by Mark Silva
While Congress may be reluctant to bail out the ailing American auto industry, most Americans support the idea of a federal loan to the automakers, a poll shows.
Fifty-five percent of those surveyed this week said the government should offer loans to the auto industry, according the survey run by pollster Peter Hart.
Now here's the disclosure: Hart is a reputable pollster, and well-known on the political front. But the client for the survey run by Peter D. Hart Resarch Associates on this issue was commissioned by General Motors. GM, Hart insists, had "no input or review of the design, methodology, content or interpretation of the survey.''
The pollster suggests that fear of a looming economic catastrophe is what motivates most Americans supporting the idea of a federal bailout, with 60 percent sayiing a collapse of the auto industry would augur a depression. At best, 84 percent say it would harm the U.S. economy.
The poll of 804 adults conducted Nov. 11-12 has a possible margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. And a possible political incredibility factor, based solely on the sponsor, and not the pollster, of about 50-50. See the poll: Hart poll
Comments
Lets also run a poll to see how many Americans think that if we bailout the auto industry, how many of the mismanaging CEOs should be tossed out on their rear ends.
Posted by: bill r. | November 14, 2008 4:08 PM
UUUMMM- Everyone wants to get in the act-
Could be a big headache for the new admirstration--
Posted by: Inky | November 14, 2008 4:12 PM
Total waste of taxpayers money- the only benfit will be the unions, to save face and the big exectuives pockers -
Posted by: Inky | November 14, 2008 4:16 PM
What is wrong with going bankrupt, they'll keep running until they come out just like the airlines did. Geesh...where's my bailout? Until they get people back in head of these companies that actually want to make cars, not just reinvest capital, they are doomed to fail.
Posted by: lochnessmonster | November 14, 2008 5:09 PM
Some said today that when Chrysler had to get money in the 70's from the government that Lee Iococoa took a $1 salary until the loan was paid back in full. I wonder how many of those big shots would be willing to make the same sacrifice if they get to borrow money this time? For good measure let's ask the big-shot union bosses to do the same? I'm sure they all got a little money tucked away somewhere that could tide them over. Like VP Biden said, "time to step up and get in the game for America"!
Posted by: vla | November 14, 2008 5:16 PM
I have been saying this for YEARS...auto workers were making around $35 an hour YEARS AGO...and a big contributing factor was health care costs. At the rate of pay they were getting, why couldn't they pay THEIR OWN insurance? (or a bigger part of it) If their hourly wage wasn't so much, they could have passed the savings on to the consumer and their cars probably would have sold like HOTCAKES!!! Now not only do they not have those big bucks, a lot of them don't even have A JOB!!!! We would all like to have a new car, but unlike the auto workers, we don't NOW and NEVER DID make the big bucks that THEY DID!!!! Don't get me wrong, I have sympathy for ANYONE who loses their job through no fault of their own, but I think some unions ask for ANYTHING they can think of at contract time, whether they need it OR NOT, and look at the result!!!! Also, I don't profess to know the answer, but bailing them out is NOT going to get more people to buy new cars...only a lower price, in my opinion, can do that!!!!
Posted by: Dawson | November 14, 2008 8:37 PM
Ford, GM and Chrysler should not get a penny from Washington!
They have been following a failed business plan for years and the chance of the taxpayers being made whole in the future is negligible.
They should file a pre-planned bankruptcy, which would allow the companies to shed those union contracts.
The UAW will scream but then the companies could compete with Honda and Toyota, which make vehicles in the US and who are not looking for taxpayer subsidies.
Posted by: Joe Jankovic | November 15, 2008 6:33 AM
Giving money to the auto companies and the UAW is a waste of taxpayer funds!
Ford, GM and Chrysler should file pre-planned bankrupticies and they then could continue to try to find a workable business plan.
Posted by: Pat H | November 15, 2008 11:06 AM
DON'T BLAME THE UNIONS!!!!
The problem is the CEO's failing to re-tool in the NINETEEN SEVENTIES for crying out loud!
They fueled all this racist anti-Japanese sentiment in Michigan instead of doing what they needed to do.
AND---THEY BOUGHT PATENTS and SAT on them--on things like renewable energy, electric cars, what not. RENT WHO KILLED THE ELECTRIC CAR!!!
The networks should show this film all on the same night so that the whole nation watches the dang thing before we give GM one damn cent.
They killed our railroads and interurban trains in the 50s, and then followed it up by not retooling, squelching innovation, and slandering their opponents.
Posted by: No lobbying for auto industry if they get bailed out | November 15, 2008 12:02 PM
Union costs to the over-all price of an auto is 8%-10%. So, don't try to wiggle out of the problem by blaming the unions. And as far as " union bosses " not taking their salaries, I'd love to see the salaries of the top echelon of Executives and the the union officers !! There would be no comparisons.
Charging the unions for the Big 3's failures, is like blaming the unions for the corruption on Wall Street, or the deceptive lending practices in the Banking Sector. America should be grateful that their are still some good paying jobs left in America, that they all haven't been whisked away to slave-wage markets, by our Capitalists !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, Chicago | November 16, 2008 8:44 AM
I believe that help should be given if it is really needed. But, the banks have received bailout money to loan. So why don't the banks loan the auto manufactures the money.
AIG did not seem to need the money, they just want to keep the party going.
Posted by: Ms. P | November 18, 2008 5:16 PM
Actually working in an industry with close ties to the auto industry, as well as living within Michigan myself, I am well aware that most of the commenters are regurgitating nothing more than what the media tells them.
First off, the modern auto industry is nothing like it was in the 70's, having adopted the Japanese method of keeping inventory low, (Just-In-Time supply chains), and having been able to largely reduce the pay of new employees (Sometimes as low as $16/hr for a newly hired assembly line worker)
The only steadily rising cost has been that of the provided health care, pushing the cost to over $1500 per car in some cases, and reducing profitability.
A lot of people have been saying, let the auto industry fail.
Which is a traditional conservative talking point of letting the market take care of itself. So, how do you pay over a 100,000 workers while in bankruptcy? How about the suppliers? You do realize that if one supplier closes shop or strikes, it shuts down a number of factories, simply because of the lack of onhand stock to continue working.
Where does the operation funding come from while under bankruptcy? From a bank? What makes you think they will be able to get operating capital while under bankruptcy, if they couldn't beforehand? No, they will go straight into liquidation. They will fall. Their suppliers will fall. The whole of Michigan's economy will fall. If 3,000,000 auto workers, subcontractors, and support workers all lose their job, how much of a burden is that in unemployment compensation provided through our tax dollars? Quite a bit more than 25 billion.
I would like to know however, just exactly what car these senators and representatives drive.
Posted by: Dennis V. | November 20, 2008 3:09 PM
Was your poll taken in Michigan. 804 people polled. Are you from Saturday Night Live?
Posted by: GetReal | November 23, 2008 9:42 AM