[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 24477-24478]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         AUTO INDUSTRY REVIVAL

  Mr. McCONNELL. The auto industry is vitally important to our Nation's 
economy, and it is vitally important to my home State. This is not in 
dispute. The question before us is how to reverse the decline of some 
of those automobile manufacturers after decades of complicity between 
management and labor.
  I understand congressional Democrats sent a revised proposal to which 
the majority leader referred, to the White House late last night. We 
will reserve our judgment until we see the latest text. But the 
proposal we saw yesterday afternoon fails to achieve our goal of 
securing long-term viability of ailing auto companies.
  I wish to support a bill that revives this industry. But I will not 
support a bill that revives the patient with taxpayer dollars, yet does 
not secure a commitment that the patient will change its ways so future 
help is not needed. To do so would be a betrayal of the millions of 
hardworking taxpayers who are not at fault for the troubles in the auto 
industry. It would be unfair to the millions of Americans who depend on 
these companies.
  On the management side, the draft plan released yesterday fails to 
require the kind of serious reform that will ensure long-term viability 
for struggling

[[Page 24478]]

automobile companies. By giving the Government the option of cancelling 
Government assistance in the event that reforms are not achieved, 
rather than requiring it, we open the door to unlimited Federal 
subsidies in the future.
  Instead, we should demand management make the tough choices that are 
required for long-term viability. This is the only fair approach from 
the standpoint of the taxpayer who is footing the bill. On the labor 
side, this bill proposal fails to require any serious reform of legacy 
costs. Indeed, it states explicitly that one of its purposes is to 
preserve the same retirement and health care benefits that have made 
these companies so uncompetitive.
  It is delusional to expect a company that spends $71 per labor hour 
to compete with a company in a neighboring State that spends $49 per 
labor hour. In short, this proposal is deeply flawed because it fails 
to assure taxpayers, who rightly expect us to be good stewards of their 
hard-earned money, that they will not be asked to shell out billions 
more in a few years or even a few months from now.
  Now, there are times when help is needed. But one thing most people 
expect when they are asked for help is that the one asking makes a 
commitment to change. This proposal does not go nearly far enough. It 
holds neither management nor labor truly accountable.
  In areas where one side is held accountable, the other side is not. 
One example is a provision that requires automakers to drop all legal 
challenges to State fuel economy standards that are inconsistent with 
the Federal standard. Where is the offer from our friends on the other 
side to call on environmental groups to drop their lawsuits?
  Democrats say they want to solve this problem as much as we do. Yet 
they seem all too eager to tip the scales to the detriment of the 
manufacturers. Look, there is plenty of blame to go around for the 
problems that ail the auto industry, but fixing half of a problem is 
not a real solution.
  Any successful proposal would force companies to reform, either 
inside of bankruptcy or outside of bankruptcy. Without that mandate, 
there can be no real expectation of reform. A good proposal would force 
automakers to get control of their benefit costs. A good proposal would 
make wages of struggling companies competitive with other automakers, 
not tomorrow but today. A good proposal would end the practice of 
paying workers who do not work. A good proposal would rationalize 
dealer networks.
  Just as struggling airlines adjust their capacity to respond to 
market conditions, automakers must respond to market demands as well. I 
regret that the proposal Republicans saw yesterday afternoon does not 
do enough to fix the whole problem. It subsidizes it. A real solution 
must protect the taxpayers by forcing the changes needed to put these 
companies on the path to long-term success.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the lifeline we throw to Detroit has to be 
one that gets them to shore, not part way to shore. That is why I 
indicated in my opening statement that during the night there has been 
a lot of give-and-take between the White House and the two banking 
committees.
  As I reported earlier, I think there are only two major issues that 
are still outstanding, and I am confident and hopeful they can be 
resolved in the next few hours.
  The issue before us is, what can we do to stabilize an industry that 
has direct impact upon 2.5 million jobs in this country. The mere fact 
that we were trying to work something out yesterday caused the stock 
market to go up almost 300 points. The American people want us to try 
to resolve this issue.
  But my friend is right. As strongly connected as I am to organized 
labor, it cannot be a one-sided proposal that is brought before the 
Senate. I am confident it will not be. I have talked to the Big Three 
operators. Some are held in low repute. But that withstanding, I think 
we are in a situation now where we all have to kind of join hands, 
recognize that this is going to be a compromise, we are going to try to 
work something out. That is what legislation is all about, the art of 
compromise and consensus building. That is where we are now. As I 
indicated, I think we are very close to having something that I think 
we can bring before the body sometime today.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________