[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 185 (Wednesday, December 10, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10843-S10844]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            BAILOUT DECISION

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the very important issue 
before the Congress this week: the proposed bailout of the three major 
U.S. auto manufacturers. Of course, I have looked at this issue and the 
proposals that have been put forward very carefully because this is 
such a serious issue. I have studied the draft language that was 
released on Monday that certainly constitutes the proposal as we have 
known it for the last few days. I have followed all of the discussions 
and ongoing negotiations and ongoing changes to that language proposed 
Monday. In fact, I have offered concrete--hopefully helpful--
suggestions of movements that could possibly garner my support. Based 
on all of that, after very careful thought and consideration, I have 
reached two inescapable conclusions for me. First, I cannot support 
this proposed bailout of the three U.S. auto manufacturers. Second, 
because I believe this proposal actually dooms those companies to 
failure, doesn't save them from it, I will use every procedural tool 
available to demand an amendment process on the floor of the Senate and 
to delay and block the measure as it presently stands.
  I don't come to this conclusion lightly. I certainly realize that the 
failure of these companies, should they go under, would be devastating, 
first for millions of individuals and fine American families and 
secondly for our economy as a whole. In reaching this decision, I don't 
trivialize or minimize in any way the impact of that sort of failure. 
Certainly that has been brought home to bear in my State, particularly 
in northwest Louisiana. We have a significant GM plant in Shreveport. I 
am very aware of the positive impact of that plant. I am very aware of 
the workers there, the families, the suppliers who are affected. And, 
of course, all across our State, I am very aware of auto dealers and 
other folks who are tied so closely to this industry. I oppose this 
bailout plan, not in spite of the suffering to all those folks and our 
economy that failure of these companies would bring, I oppose this

[[Page S10844]]

bailout plan because of that level of suffering, because of that 
significance to individual workers and families and the economy as a 
whole.
  That may seem a bit of an odd statement to some folks. Why do I say 
that? Well, for two reasons. No. 1, this proposal, at its core, is 
about giving these companies $15 billion of loans, $15 billion on the 
promise of a detailed restructuring plan yet to come. So we give them 
significant amounts of money--$15 billion--so that they go through that 
process, so that they start that discussion, so that they come back to 
us months later with a detailed restructuring plan.
  Well, my reaction to that is pretty simple. I think the average 
American would say: What? Isn't that putting the cart before the horse? 
$15 billion, and then later, after that is out the door, we will see a 
detailed restructuring plan? Secondly, even more important than that, 
it means that the impetus, the pressure to make that restructuring 
truly fundamental, truly to the core, which is absolutely necessary for 
these companies to survive, that pressure is not nearly as great as if 
we held the money until that detailed restructuring plan was presented.
  The second reason I will vote against this bailout plan, the second 
reason I believe it actually would doom these companies to failure is 
that I believe it politicizes the management of these companies right 
at a time where they need to move in the opposite direction so that 
business and engineering considerations alone guide their company's 
futures.
  Let me say bluntly, I have no confidence--absolutely no confidence--
in the present management of these three companies. But let me also 
say, if there is a way for that to go from bad to worse, it is by 
injecting into the process politics and a political appointee such as 
this so-called car czar. That would make a very bad situation very much 
worse. It would politicize further the management of these companies, 
again, when they need to move to a situation where business and 
engineering considerations alone guide their decisions.
  Another good, specific example of this politicization is language 
which has been in the proposal so far to actually prohibit these 
companies from legally challenging various moves for individual States 
to impose onerous, complicated, different environmental standards on 
them. Again, we are bringing political mandates, political pressure, 
political decisions to bear right at a time when these companies need 
to move in the opposite direction, get away from all of that, which has 
been a part of the reason they are where they are today, and base their 
future decisions on business and engineering considerations alone.
  For these companies to survive, no matter what taxpayer dollars are 
involved, they need truly core fundamental restructuring. They need to 
revamp and revisit all their obligations, all their business models, 
all their labor contracts, all their dealership associations--
everything that constitutes them as they presently are. They need to do 
that; if not in a bankruptcy process, they need to do that through a 
process which is the equivalent of bankruptcy, just by another name.
  This plan which is being worked on and will be presented before us is 
not that. What is worse, it is not only not that, I believe it will 
prevent that from ever happening and will, therefore, doom these 
companies to failure, no matter what taxpayer dollars are thrown at 
them.
  Again, for this reason, I have reached what is for me a clear and 
inescapable conclusion. No. 1, I cannot support this general bailout 
plan. No. 2, because I believe this plan will actually doom the 
companies to failure, I will use every procedural tool available to 
demand a fair and open amendment process on the floor of the Senate and 
to delay and block the measure as it presently stands.
  Mr. President, with that, I yield back the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Thank you, Mr. President.

                          ____________________