<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120301326.html>

Automakers Are Lining Up Aid, But Just Don't Call It a Bailout

By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Sholnn Freeman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 4, 2005; A01

Troubled U.S. automakers and their allies on Capitol Hill are seeking
billions of dollars in aid from the federal government ranging from
health coverage for their workers to extra tax write-offs for
themselves.

They're also asking for one rhetorical favor: Please don't call the
requests a bailout.

"I don't view it as a bailout," Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) said.

"We're not looking for a bailout," agreed William C. Ford Jr.,
chairman of Ford Motor Co.

The "B" word has been taboo ever since Chrysler Corp., faced with
impending insolvency, sought and narrowly won $1.5 billion in loan
guarantees from Washington in 1979 and 1980. The company eventually
borrowed $1.2 billion and repaid the loans in 1983, seven years
earlier than was required.

Nonetheless, the notion of the American taxpayer saving a company with
a large and quick fix has pretty much gone out of style and has not
been repeated since, with the exception of loan guarantees to airlines
after 9/11. Even though General Motors Corp. and its rival Ford Motor
now face serious financial straits, both are studiously avoiding
public condemnation by spreading their aid requests widely among many
types of government policies.

Taken together, however, the components of their wish list would cost
tens of billions -- far more than Chrysler ever dared to seek.

With pleadings that large, breaking the requests into smaller pieces
makes a great deal of legislative sense, and industry and labor
leaders hope that several relief packages could begin to move in
Congress next year. The outlook is uncertain, especially given the
size of the federal budget deficit, but auto industry representatives
said they were optimistic that at least some of their proposals would
succeed.

"The likelihood of some sort of grand solution probably isn't there,"
said Dennis B. Fitzgibbons, director of public policy in Washington
for DaimlerChrysler AG, the firm that was formed when Germany's
Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler in 1998. "But," he added, "there are
pieces that people could agree on."

Many, many pieces. In a speech in Washington last month, William Ford
urged the government to help domestic automakers by expanding
subsidies for companies that make components for gasoline-fuel-cell
hybrids and other fuel-efficient vehicles. He also asked for federal
money to retrain workers and for tax breaks to help manufacturers
outfit old plants with new equipment.

GM has its own elaborate list. It hopes that pension legislation that
is wending its way through Congress will tread lightly on heavy
manufacturers such as GM. The legislation would strengthen the federal
backstop to private pension plans by raising corporate contributions
to a fund. The company also seeks health legislation down the road
that would unburden it of the huge cost of medical coverage that it
now offers its 450,000 retirees and their spouses.

One proposal that's being floated is for the government to provide
catastrophic health care coverage. GM has pointed out that the most
severely ill patients, the top 1 percent of health care users, account
for 30 percent of health care costs. The industry also is interested
in revising tort law as a way to alleviate health care costs.

U.S. carmakers also want to persuade the Bush administration to push
harder to get the Japanese to raise the value of their currency. The
manufacturers assert that Japanese cars sell for thousands of dollars
less than they should in this country because the Japanese government
unfairly intervenes in currency markets to artificially depress the
yen. The Bush administration rejects claims that the Japanese
government is manipulating exchange rates.

"We can compete with Toyota, but we can't compete with Japan," William
Ford said.

In addition, the companies advocate tougher trade policies that would
restrict the import of foreign cars into the United States where
possible and would ease entry of U.S.-made cars into other countries.
"We could sell plenty [of cars] in Japan if we were allowed to," Sen.
Levin said. "We need a president to go after the Japanese to tell them
if they don't reduce their barriers that they will find similar
barriers to theirs" in the United States.

The car companies are working through several industry coalitions and
major trade groups, such as the National Association of Manufacturers,
to press their case on various issues. Not all parts of the proposals
are likely to move at the same time, auto executives say, but they see
an urgent need for at least some assistance efforts to move soon.

Beset by falling sales and rising health care and pension costs, GM
and Ford have suffered through a tough year. GM, the world's largest
automaker, said last month that it would cut 30,000 jobs and close all
or part of 12 facilities. Ford, No. 2 in the United States, plans to
announce its own closings and job cuts next month. In figures released
last week, both auto giants reported that their November sales
dropped, as sales of Toyota and Honda vehicles continued to rise.

One reason the car companies are not pressing for a single infusion of
money is that their problems would not be solved by such a benefit.
"Their problem is not so much cash flow to get them through a crisis,"
said Rep. Dale E. Kildee (D-Mich.), who has been a leader in devising
relief efforts. "It's more of a structural change in the global
automotive market that the auto companies and the auto-parts makers
need to cope with."

The assistance that is being sought would address only some of the
companies' problems, which range from inefficient factories to
consumer preferences for foreign-built cars. Auto executives
acknowledge that recovery will depend on their ability to resolve such
issues.

Senators and House members have been meeting privately among
themselves and with auto company executives for weeks and expect to
have further planning sessions. Much of what they will ask for is part
of an effort in general to revive what has been a floundering
manufacturing sector.

"What we would be doing is common sense -- fighting for a
manufacturing base for this country," Levin said. "We have to decide
if we want to have manufacturing jobs or [if] we want to put up with
losing millions of more jobs."

Michigan's congressional delegation has led the effort to aid the
industry, but lawmakers from many other states may be sympathetic:
Cars and their parts are made in many areas of the country. The auto
industry is directly or indirectly responsible for 13.3 million jobs
nationwide, according to a report by the University of Michigan and
the Center for Automotive Research, although that includes the U.S.
operations of foreign automakers.

Republican lawmakers from regions affected by the auto company
retrenchment are joining the drive. Rep. John J.H. "Joe" Schwarz, a
freshman Republican from Michigan, has been working on a universal
health care plan modeled on federal employees' benefits that
potentially would help GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler unload billions of
dollars in annual health care costs for current workers and retirees.
"It is wrong to destroy the middle-class dream in America," Schwarz
said. "We are going to have to find a way as a country to work our way
through this."

But it's not clear how united the industry is. For example, GM cares
more about pensions than Chrysler because Chrysler, as a smaller
company, has far fewer retirees. The industry's big trade group, the
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, has also been on the sidelines
because it focuses mainly on trade and safety issues and represents
foreign-owned car companies as well the U.S. automakers.

"There's no umbrella group," said Alan Reuther, the legislative
director of the United Auto Workers union. "It's not like we all have
the same talking points and it's all lockstep on things like relief
for the industry."

Even the Michigan delegation has had its tensions. In mid-November,
members of the delegation met at the Capitol to discuss auto industry
issues with Michigan Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm (D). The meeting was
stalled as Republicans and Democrats battled over Republican Rep.
Candice S. Miller's attempt to open the meeting to reporters.
Democrats said opening the meeting was an attempt by Republicans to
embarrass Granholm, who is up for re-election next year. Once the
doors were closed and members cooled off, however, the participants
began to work together.

But what they discussed, participants insisted, was not a bailout.

Reply via email to