Quantcast
U.S. & World

Romney doesn't back down from his opposition to a multibillion-dollar federal bailout

Comments

Return To Article
  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 8:07 a.m.

    'LIVONIA, Mich. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is defending himself in Michigan against questions over why he opposed a federal bailout of General Motors and Chrysler two years ago.' - Article

    Defend?

    But this is lock in step with the Republican party.

    *'Republicans kill Senate jobless aid measure' - By Andrew Taylor - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/24/10

    *'Senate Republicans - again - kill bill for jobless aid' - By Stephen Ohlemacher - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/30/10

    (After 2010 Midterms)

    House GOP blocks bill to extend jobless benefits By Andrew Taylor AP 11/18/10

    *John Boehner: If GOP Cuts Cause Federal Job Losses, 'So Be It' - Huffington Post - 02/15/11

    But...

    *'AP: Lawmaker seeks hearing on NJ gov's chopper use' - By Angela Delli Santi - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/02/11

    'TRENTON, N.J. A Democratic state lawmaker said Thursday she'll convene a hearing into New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's use of a state police helicopter to fly to his son's baseball game.' - Article

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    June 9, 2011 8:34 a.m.

    Romney absolutely took the right position in this issue. The bailout was a total payoff to the union buddies of the Democrats. That's all. GM should have gone through the bankrupcy process, gotten rid of terrible union contracts and started over.

  • Independent Henderson, NV
    June 9, 2011 9:19 a.m.

    Romney looks pretty good to me on this one.

  • FDRfan Sugar City, ID
    June 9, 2011 9:29 a.m.

    I believe that Romney was right and that FDR would have agreed with him. The pendulum had swung too far and GM needed major restructuring to become competitive. And the free market place was the best place. Governments won't make the hard choices unless the public agrees. And no one, Unions or Utah Republicans, want to cede power.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    June 9, 2011 9:32 a.m.

    "Ford electrician Larry Ring of Wayne County's Canton Township...says he can't understand why Romney took the position he did."

    For the same reason his employer (Ford) refused the money. Larry probably doesn't understand much other than Democrats/Big Government = Good; Republicans = Bad.

    It would have been more clever for the Dems to bus in a GM employee to protest. Looks like someone forgot to take their smart pills.

  • johnnylingo62 Gray, TN
    June 9, 2011 9:40 a.m.

    Romney has it right. The Bond Creditors were treated unfairly and the estabalished rules of law were circumvented when the Federal Govt interferred. This is really unprecedented and you can bet that bond holders will be much more wary of "investing" in the future when big gov't has stepped in this manner to take property from one group (the bond and credit holders) and give it to another group (the unions) without adequate compensation.
    Gross error by our government in a capitalist free-market economy.

  • screenname Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 9:44 a.m.

    Funny how Pagan loves to mention that a Republican, George W. Bush, initiated the bailouts and therefore Republicans are evil and spend too much.

    Now that Romney is defending his opposition to that action, all the sudden Romney and Republicans are evil by not being willing to spend enough.

    I get the feeling Republicans can't win with some people, regardless of their actions...

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 9:44 a.m.

    barack said his #1 priority was the economy.

    Let's recap how that went.

    "We need to act quickly in passing these stimulus funds(nearly a trillion) to prevent unemployment from reaching 8%"

    Unemployment soared to over 10%.

    Unemployment is still over 8% 2 years later.

    Unemployment is expected to be over 8% for another 2 years.

    Is barack solely to blame for the economy?

    No

    Is barack solely to blame for spending 787 billion and telling us that unemployment would not reach 8%?

    Yes.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 9:46 a.m.

    Barack:

    Proven he is good at spending other people's money.

    Romney:

    Proven through a lifetime in business that he can build wealth.

    I wonder what our economy needs?

    Redistributing or building?

    What

    do

    you

    all

    think?

    I

    say

    we

    need

    to

    build

    wealth.

  • MVH Cottonwood Heights, UT
    June 9, 2011 9:47 a.m.

    "Among [the protestors] was Ford electrician Larry Ring of Wayne County's Canton Township. He says he can't understand why Romney took the position he did."

    The 99.9% of us who aren't auto workers, we CAN and DO understand why Romney took the position he did on the bailout.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 9:51 a.m.

    'Larry probably doesn't understand much other than Democrats/Big Government = Good; Republicans = Bad.' - MapleDon | 9:32 a.m. June 9, 2011

    Ok.

    So American jobs = bad. Can't afford it.

    And, the GM bailout, also bad.

    Who, signed the GM bailout into law?

    *'Timeline of the Auto Bailout' - 08/02/10 - Fox News
    'The Senate voted Oct. 1, 2008 to pass a revised version of the TARP bill (HR 1424) and the House voted Oct. 3, 2008 to clear the measure.'

    *Bush signs $700 billion bailout bill AP Published by Denver Post By Tom Raum 10/03/08
    WASHINGTON President Bush quickly signed into law a far-reaching $700 billion bill to bail out the nation's tottering financial industry, calling it "essential to helping America's economy" weather the storm.

    Same day.
    Same Bailout.

    Blame Dems.

    *'Univ. of Maryland study finds Fox News viewers to be misinformed on key issues' - By Ryan Witt - Examiner - 12/17/10

    'Over 40% of respondents said President Obama started TARP even though TARP was signed into law by President Bush on October 3rd of 2008.'


    Then President George W. Bush signed this bailout.
    The ones even his Republican party, cannot support.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    June 9, 2011 9:53 a.m.

