In today's pages: GM bailout, Proposition 8, post-Bush conservatism
Today's editorial page is an extravaganza of topicality, hitting on three top-of-the-news issues: The proposed federal bailout for U.S. automakers, the taxing problems facing California lawmakers as the state budget melts down, and the ongoing protests by gay-rights activists following last week's passage of Proposition 8.
On the bailout, The Times urges Congress to look before it leaps into a $50-billion aid package for the Big Three automakers. These companies aren't failing for the reasons they like to claim -- high health care and pension obligations, unfavorable exchange rates and government fuel-economy standards -- but because they aren't building competitive vehicles. A bailout alone won't change that, nor would it replace the Big Three's failed managers or change their troublesome union contracts.
On the state budget, The Times urges Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to reinstate the car tax that he rashly slashed after bumping former Gov. Gray Davis out of office. Though it's a regressive tax, it's not nearly as bad as the 1.5% sales tax Schwarzenegger is proposing. And it's tax-deductible! (From your federal taxes, that is.) Finally, The Times points out the many mistakes made by opponents of Proposition 8; while it's nice to see them marching in the streets now, where were they before the election? Where were the gay leaders before Nov. 4? Opponents ran a disorganized campaign, failed to target the African Americans who proved crucial to the measure's success, and waited until the last minute to get serious about fundraising.
Wresting equal rights from a society reluctant to grant them isn't easy. It can take years of nonviolent resistance, passionate speeches and even in-your-face radicalism. If people who voted yes on Proposition 8 say they didn't see it as a civil-rights matter, that's because until now there has been nothing resembling a civil rights crusade by the gay community.
Over on the op-ed page, columnist Jonah Goldberg ponders George W. Bush's legacy for the conservative movement. Bush's brand of conservatism has always been troubling to many on the right, even if they rallied to his side in the face of "shrill partisan attacks from Democrats who seem more interested in tearing down the commander in chief than winning a war." As the movement looks to reinvent itself, the question is whether it will choose "a debugged compassionate conservatism 2.0 or a Reaganesque revival of conservative problem solving?"
New York Judge Joseph Fahey, meanwhile, takes time out on Veterans Day to ponder the U.S. government's shameful treatment of Vietnam vets and their families whose lives have been torn apart by exposure to Agent Orange. With the courts failing to adequately compensate these victims, the government needs to fashion another remedy, such as a compensation fund. And author Norah Vincent, a libertarian conservative, regrets her decision not to cast a vote in last week's historic election. Turned off by John McCain's "doctrinaire sensiblity" and his choice of running mate, and disturbed by Barack Obama's tax proposals, he ended up supporting neither. But now she's a little caught up in Obamania:
But after watching the video of Obama's acceptance speech (I went to bed early Nov. 4), I have, to my great surprise, found myself moved to tears by the president-elect, by his poise and graciousness, not to mention what seems to be his almost Hegelian historical significance. I now wonder if I missed out on the moment. Am I going to feel a little caught out one day when I have to say that I did not vote for him? Or will I feel vindicated by what will surely be the many and great disappointments of the Obama administration?
* Illustration by Anthony Russo / For the Times
THE AUTO INDUSTRY SHOULD BE BAILED
ONLY VERY DRASTIC ACTION WILL SAVE DETROIT
Congress: Here is a radical, but common sense and workable plan…
http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/11/solution-for-detroit-gm-friends.html
It’s this, or bankruptcy. The American Auto industry should be saved but under new conditions.
Do not leave it to the likes of Paulson or Congress to come up with a creative plan resembling interest in taxpayers' wellbeing.
Posted by: PacificGatePost | November 11, 2008 at 06:15 PM
I am saddened to hear about the Gay and lesbian artists calling for an artistic and audience boycott of California Musical Theatre and they further actions against CMT Director Scott Eckert. How can those who fight for rights for themselves be so quick to take rights away from others. They are threatening and harassing him because he expressed a personal belief. Now, because he exercises his right as an American to contribute to a campaign - he's in jepardy of losing his job and be "blacklisted" -- Is this how they build consensus with others through threats and intimidation ? I agree that Scott has a defamation of character lawsuit, along with a civil rights violation and quite possibly a Hate Crime since they are targeting him because of his belief.
