MSNBC, Wash. Times echo GOP accusation that UAW killed bailout
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: On-screen text at MSNBC and a Washington Times article and headline echoed the Republican accusation that the United Auto Workers union killed the $14 billion bailout for General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. In fact, Senate Republicans refused to support legislation endorsed by the White House, a majority of members of the House and Senate, and the UAW.
On the December 12 edition of MSNBC Live, while anchor Andrea Mitchell interviewed Republican National Committee chairman Vin Weber, MSNBC aired the caption, "Union fails to agree to Republican demands for immediate wage cuts." Similarly, in the lead paragraph of a December 12 article headlined "Wage issue kills Big 3 deal in Senate; Union refuses GOP conditions," The Washington Times reported that "Senate leaders gave up Thursday night on a $14 billion automaker bailout, sunk by the refusal of the autoworkers union to agree to the concessions that Republicans had demanded as their price for support." In fact, as Media Matters for America noted, a $14 billion compromise bailout bill for GM, Ford, and Chrysler supported by the United Auto Workers and the White House passed the House of Representatives by a 237-170 vote. Then, in the words of Edmund L. Andrews and David M. Herszenhorn of The New York Times: "After Senate Republicans balked at supporting a $14 billion auto rescue plan approved by the House on Wednesday, negotiators worked late into Thursday evening to broker a deal, but deadlocked over Republican demands for steep cuts in pay and benefits by the United Automobile Workers union in 2009."
Cloture, which was opposed by a majority of Senate Republicans, failed in a 52-35 vote on December 11.
The MSNBC on-screen text and Washington Times headline and lead paragraph echoed the accusation by Republicans that the UAW killed the bailout bill, or as South Carolina Republican Jim DeMint is quoted as saying in The Washington Post, "It sounds like UAW blew up the deal."
Earlier in the day on MSNBC Live, anchor Tamron Hall also echoed this Republican accusation, stating that "The deal fell apart because the auto worker's union refused to give in to Republican demands to reduce workers' wages." But during a segment in the hour of MSNBC Live following the use of the chyron, Hall asserted: "This morning the leadership of the UAW, the union coming out and basically saying that this boiled down to people who are against Detroit and people who are against the union. So you've got the American people here and they're watching and they're concerned about themselves, they're concerned about the economy, and their neighbors, and they hear that 3 million people could lose their jobs, but the folks that we vote into office are using the union, trying to slap them and teach them a lesson." Hall then asked Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), "What do you say to people at home who are hearing those union leaders say, this has become about them and an anti-union sentiment in this country?"
From the 2 p.m. ET hour of the December 12 edition of MSNBC Live:
HALL: This morning, the leadership of the UAW -- the union coming out and basically saying that this boiled down to people who are against Detroit and people who are against the union. So you've got the American people here and they're watching and they're concerned about themselves, they're concerned about the economy and their neighbors, and they hear that 3 million people could lose their jobs, but the folks that we vote into office are using the union, trying to slap them and teach them a lesson.
What do you say to people at home who are hearing those union leaders say, this has become about them and an anti-union sentiment in this country?
SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): Well, it's shocking. It's shocking, but [UAW] President [Ron] Gettelfinger, I believe, is absolutely correct in the end analysis, and it does not speak well of some in Congress. And the reality is that we put in process a short-term bridge loan, had to be repaid, and a process over 90 days to bring everybody to the table to agree to cuts and to restructure so this industry can be viable long-term. But we had a group of Senate Republicans who wanted the workers to negotiate with them first --
HALL: Right.
STABENOW: -- separately, before everybody else. And so, this goes back to the whole question of what's going on here.
HALL: Right.
STABENOW: Seven hundred billion for Wall Street; what about Main Street? What about the middle-class workers?
Sorry all.... I copied and pasted the post above broken down into easy to read sentences... and somehow it got all clumped.... forgive me.
Very nice post, Capt. Thanks.
I'm confused. All of a sudden, the Republicans are worried about how much the UAW workers make. Were they equally worried about how much the investment bankers make?
They just dumped several hundred BILLION dollars in the laps of a bunch of Wall Street shysters with zero accountability, and now they're all tightassed about lending a tenth of that to the industry that comprises the core of our manufacturing base?
Something stinks here. There's a Troglodyte idealogue pulling the strings in the background somewhere. This is all about busting the Unions.... period.
No wonder you're confused. You're looking at it all wrong.
See, the investment bankers RISKED more, and therefore their salaries and bonuses were well-earned. Whereas your typical autoworker hardly has anything to lose.
Hope that helps.
Yep, Nerz, they're honoring the Gippers memory.
I'm always amazed that so many average working Americans can be talked into hating blue collar workers and worshipping the wealthy. I guess it has to to with their own daydreams skewing toward the idle rich lifestyle rather than actually doing some work.
I guess it has to to with their own daydreams
Can we call it "Joe the Plumber Syndrome"?
