$14B auto bailout bill failed to pass

Jul 10, 2007
12,050
3
0
*stands and applauds*
stick it to the UAW.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The future of the U.S. auto industry was in doubt Friday morning after a proposal for $14 billion in federal loans died in a late night Senate vote.

The Senate voted 52-35 to bring the measure for a vote -- short of the 60 votes needed to advance the legislation. The failure followed the collapse of negotiations between Senate Democrats and Republicans seeking a compromise that both parties, as well as the companies and the United Auto Workers union, could accept.

The dramatic late-night developments could doom General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) to a bankruptcy and closure in the coming weeks, with Chrysler LLC potentially following close behind.

While Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500) has more cash on hand to avoid an immediate crisis, its production could be disrupted by problems in the supplier base, as could the production of overseas automakers with U.S. plants such as Toyota Motor (TM) and Honda Motor (HMC).

Investors around the world reacted negatively. Stocks closed lower in Japan and Hong Kong and were trading down in Europe. U.S. stock futures were down sharply. General Motors was trading 34% lower and Ford 11% in premarket trading. Chrysler is privately held.

GM and Chrysler said in statements that they were disappointed but did not reveal their next moves.

"We will assess all of our options to continue our restructuring and to obtain the means to weather the current economic crisis," according to the GM statement.

GM has continually said it could not continue to operate if it is forced to file for bankruptcy. In response to reports that the company has hired a prominent bankruptcy attorney, GM said its board "is meeting frequently and monitoring the situation very closely and is committed to considering all options -- as is management -- and has engaged appropriate advisors for all contingencies."

However, the Big Three could still wind up getting government funding. Bush officials warned wavering GOP senators earlier Thursday that if they didn't support the legislation, the White House will likely be forced to tap funds from the Wall Street bailout to lend them money, two Republican congressional officials told CNN.

The White House has been strongly opposed to using any of the $700 billion in bank bailout funds to help the auto industry, but the Bush administration has also said the Big Three must get some financial assistance soon.

"It's disappointing that Congress failed to act last night," said White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto. "We will evaluate our options in light of the breakdown in Congress."

The measure the Senate turned back would have provided $14 billion in federal loans as a stopgap measure until the new Congress and the incoming Obama administration could reach a longer-term solution.

While the package was far less than the $34 billion requested by the automakers earlier this month, it would have seen them through their current cash crisis.

GM has said it needs $4 billion by the end of the month or its cash reserves will fall below the level it needs to continue operations. It needs another $6 billion in the first two months of 2009, according to its request to Congress. Chrysler had said its cash would run out early next year and it would need $4 billion in the first quarter to continue operations.
Hopes for compromise quickly faded

Earlier in the evening, it appeared that the two sides were getting close to an agreement on the bailout. But just after 10 p.m., Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced a failure to reach an agreement and that he would call for a procedural vote to test support for the measure.

"We have worked and worked and we can spend all night tonight, tomorrow, Saturday, and Sunday, and we're not going to get to the finish line," Reid said on the Senate floor before the vote. "That's just the way it is. There's too much difference between the two sides."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the sticking point was the United Auto Workers union's refusal to put employees at U.S. auto manufacturers at "parity pay" with U.S. employees at nonunion plants operated by foreign automakers in the United States.

Negotiations centered around proposals from Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., that would have set dates in 2009 by which the automakers receiving the loans had to reach cost cutting agreements with unions and creditors or be forced into bankruptcy. Corker said the two sides were very close to a deal and stumbled on the deadline for the union to agree to the reduced pay.

"We are about three words away from a deal," Corker said.


Currently, analysts estimate the union workers at U.S. automakers make about $3 to $4 per hour more than the non-union U.S. employees of foreign automakers like Toyota and Honda, according to the Center for Automotive Research.

The benefit costs are significantly greater for U.S. automakers, though, because they have to pay health care costs for hundreds of thousands of retirees. The union agreed to close much of that gap in the 2007 labor agreements by shifting responsibility for retiree health care to union-controlled trust funds. But those changes won't take effect until 2010.