Posted by: Carol Lutheran | November 11, 2008 at 07:49 PM
I just read the Connick op on why black lesbians think that gay marriage is a "white gay" issue. I was dumbstruck by her prejudice and seething hatred towards white gays. She was correct on one point: The church tells the black community what to believe and what to vote on. As long as the church is against gays, then blacks will not stand up for civil rights for all.
Posted by: Maurice | November 11, 2008 at 09:05 PM
What is the big deal about this GAY ISSUE here.
I mean our Democractic process worked here. most of the people dont want gays around at all. and how is unfair . it ws put to a vote and they lost. AMEN. i mean it proves they are not as main stream and accepted in californai aas they think they are
Posted by: DARIn GLANVILLE | November 12, 2008 at 01:45 PM
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Please do not bail out the Auto Industry. Let them fail and start over, maybe then, the average American can be in balance :@
Question.. When the average American hourly pay is $17.60 how can they afford a automobile which pays it's employees $40+ per hour to produce the product?.. Not withstanding the other cost of production...
The only way is, keep increasing finance time. ( should this continue we will be financing our autos the same as our housing) What does this accomplish? The banks get richer, the auto industry keeps giving more raises to their employees and the poor average American is driving an auto that will not last the time it takes to pay for it, and is paying a high interest rate on the money we helped to bail out the Finance Industry, an auto Industry should you do so.
We bail out the Banking system with very reasonable terms. They in turn lend back our money at very high rate of interest. ( this makes no sence to me, there is something wrong with this picture) The banking system uses our money against us. How can you who claims to be for the American People set back and let this happen? Skip the banks, let the Government lend the American people the money at the terms they we give the banks. This will start America back to the black side of the financial statement. The people will start buying, homes, cars, appliances and other goods, to begin to get people back to work and companies from failing. Just think how many home buyers you would have with a 2% home loan....but only for those who live in their homes. Should there be an occupancy change so would be an interest rate change..
Then maybe the banking system will start working with people again and not gambling with risky investments. They used the peoples money, in their Slot Machine finance. Now, instead of punishment, our government awards them, again with the peoples money..
Please, please, help out the American People. As one of the sheep, we do not have any wool left.. Without this wool know matter how much money you give to these Industries, we the American People cannot afford to buy there products, the cost is on or passed the threshold of becoming to expensive for the value, even if we still have a will to do so..
I leave you with a few quotes..
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
George Bernard Shaw
Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan (1986)
No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
-Mark Twain (1866 )
The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.
-Ronald Reagan
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson
Frank Bartonie
11/12/08
Posted by: Frank Bartonie | November 12, 2008 at 02:17 PM
RE PROP 8
THE RECENT TIMES EDITORIAL ON THIS ISSUE ASKS
"WHERE WAS THE GAY COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PRIOR TO THE ELECTION." THE ANSWER IN OUR COMMUNITY IS THAT THEY WERE HIDING IN THE THE NIGHT. THROUGH OUT OUR COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES MANY SIGNS AND BANNERS IN SUPPORT OF PROP 8 DISPLAYED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WERE REPEATEDLY STOLEN OR VANDALIZED, AT NIGHT, BY OPPONENTS TO THE PROPOSITION. THESE COWARDLY ACTIVITIES NOT ONLY VIOLATED TRESPASS LAWS BUT ARE IN COMPLETE CONTRADICTION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT IN OUR DEMOCRACY THAT WE ARE ALL ENTITLED TO THE FREE AND PUBLIC EXPRESSION OF OUR DIFFERING OPINIONS WHILE RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF OUR OPPONENTS TO THEIR OPINION. THOUSANDS OF SUPPORTERS GATHERED ON STREET CORNERS THROUGH OUT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN BROAD DAYLIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINION. A FREE AND OPEN ELECTION WAS CONDUCTED AND THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WAS EXPRESSED. ALTHOUGH IT IS TECHNICALLY TRUE THAT ACCESS TO MARRIAGE WAS REVOKED IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS ACCESS WAS ONLY FOR A SHORT TIME UNDER LEGAL INTERPRETATIONS THAT VOIDED THE OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTIVE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS ISSUE THAT TOOK PLACE JUST A FEW YEARS AGO..
