To save dealers, save GM

The restoration of General Motors depends on the U.S. government, its savior, remaining a silent partner during the company's emergence from bankruptcy. Taking an activist approach toward managing GM's affairs would be disastrous — there are no car dealers in Washington.

Well, at least not technically. What is lacking is a cogent notion of how to revive the American automotive industry, as evidenced by the hamfisted attempts of Congress to influence the sector through shortsighted policies such as "cash for clunkers."

Federal intervention into GM always promised to be dangerous. Yet so far, the results have been promising. GM's bankruptcy has been approved by a federal judge. This is meager progress, yet progress, nonetheless. After watching this quintessential American symbol of technological and industrial power crumble under its own debt and mismanagement, a little positive news is awfully welcome — even if it's only news that the bankruptcy plan looks solid.

The right role for Congress is spectator. It cannot legislate the industry back to prominence. It can, however, undermine GM's potential resurrection by using its not-so-nice parts — such as the closings of dealerships across the country — as a platform for political pandering. Which is, of course, exactly what Congress is doing.

Legislation has been introduced in the House and Senate to reverse the 3,300 dealership closings announced by Chrysler and General Motors. The Auto Dealer Economic Rights Restoration Act is co-sponsored by a majority of House members, including Maine's delegation. Sen. Olympia Snowe is a co-sponsor of the Senate bill. 

Closing these dealerships is estimated to save these companies $2.1 billion; yet those dealerships targeted for closing are arguing, through Congress, that the market — not the management — should decide which outlets should be shuttered. At first, that seems like an OK idea.

Until one considers that the market has already decided. The market targeted not only GM's dealers for closure, but perhaps the company itself. Without the government bailout, the prospects for all dealerships, plants and the innumerable industries and jobs intertwined with automobiles were imperiled.

The matter is not how many jobs will be lost. The victory is how many jobs might be saved.

We want car dealerships — of all makes and marques — to thrive. A healthy automotive industry is a prime indicator of economic growth. What we don't want is continued indecision about how it should be restored. GM and Chrysler must move forward, not become mired in debates about how to do so, especially when these debates pit two ancient rivals, Congress and the White House.

On Friday, the House passed language to restore the dealerships as an amendment on a larger bill to fund the Treasury. The White House, in response, has called this a "dangerous precedent." We agree.

What is of concern is what happens when worse proposals emerge — such as closing plants. How this legislation about dealerships is handled could have grave implications for success or failure of future, unpopular, cost-cutting plans.

Our government should not be in the car business. It never should have been in the car business. But now that it is, it cannot let factions within itself — and legislation like this — steer the industry's nascent recovery into a ditch.

editorialboard@sunjournal.com

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.

Advertisement

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

skippy's picture
verified

It seems odd to me that

It seems odd to me that taxpayers (including the shutterred dealers) had to rescue the manufacturers from their own poor management, and that these same poor managers (GM & Chrysler) want to close these dealerships arbitrarily to remove competition so that the taxpayers that helped them (GM & Chrysler) will have less options on where to buy and will have to pay more for their GM or Chrysler purchases.

Also, do we want to encourage companies that jst wiped out their shareholders? Many of these shareholders are our neighbors who invested their hard earned monies in these corporations and they were just kicked out the door. Who now owns these companies? The U.S. and Canadian governments and the unions. Remember that less than 50 years ago the U.S. governemnt was threatening G.M. if they produced more than 50% of cars sold in this country and the unions were making horrendous demands on these companies. No U.S. company stood up to the government or the unions. Now they are dead in their tracks and have to be rescued.

Do we really want to buy from them? I always want to buy American and my cars are American (at least in name; who knows where the parts or the cars were manufactured), but I now question if I want to continue doing this.

verified

I'm not sure that theLSJ

I'm not sure that theLSJ editorial board should be viewed as any sort of expert on this matter, as former local dealership empolyee,Iwould be more inclined to listen to expert opinions from he Maine Auto dealers Asociation lead by Auburn's ownquite capable Tom Brown!

Advertisement