little Republicans

Me, I say we start asking John Boehner to name names–to list the 12 Republicans who put their poor little feelings ahead of the economy.

Share this entry

The Bush Economy

djia-bush.thumbnail.jpg

January 19, 2001: 10,587.59
September 29, 2008: 10,365.45

NASDAQ Jan 19, 2001 = 2770.38
NASDAQ September 29, 2008 = 1983.73

CPI, January 19, 2001: 175
CPI, September 29, 2008: 219

Dollar exchange with Euro, January 19, 2001: 1.068
Dollar exchange with Euro, September 29, 2008: .695

Share this entry

Tweety Blames McCain

And why not? After all, McCain said he was responsible this morning. 

One thing that works in our favor for the CW (in assigning the blame for this to the Republicans) is that most TV pundits are so solidly members of the village, they can’t imagine sacrificing Wall Street to the fates of the free market. So I expect it won’t just be Tweety blaming Republicans–and John McCain in particular.

Share this entry