I LIVED IN MONTGOMERY ALABAMA IN 1956 AND CLEARLY RECALL THE DISCRIMINATION THAT TOOK PLACE AT THAT POINT IN OUR HISTORY. IT WAS OBVIOUS TO MY TEN YEAR OLD MIND THAT THESE PEOPLE WERE BEING DENIED RIGHTS BECAUSE OF SOMETHING THEY HAD NO CONTROL OVER-THEIR COLOR. OUR COUNTRY HAS RIGHTLY COME TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE SAME PRINCIPLE IS VALID REGARDING SEX DISCRIMINATION- YOU HAVE NO CHOICE WHETHER YOU ARE BORN MALE OR FEMALE -OR AGE DISCRIMINATION- NO 80 YEAR OLD VETERAN CAN BECOME A TEN YEAR OLD. THESE ARE GROUPS WITH OBVIOUS CLAIMS TO EQUAL PROTECTION AND OPPORTUNITY UNDER THE LAW. I AND THE MAJORITY OF CALIFORNIANS DO NOT THINK THAT A PERSONS CHOSEN SEXUAL ORIENTATION CREATES A PROTECTED MINORITY. IT IS INSTRUCTIVE TO NOTE THAT THE AFRICAN -AMERICAN COMMUNITY OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTED PROPOSITION 8. THIS SEGMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY MOST INTIMATELY AWARE OF THE NOTIONS OF DISCRIMINATION CLEARLY DID NOT FEEL THAT THIS WAS AN ISSUE PIVOTED ON DISCRIMINATION.
Posted by: JERRY KRAMER | November 12, 2008 at 06:06 PM
Any taxpayer aid should be approached by a buffett like investment - would he put money to support any of the outdated product sectors?
If any aid is needed to put them on an equal footing, then get to work on a national healthcare plan and that should be the only necessary aid for the "old industry".
To protect the workers and pensioners, if they end up having to relinquish benefits then have the bankruptcy court reach back into the pockets of the past directors and empty their bank accounts as well - it is only fair!
And if you want more evidence of crookedness in the auto industry do a search of why AFS TRINITY 150MPG is being denied a spot in the upcoming LA autoshow.
Posted by: jk | November 16, 2008 at 02:15 PM
GM purposely destroyed every General Motors electric vehicle EV1 it produced to avoid innovation and maintain it's grip on the auto industry.
This is a company that we should bailout????
Posted by: ty lee | November 19, 2008 at 08:35 PM
Larry Burns, GM Vice President of Research & Development, wrote that "The solution lies in sharing the public/private risks and rewards – possibly creating a partnership between the U.S. government, auto manufacturers and suppliers, the energy and infrastructure industries, and other key stakeholders focused on transforming the automobile.(GM Fastlane, http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/)" Perhaps GM should consider a new model for public-private partnerships beyond the bailout.
As the Federal Government issues billions in bailout packages, local municipalities compete for manufacturing jobs with individual firms receiving customized tax packages. Large corporations such as GM have armies of tax advisors, strategists, consultants and attorneys to their disposal. Smaller municipalities may not have these resources, but must pick up where a corporation leaves off. For example, the town of Vance, Alabama and associated local government agencies offered Mercedes–Benz 362 million USD in subsidizes to attract foreign direct investment into the town. The factory builds automobiles and thus increase the town’s share of Gross Domestic Product and the advanced technology that the company brings will increase productivity.