I wasn't even thinking about "Joe" the make-believe "plumber", Foghorn, but that's a very good example. The pinheads have been scared into thinking that if they hit a real longshot, and increase their income six- or seven-fold, they'll be "punished" with crippling taxes.
And they've been sold this fantasy by people making 6 or 7 times what they make, or more. Suckers.
It would be class warfare for someone from the unwashed masses to suggest that a captain of the financial industry suffer when it's these very same people who've created all of these jobs in the first place. And given us benefits in addition to our salaries.
I blame the damn unions for my financial failures. If it weren't for them, my children would have been in the factories instead of school. Earning a living and bringing their pay home to the old man.
Why do you say the repubs gave all that money to the banks, I believe that was a complete bi-partisan bailout.
Nice story, but you are forgetting a couple of things:
(1) The Japanese government built the Japanese company a nice training facility in Japan and had them work for 25 years in Japan perfecting their training/market, while the American company was left to fend for themselves in the "free market."
(2) After they won the "race", those nice folks down in Kentucky set up a sweetheart deal so that Toyota would not have to be pay as many property taxes. They also set up their laws so that Toyota would not have to pay their workers as high wages as they do at Ford.
(3) The Japanese government, being those tax and spend liberal people that they are, gave all the people at Toyota in Japan health care for free so that Toyota in Japan could have more money to invest elsewhere.
In other words, this is the philosophy that government is the root of all evil coming to roost, sometimes good government does play a part in the greater good. Your premise is otherwise correct, Executive Management was allowed to take bonuses and outsource jobs - perhaps proper forward government policy would have stopped this in its tracks.
Welcome to GOPerville!
Oh lord, just got this off of think progress:
Yesterday, Secretary of State Condelezza Rice sat for an interview with CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo. In a portion of the interview that does not appear to have aired, Bartiromo asked Rice about her “thoughts on the Republican party.” Rice claimed that the GOP has played a large role in bringing the country to a place where “people can look beyond race“:
snoop...for cryin out loud...do you have to drag racism into every thread?
I'm not the hall monitor...or the thought cop...so it makes no difference to me what you post...to each their own.
But all I can say is you must have really experienced some severe racism in your life to be so consumed with it.
Nah, it was my wife who experienced it. But ya know, I thought I was on the other thread where I intended to post this. I didn't know you were that sensative though...
the GOP has played a large role in bringing the country to a place where “people can look beyond race“:
Rice is partly right. The GOP screwed up everything so fantastically that a part-black man with Hussein as his middle name could get elected.
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Corker (R-TN)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Not Voting - 12 Alexander (R-TN)
Biden (D-DE)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Smith (R-OR)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Wyden (D-OR)
Some, oscar, but most of the missing had a reason. Kerry was in Potsdam, and Biden is busy with the transition. I hope you aren't suggesting half a dozen democrats could have a greater impact than 39 republicans.
The 52 Ayes included 10 Republicans, 35 Nay votes included 4 Democrats. Move the 4 to Ayes and the Ds only needed 4 votes to pass the bill. Biden busy? Apparently, Obama must not have been too busy to vote. Down to 3, Kennedy, Widen, MIA. Kerry picked a heck of a time to be out of the country, don't you think? We seem to be missing one somewhere along the line. I saw the vote as 52 - 35, leaving 13 absent and you only have 12 absent. Who is missing from the list? And yes, 6-7 Dems would have had a greater impact than 37 Republicans, but apparently they thought otherwise.
"Apparently, Obama must not have been too busy to vote."
Um.... Oscar.... perhaps you didn't get the memo.....but...
Obama resigned his position as a Senator, so he can no longer vote on any bills.... hence the debacle as it pertains to Rod Blagojevich's moronic attempt at trying to sell Obama 'old' senate seat to the highest bidder.... or did FoxNoise tell you to forget that little tidbit?
I confess that I missed the date as to when the resignation was effective. I assumed it would have been effective at the start of 2009, my bad. That accounts for the missing vote, but makes the effect of Kennedy, Kerry, Widen not being present to vote and the 4 that jumped the ship even more critical. I'm also amazed that Hagel did not vote (his would have probably been Aye). Perhaps the Senate leadership was unable to "buy" votes through added appropriations to make the bill fly. Ah, well, it looks like it is going to happen anyway (the big three(?) will get their dollars and our children/grandchildren/etc will get the bill, hopefully the loans will be paid back, auto and financial and perhaps pigs will grow wings).
Maybe those bills being paid back will include all the money given to the rich, oh thats right, that won't happen. Maybe all the money wasted in Iraq....won't happen.
This article discusses the truth behind the $73 figure and what the real issues are. Some important points worth noting:
1. The true hourly compensation of Detroit’s unionized work force: roughly $55 an hour. Honda’s or Toyota’s (nonunionized) workers make $45 an hour.
2. Retiree benefits are roughly $15 an hour.
3. If you reduced retiree benefits by $10 an hour and reduced worker rates $10 an hour to $45, you would only reduce the cost of building an automobile by $800.
