Would you like to read a Senatoramp;#39;s response to the Auto Bailout Bust? -

I received this letter from the Republican Senator in Florida, Mel Martinez. I am a Democrat, but found it very interesting and wanted to share it. Your opinions? Thank you for contacting me regarding the automobile industry. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to take this opportunity to respond. On November 17, 2008, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced two bills (S. 3688 and S. 3689) that included provisions that would amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act to direct the Secretary of the Treasury to make a loan of up to $25 billion to automobile manufacturers and parts suppliers. Both S. 3688 and 3689 have been placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar and await further consideration. In the meantime, Congressional leaders have directed the auto manufacturers to present a comprehensive proposal by December 2, 2008, that explains exactly how they would use public financing and details a clear plan to return to profitability. The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is scheduled to hold hearings on the proposal prior to any consideration by the full Senate. I believe that the domestic auto industry is an integral part of the American landscape and that the failure of General Motors, Chrysler, or Ford could, in the short term, further damage our already fragile economy. However, I do not support using funding from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) to assist the auto industry, as Senator Reid’s legislation would direct. TARP is specifically targeted to the credit markets and should remain narrowly focused on that industry. I do support altering the Section 136 program to allow automakers to immediately tap a $25 billion loan program included in a broader energy package enacted by Congress last year (P.L. 110-140). The original intent of the Section 136 loan program was to help the auto industry retool to produce more fuel-efficient cars. To date, not one of the auto companies has utilized any of this funding. I do not want to see the American automobile industry fail, but equally, I do not want to see taxpayer dollars put at risk in an investment that is at best risky. Florida families deserve to know that their hard-earned money will not be squandered. I will be working with all of my colleagues in the coming days to ensure that any plan Congress considers is in keeping with the best interest of taxpayers.|::::|This is interesting. Thanks for sharing!|::::|you can t trust them letters, there generic and fake, what they say is not what they want to say|::::|It appears that the auto makers do not want a loan, they want a bailout. Let s face it if they can get our grandkids to pay they are better off.|::::|I ll bring it along to read when I m on vacation for a few weeks.|::::|I salute him in not wanting to use TARP and Section 136 funds for the automakers and I salute him in wanting what is in the best interests fo the taxpayers. And I get the impression that he is thinking of all taxpayers, not just those in Florida and/or Michigan. I cannot see how the big 3 can pull themselves out of the hole that they have dug for themselves with 15 billion of our hard earned dollars without restructuring both manufacture and current wage/benefit programs. That money would not last a single quarter and it is going to take a lot more than one quarter for the changes needed to show effect. I find it interesting and sad that, to date, the auto industry has not utilized any of the money set aside to help retool.|::::|There s a new Civil War going on when it comes to automaking in America. Japanese, Korean, and German automakers are now building 18 auto assembly plants in the United States, none of which is unionized. Kentucky (Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell) already has Toyota s biggest auto assembly plant outside Japan. Tennessee (Senate Rep. Bob Corker, who came up with the quot;chapter 11quot; bailout amendment) houses Nissan s North American headquarters. Alabama (Senate Rep. Richard Shelby) hosts Mercedez Benz and several other foreign automakers. So there s no reason to suppose the good citizens of Kentucky, Tennessee, or Alabama are particularly excited at the prospect of handing over their taxpayer money to competing firms and their workforces. Besides, southern Republican are not particularly enamoured with the UAW, which has steadfastly bankrolled Democrats who have taken on Republicans. (The new Congress will have at least six new Democrats from formerly Republican districts, all of whom received at least $40K from the UAW.) Corker s compromise -- which would force the UAW to match the wages of foreign, mostly non-unionized autoworkers in the South -- would essentially make the UAW irrelevant. Why have a union if you can get the same deal without one? But Republicans also know that the Big Three and their suppliers are spread out over the battle-ground states of Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Minnesota. Republicans don t dare give up these states or alienate their citizens. So here s where compromise comes in. The dirty little secret is that, bailout or no bailout, the Big Three will have to lay off thousands of workers over the next few years, as the foreign non-union automakers take market share away from them Good ole Mel is mighty close to these states and I m sure he s getting some quot;feedbackquot; from his fellow Southerners. The TARP funds were for banks....to make loans.....they should loan the money to the automakers. Alas, foreign competition in our capitalist market is ever stronger and showing no signs of weakening.