En la república bananera del norte
June 16, 2012I’ve mentioned before that it seems obvious the Obama administration is paying off its union backers with political favors. So this article from the Wall Street Journal wasn’t much of a surprise, though it still shocks me that the Executive branch interceded in judicial proceedings in such a transparent and heavy-handed way. How in the world did it get away with that?
Sherk and Zywicki: Obama’s United Auto Workers Bailout
If the administration treated the UAW in the manner required by bankruptcy law, it could have saved U.S. taxpayers $26.5 billion.President Obama touts the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler as one of the signature successes of his administration. He argues that the estimated $23 billion the taxpayers lost was worth paying to avoid massive job losses. However, our research finds that the president could have both kept the auto makers running and avoided losing money.
The preferential treatment given to the United Auto Workers accounts for the American taxpayers’ entire losses from the bailout. Had the UAW received normal treatment in standard bankruptcy proceedings, the Treasury would have recouped its entire investment. Three irregularities in the bankruptcy case resulted in a windfall to the UAW.
My father was a member of the UAW for several decades though he never worked for one of the Big Three auto companies. (He worked at Caterpillar, building engines for dozers and graders and the like.) So the UAW had some influence on my raising, though I’m not sure how much or what kind. But this deal still stinks, Mr. King.
Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock had this to say about the lawlessness of the Chrysler bailout back in 2009.
No Truce With Kings 
Leave a Reply