This is a common practice in the United States where cities and states compete for corporate investment. Part of the package came in the form of tax breaks against future earnings. Others, such as the construction of new roads, was an advance investment by the city. Thus the city made a trade off between building a road for the company verses building a school or hiring more police. The government justifies the expense because of expected future returns in tax revenues form the factory and employment for the local workers. This is also therefore an attempt by the government to shift the unemployment. General Motors is also accustomed to receiving generous government support, such as $200 million from Canada in March 2005 and subsequent closing of multiple fatalities in Canada. What is the result of these subsidies? Do auto manufactures build a commitment to a community and stay in the long-term? Or do these corporations plan to simply leave for the next best opportunity where another municipality will offer even better subsidizes?
Dennis Rondinelli and William Burpitt of the Kenan-Flagler Business School, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill hold that incentives are not a primary factor for executives considering investing in North Carolina. In Do government incentives attract and retain international investment? A study of foreign-owned firms in North Carolina shows that “In an era of strong global competition, national, state, and local governments are vying to attract and retain investment by international firms by increasing the range and value of public
incentives for businesses to invest in their jurisdictions. A survey of executives in 118 internationally-owned firms in North Carolina reveals that they rank state incentives low in a list of factors that they believe attract foreign-owned companies and retain them in the state. Labor force, trans-transportation, quality of life, and overall business climate factors are consistently ranked highest by business executives, and state tax, finance, plant services, and marketing assistance are consistently ranked low. (Rondinelli and Burpitt, Policy Sciences, June 2000).
In a similar way, Dafna Schwartz, Joseph Pelzman, and Michael Keren at Ben Gurion University of the Negev, George Washington University, and Hebrew University of Jerusalem, respectively, show that incentives do not contribute to long-term economic development in The Ineffectiveness of Location Incentive Programs. “Many countries use location incentives programs to attract investment into a recipient country as a whole or to priority regions, with the goal of promoting growth....In both cases (Israel and Puerto Rico), the programs led to increased employment in the short run but did not alter the fundamental economic problems of these areas.... there is a governmental failure in their operation of location-related incentives programs and that these governments find it difficult to discontinue incentive programs once they have been introduced. Schwartz, Pelzman and Keren, Economic Development Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 2, 167-179 2008)
Mr. Burns, General Motors has asked for billions in special support from taxpayers. With respect to sharing the public-private risk, the history of auto manufactures such as GM, the risk is primarily on the side of governments, with the sharing of benefits is primarily on the side of the manufacturers. What is your commitment to the public? To put the issue in perspective; what would the financial services subsidiary of General Motors, GMAC, do to a customer who stopped making monthly payments with twenty thousand Dollars in debt? How long would GMAC wait until reposing the auto? The customer may be given some time, but eventually the car would be repossessed. The US Government is not in the business of manufacturing automobiles. If GM is unable to to find capital or debt on the free market, it should be liquidated. In a healthy free market, some companies fail, their useful parts are reorganized, and the sector consolidates or takes a new direction. Creditors and shareholders may loose money, but that was a risk that they knowingly took upon lending and investing in the company. Let bad management pay its price. Perhaps other firms or entrepreneurs will be able to turn some of GM's business lines towards profitability. Let he genius engineers and designers find quality companies to work for.
The auto manufactures may cry that the domino effect of a company such as GM closing down will spread to relating industries. Closing GM will lead to the closing of supporting businesses who are not able to adapt. Should the public support funding for a horse and buggy industry because firms producing accessories such as buggy wheels and decorations? The interlinking of supply chains within the industry and related relationships has significant knock-on effects. For some industries this domino effect is stronger, such as the finance sector. This domino effect is not evident in the auto industry, where consumers have been voting for other firms for years. Let Let GM rest in peace. Let Darwinism do its work.
Joseph Sherman
Anjan Chhetry
World Mediterranean MBA
Euromed-Marseille, France
Posted by: Joseph Sherman and Anjan Chhetry | January 20, 2009 at 04:19 PM