Republicans really wasted our time trying to focus on union wages. The bottom line is the big three chose to push bigger cars, and republicans like Tom Delay fought fuel efficiency standards telling us he "won't make americans drive smaller cars", and the big three also have several lawsuits against California and other states who pushed for higher EPA standards than the federal limit. Heck, there are even tax incentives for businesses up to $100K for buying big gas guzzling Hummers thanks to republicans.
If this bill had passed we might have had higher EPA standards and a forced retooling of our plants. Now we get what Bush brokers. Oh joy of joys.
I've stated many times, the problem is a whole lot deeper than the "floor" wages, be they $75, $70, $55, $45, or $30 or the $2/vehicle "earned" by the CEO. Look back to the first post and one can get a sense of the problem, too many layers between the bottom and the top and those layers are too heavily populated for the "productivity" coming out of them. Build the vehicle for no labor costs, pay the CEO $1/year and GM would have still lost money last year. Looking back (ain't hindsight wonderful?), it's easy to see that 4-5 years ago, they made the wrong decisions based on product mix. And people like Delay did not help. Now there were good reasons for the tax incentives, but like all things, those incentives were abused. Example, a local owner of a paint, wallpaper, blinds, etc store purchased two Hummers (complete with Company Decals in the windows). Completely unnecessary for his business. I can see the larger trucks, vans, etc for the local electrical contractors, plumbing contractors, HVAC contractors and General Contractors, even in 4 wheel drive because of some of the terrain around here, but does Joe the Plumber's wife need a Hummer for her jaunts around town? No. I drive a small pickup (16 years old) because my commute is short and I often use it to transport landscaping materials, home improvement materials and such for use around the homestead. Would I buy a hybrid to replace this vehicle? Probably not, because I'm only putting about 3,000 miles a year on it, it's paid for and well maintained.
That's what I like about you Oscar, you're practical!
I agree that the business models pursued by the B3 were off target.
However today, despite the poor management...the auto industry in general is in trouble. The Nov. sales report shows:
-- General Motors, down 41.3 percent, Ford Motor, down 30.5 percent, and Chrysler, down 47.1 percent...At Toyota, sales fell 33.9 percent. Honda sales dropped 31.6 percent and Nissan’s plunged 42.2 percent. --
Great link, snoop. And if you follow the links found in your article you find some other informative articles...like the Ceo's of the B3 have all pledged to reduce their salaries to $1/yr.
Yet, the bad news continues with GM planning on cutting their work force by 20%...closing nine factories...and a couple of thousand dealerships.
Perhaps this sunday warship on the big 3's behalf will help?
<groan!>
$1 a year, big whoop. It's a symbolic gesture.
Let them give up their stock options and bonuses and then they'll have some skin in the game. Iacocca pulled the same crap in '78, but he still parlayed his one dollar/year salary into a 43 million dollar payday with all his perks.
Heck, they could agree to make no more than 25 times the lowest paid employee in the company and show some real courage. Foregoing all their perks and attaching laborers salary to theirs would not only be proper and fair, it make sense. It would give CEO's greater incentive to raise wages and it would uplift people in the middle class. It would build workplace trust and since job satisfaction is the greatest incentive for productivity, it would raise productivity. It's win-win.
You're right, Roundhouse, to a lot of these guys, the salary is just gravy.
I heard a caller to one of the wingnut radio shows last week,with that complete confidence that you only hear in the completely brainwashed, asking why Barack Obama hasn't committed to working for a dollar a year for his first term. She didn't mention what she thought the Bush gang should be sacrificing, but I guess she was convinced that there was an Obama Recession going on.
They are unbelievable.
Thanks, C&L! If there was any question about the GOP position on the auto bailout, this memo should put that to rest...
From: Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:12 AM
To: Subject: Action Alert -- Auto Bailout
Today at noon, Senators Ensign, Shelby, Coburn and DeMint will hold a press conference in the Senate Radio/TV Gallery. They would appreciate our support through messaging and attending the press conference, if possible. The message they want us to deliver is:
1. This is the democrats first opportunity to payoff organized labor after the election. This is a precursor to card check and other items. Republicans should stand firm and take their first shot against organized labor, instead of taking their first blow from it.
That is the crux of the matter. Written down so every mothers son can see what these miscreants are head for In the tradition of Ronnie Raygun that union busting sweet old man. The air traffic controllers have never fully caught up. In the course of things we went from importing less than we exported to fitting the definition of a third world country exporting more raw material than we process
Thanks Snoop. I'd heard about this quote. I just sent a letter to both of my Democratic Senators.
OT but thought you'd like this Christmas video from the Phelps Family at Westboro Baptist.
Excellent, WK, and surprisingly easy to dance to, I had a Christian pamphlet years ago exposing the real evil of Santa. He said "Ah hahahahah" instead of "Ho HO Ho", and seemed to willfully overshadow Jesus.
I think your link's dead. Here's another.