The House easily passed the bailout bill Wednesday night but it quickly ran into trouble in the Senate, where Republicans objected to several provisions.

Locked due to OP failing to include own input.

Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
:thumbsup:

Now if only these guys had stuck to principles over the past 8 years the way they're doing now, we'd be in better shape overall.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
69,045
26,922
136
Death to the workers! To hell with the economy, the workers must die! Way to go Republican scum.

Incidentally, nationalizing health insurance would save the big three and be a long term fix.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: ironwing
Death to the workers! To hell with the economy, the workers must die! Way to go Republican scum.

Incidentally, nationalizing health insurance would save the big three and be a long term fix.

Fake outrage FTL.

Nobody wants the workers to "die". Me especially (Dad works for GM).

But you can't honestly believe these loans would solve anything in the long term, do you?

It's the UAW's fault for promising concession and then backing out once they thought the loans would go through.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
:thumbsup:


What else I find interesting is that the Dems caved to Union pressure (Dems receive tons of money from the unions) but the Repubs did not cave to the auto makers (Repubs receive tons of money from the auto makers). So, who's in the pocket of their contributors?
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,625
5
81
They just need to promise 4 or 5 more lines of large SUV's.. then they will be fine :)
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
3
0
LOL @ all the "thumbs up" smileys from the idiots who apparently don't know that they did take pay cuts, and are pretty close to the wages of Japanese factories'.
 

DukeN

Golden Member
Dec 12, 1999
1,422
0
76
The retarded thing in all of this is that the wages and benefits only make up 10% of the overall costs or less. The automakers have done a great job with painting the workers as the cause of this great evil.
 
Jul 10, 2007
12,050
3
0
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
LOL @ all the "thumbs up" smileys from the idiots who apparently don't know that they did take pay cuts, and are pretty close to the wages of Japanese factories'.

really? ya don't say...

Currently, analysts estimate the union workers at U.S. automakers make about $3 to $4 per hour more than the non-union U.S. employees of foreign automakers like Toyota and Honda, according to the Center for Automotive Research.
 

brencat

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2007
2,170
3
76
I've had CNBC on all morning since 7:30. Bob Corker was on ~ 8:30 and stated the parity pay issue was what doomed it. That he and his colleagues wanted the union to agree to a date in 2009...left up to them, and language was broad enough to give them wiggle room. Also gave them an out if the Sec of Commerce (Richardson in the new Obama administration) overruled the date. But the UAW refused.

Now just 15 mins ago, I watched the Ron Gettlefinger press conference. He made it somewhat political -- "Republican Senators" doomed this bipartisan compromise. He also talked about how he wasn't confident of negotiating with Corker, who they don't really know that well, that after showing their hand Corker might not then be able to deliver the votes anyway and they would then be in a weaker bargaining position later.

Finally he mentioned 4 internal emails from Toyota (sources unknown, could be B.S.) in the past 9 mos claiming how the UAW was falling behind on pay in the industry. He backed this up with two more memos that showed how Toyota wages, when you factor in the $6 - $8k bonuses their workers at a certain plant received last year, were actually higher than the UAW's by ~ $2/hr.

The problem I have with that last comment particularly, is that everyone knows that bonuses give corporations huge flexibility. So it's total B.S. that Toyota's wages are higher. YOU CAN'T COUNT THE BONUS Ron. Toyota's wages in a good year, counting bonuses, might be on parity, but the salaried wages ARE LOWER than the UAW. I'm not surprised that no one challenged him on this in the follow up Q&A.
 

Skitzer

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2000
4,415
3
81
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
LOL @ all the "thumbs up" smileys from the idiots who apparently don't know that they did take pay cuts, and are pretty close to the wages of Japanese factories'.

Define "pretty close".
According to a CNN report I just heard they are nowhere near close.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,377
1
0
I hope this works out for the best and by "best" I mostly mean for the laborers and the rest of middle class America.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,433
204
106
Pay is one thing, pensions and benefits are another, and work week hrs another.
All these things are considered compensation.
Which the UAW is way ahead of non-union american auto workers.

