Saturday, December 13, 2008

Did Big Three Try to Buy Their Bailout?

MAPLight, a nonpartisan group that "illuminates the connection between campaign donations and legislative votes," has cast a spotlight on the bailouts the Big Three have already provided to Congressman who supported the $15 billion bailout. Auto manufacturers, auto dealers and labor unions gave an average of $74,100 in campaign contributions, over five years, to each Representative voting in favor of the auto bailout. That's 65% more money than the $45,015 average to each Congressman opposed.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good post - and the reason nobody in the deal wants bankruptcy considered, as it would finally force meaningful, painful reform on both sides who have much blame to share.

Two of the big three companies have very successful European operations amid very worthy European competitors. In fact, GM and Ford kick ass and take names in Europe.

Chapter 11 will force reorganization that will set up survivors (likely Ford and GM) for long-term success. Bailouts, by any name, will accomplish nothing, save to prolong their inevitable demise.

Anonymous said...

Where are the numbers on the Wall Street bail outs? Where's that break down? Apples and oranges? Southern Senators killed the deal and they are ALL GOP'ers and union busters! Rich get richer..and the poor get nothing!

Anonymous said...

The rich got their money but when the working man asks for help..forget it! Sickening what has happened to this great country.

Blah Society said...

If the Big 3 don't get what they want in the Bush administration, they'll get it when Obama takes office. It's only a matter of time.

What ever happened to bailing out healthcare and education?

Anonymous said...

Even though ten Republicans voted for the bailout bill the Democrats couldn't get enough of their members to reach the sixty votes needed to end debate. Whether one was for or against this bill one thing is clear, this is just another failure to lead that can be laid at the feet of the Democrat leadership.

Scott Armstrong

Anonymous said...

Armstrong, the other day someone redefined Ron Angle.
Look in the Encyclopedia under "Whack Job"You will see your picture and name.

Bernie O'Hare said...

Anon 10:52, Although I would not blame this problem on either party and disagree with Scott, his view is very welcome here. He is informed and signs his name to his comments. Anonymous personal attacks are not welcome here and will be deleted.

DemoThug said...

Scott..

re the Senate vote...

Dems

voting party line... 81.63%
voting against party line... 8.16%
not voting... 19.20%

Repubs
voting party line... 63.27%
voting against party line... 20.41%
not voting... 16.33%

You argue that the Dems suffer from a lack of leadership? What afflicts the R's? Indigestion? Gas?

Seems to me you had better move out of that glass house before tossing stones.

Anonymous said...

The Democrats control the senate and its agenda, that makes them the responsible party. They couldn't line up enough votes to bring closure to debate. That failure to bring their own members(ten) into line on what they themselves said was an issue of vital importance to the nation is viewed as a defeat by those who wished to see the proposed legislation voted into law. This is merely the latest example of legislative mismanagement by Washington Democrat leaders.
Name calling on local blogs fails to change this dynamic.

Scott Armstrong

Anonymous said...

As a Republican I will agree that for too long the party has lacked direction. However, for once, "the Republicans" have demonstrated leadership by standing up for the nation's long term best interest rather than surrendering to the facility of the moment.

Scott Armstrong

Anonymous said...

Leadership? Where? Who? Out of your mind if you call this leadership! 1/20 can't get here soon enough!

Anonymous said...

Yes, January will be a joyful day for many. However, with this date comes responsiblity. The Democrats will be in total control. The public will then hold them to account for all that follows. Being against/contrary to something or someone will no longer be enough. I look forward to the Democrats presenting their plans for governance.

Scott Armstrong

Anonymous said...

Of course they did!

Just as anyone born of the male specie would deny had they been caught getting a blowjob in the bathroom at the company Christmas party, with the boss...

As Detroit is getting their welfare, so did the southern states and their senators respectively but it was called economic development.

If it means saving our country, then load up the bus's and head on down to one of the many prosperous non-union auto plants and bring this country back to greatness.

We can only wish that our economic prosperity depended on a single industry.

Anonymous said...

the above comments demonstrate how Scott Armstrong got the label "extreme partisan". When talking about corporate greed, Scott couldn't stick to the argument at hand (that big auto and wall street are buying their bailouts). Instead he launched into a partisan rant.

Want to talk about leadership: how did the allentown and lehigh county GOP do under it's paid and volunteer leadership from 2005-2008?

Anonymous said...

How has the City of Allentown fared under Democrat leadership 2001 to present?

Higher taxes and fees, more debt, fewer police, more crime, more poverty.

I hope that we can agree that just because a party is able to win an election does not mean it is able to govern effectively.

Anonymous said...

Dave said...
"The rich got their money but when the working man asks for help..forget it! Sickening what has happened to this great country."

If your measuring stick for bailouts is how something compares to the incredibly stupid banking bailout, then you might have a point. However, neither bailout makes any sense.

I find it interesting that many of those who have been the first to complain about the "evils" of big corporations and "corporate welfare" are now at the front of supporting the largest instance of corporate welfare in our nation's history.

The Big 3 are in this situation for a variety of reasons, and there is a mechanism already in place to solve the problem. It's called bankruptcy, and it allows the company to reorganize and come out stronger.

Why on earth should the American taxpayer go on the hook to help companies that are not competitive? Somehow, many other auto companies (American Honda, Toyota, BMW, etc) have managed to turn a profit here in the US.

I also find it funny that Ford was right in line to get its share of the bailout money, but once they got a sense of the strings that would come with the funds they decided they didn't need it. I guess if you put a pot of "free" money in front of people, the inclination is to find a reason to take it.

To succeed, this country needs to get out of the bailout mentality. If a company can't remain competitive, management and workers have to work together to solve their problems on their own.

Anonymous said...

"I hope that we can agree that just because a party is able to win an election does not mean it is able to govern effectively."

and yet the local GOP can't win elections in the city of allentown. 2005 was a sweep. 2007 was a sweep. My goodness: if the city is in such dire straights, shouldn't one win in 4 years be possible?

Oh, I forgot: blame the voters.

Anonymous said...

You are correct - everything is great in the City of Allentown. The same goes for Philadelphia and Detroit, to name a few.

Surely if something were wrong in those towns the Democrats could not win.