Its like a game of chicken the UAW is playing where they think if they stick to their guns the Fed is gonna save them . . . .
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,377
1
0
The decrease that the Reps wanted the UAW laborers to endure in 2009 is about 30% after taking into consideration everything they get in both wages and benefits. I personally believe that was asking for a bit too much too fast. I think 15%-20% would have been more reasonable. I don't blame the UAW for saying no to that.
 

Rustler

Golden Member
Jan 14, 2004
1,253
1
81
Dingy Harry attaches a Pay raise for Federal Judges to the Auto Bailout..................................
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Interesting to note that conservatives seem to love their little war on the workers. Cheap labor FTL! But then act surprised when the unions and union workers all vote Democrat. I guess the GOP is happy to add another group of voters to the ever-growing list that will never vote for them, eh?
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,496
20,599
146
Originally posted by: CPA
:thumbsup:


What else I find interesting is that the Dems caved to Union pressure (Dems receive tons of money from the unions) but the Repubs did not cave to the auto makers (Repubs receive tons of money from the auto makers). So, who's in the pocket of their contributors?
To be fair though, many of the Republicans leading the charge are from states where foreign auto makers have plants and are building more. Personally, I don't think they deserve to be exonerated as not being in someones' pocket.

 

CRXican

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2004
9,062
1
0
I don't have much love for GM but I don't get any pleasure out of seeing them fail. I do believe that the autoworkers are overpaid for what they do.

 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: Xavier434
The decrease that the Reps wanted the UAW laborers to endure in 2009 is about 30% after taking into consideration everything they get in both wages and benefits. I personally believe that was asking for a bit too much too fast. I think 15%-20% would have been more reasonable. I don't blame the UAW for saying no to that.

I guess at this point when you are begging for help one shouldnt be a chooser. What is worse. 30% paycut to fix the company with a potential recovery down the road or out on the street until Toyota buys the factory and reemploys you at the same rate?
 

Ktulu

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2000
4,354
0
0
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
They just need to promise 4 or 5 more lines of large SUV's.. then they will be fine :)

Um okay. Or they could have just continued within the plans they currently had producing more fuel effient cars and wait till 2010 when they could finally start turning profits thanks to the concessions from the UAW gave them last year.

:confused:

I guess some people just hated GM so much that they want them to die no matter what the consequences.
 

brencat

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2007
2,170
3
76
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Interesting to note that conservatives seem to love their little war on the workers. Cheap labor FTL! But then act surprised when the unions and union workers all vote Democrat. I guess the GOP is happy to add another group of voters to the ever-growing list that will never vote for them, eh?

It was never about punishing workers. It's about sticking to principles of capitalism and free markets, including competition, and survival of the fittest. Why is it that Honda, Toyota, and BMW are thriving while building cars in the U.S. with non-union labor?

Simple: they make a better product.

Believe me, I'm saddened that we might see mass layoffs of good folks very soon. But I don't believe in saving poorly run companies with crappy products either, just because the consequences might be ugly.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Interesting to note that conservatives seem to love their little war on the workers. Cheap labor FTL! But then act surprised when the unions and union workers all vote Democrat. I guess the GOP is happy to add another group of voters to the ever-growing list that will never vote for them, eh?

Add? Let me know when the last time the UAW was a big backer of republicans.
UAW will get what they paid for though. They just have to wait until next year. Then they will cash in their chips and pull the stings of their democrat puppets.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,195
126
The reason it failed is because Senators with Japanese companies building cars in their states sold this country down the tubes.
UAW excuse is just that, an excuse. They wanted to kill this bill, and they succeeded, for a time. Next year, we'll see.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,496
20,599
146
Originally posted by: senseamp
The reason it failed is because Senators with Japanese companies building cars in their states sold this country down the tubes.
UAW excuse is just that, an excuse. They wanted to kill this bill, and they succeeded, for a time. Next year, we'll see.
Don't forget German and Korean.