    This is MY VIEW, if you "Romney Lover's" don't like it, tuff. Is Romney on trial in a court room here, (perhaps he should be for lies to the voters in America,) when the DN's poster boy icon Mitt Romney, that is defending himself in Michigan against questions over why he opposed a federal bailout of General Motors and Chrysler two years ago?. Was the auto bailout Mitt Romney's idea?. Mitt Romney is saying that the auto bailout looks a lot like what he suggested in 2008. Yes, and no. But there are good reasons why Romney's bringing it up and why Dems are fighting back. FLIP flop, He and his campaign in recent days have insisted that they get at least some credit for suggesting a plan to save GM and Chrysler that the Obama administration later followed.

  • GoodGuyGary Houston, TX
    June 9, 2011 9:55 a.m.

    "Ford electrician Larry Ring of Wayne County's Canton Township...says he can't understand why Romney took the position he did."

    That is why Larry the Eletrician is an electrician, not the CEO of Ford.

  • ClarkKent Bountiful, Utah
    June 9, 2011 10:01 a.m.

    I think this would have been a no-win situation no matter which direction the government went. Whenever big business files BK there are ALWAYS lots of complainers about how the big creditors got more than their fair share, how the little guys suffered, etc. The public is often quite frustrated by what appears to be a huge enterprise getting away with not having to pay its debts when it files BK. I've seen many such complaints registered over the past few years. Memories appear to be short though when people chose to make this a political party argument!!!!

  • Bountiful Democrat Bountiful, UT
    June 9, 2011 10:01 a.m.

    I think the "Ford" Electrician who asked Gov. Romney why he opposed the Federal assistance, needs to be educated that his own employer turned down the Federal Assistance and is doing very nicely because of good management decisions.

    I also doubt the democrats planted him in the audience as others alude, but thanks again for blaming everything bad on Obama. Fox is doing its job, all too well.

  • Eddie Syracuse, UT
    June 9, 2011 10:08 a.m.

    Maybe Larry Ring could understand why Obama will not give me a bail out. I sure would like the Government to give me some cash to payoff my morgage and buy a new car and really set me up for life and then just left it up to me to pay it back if I wanted to or not.

    Mitt got it right and painful as it may be for us in this country, we have a long, hard row to hoe before we are in the clear. If we don't get someone in there to guide us through, we ALL will be in deep trouble.

  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    June 9, 2011 10:32 a.m.

    Hindsight is always 20/20.

    What are the Republican candidates SPECIFIC GOALS, OBJECTIVES and TIMELINES with regard to the economy, unemployment, housing, Medicare, Social Security, immigration, the defense budget, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya as well as uniting a completely divided nation...for starters.

    To invoke the "corporate" model, why would (shareholders) voters, again, elect a (CEO) President, without knowing exactly where that person is going to take the country?

  • Hawkeye79 Iowa City, IA
    June 9, 2011 10:41 a.m.

    Interesting, Pagan. You complain a lot, but don't seem to offer much substance in the way of solutions. So, do you think the bailouts were a good thing or a bad thing? It would seem that, as much as you hate it, you either side with George Bush or Mitt Romney on this one.

    As far as job creation goes, if you are of the persuasion that jobs can only be created when the government spends hundreds of billions of dollars that it doesn't have, then you have a thing or two to learn about business. While some business regulations are appropriate, our businesses are greatly overburdened compared to the rest of the world. Is it any surprise that we are not competing as well when our businesses face the greatest regulation in addition to the 2nd highest corporate taxes in the world?

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 10:45 a.m.

    'I sure would like the Government to give me some cash to payoff my morgage and buy a new car and really set me up for life and then just left it up to me to pay it back if I wanted to or not.' - Eddie | 10:08 a.m. June 9, 2011

    Eddie,

    Just vote Republican.

    *'Bush signs stimulus bill; rebate checks expected in May' - CNN - 02/13/08

    'President Bush on Wednesday signed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, calling it a "booster shot" for the American economy.'

    But remember!

    Republicans are financially 'conservative.'

    *'AP: Lawmaker seeks hearing on NJ gov's chopper use' - By Angela Delli Santi - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/02/11

    'TRENTON, N.J. A Democratic state lawmaker said Thursday she'll convene a hearing into New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's use of a state police helicopter to fly to his son's baseball game.' - Article

    *Barbour defends use of state plane for DC events By AP Published by Washington Post 03/25/2011

    State finance records show Barbour billed taxpayers $7,020 to fly himself, his wife, tow aides and two security guards to Washinton...'

    Unless it comes to themselves.

  • Hawkeye79 Iowa City, IA
    June 9, 2011 11:20 a.m.

    Pagan,

    So, who do you side with on this issue - Bush or Romney? What do you feel was the best course of action? Do you dare commit to a course of action, or are you only here to complain about a political party, regardless of its beliefs?

    Also, Pagan, I love the way you try to characterize an entire group by the actions of a few of its members. What a place this world would be if everyone adopted your hyper-stereotyping attitude!

    Life is better without partisan blinders on.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    June 9, 2011 11:22 a.m.

    It is fascinating to read here the comments putting down the question of Mr. Larry King to Mr. Romney. Many people are assuming that Mr. King didn't know about Ford refusal to government help. Wouldn't it be possible that Mr. King was looking "beyond himself" and looking after the status of the economy of his state?

    In a Laissez-Faire economy system the government should not intervene and leave the market alone. I assume than an ideologue would promote that. I'm glad that in the real world our government is willing to use different strategies to move the country ahead, even if it means to be accused of being a Socialist.

    I think the question the country should be asking is, what was the result of the bail out? Chrysler just paid 6 billion back, way ahead of time. By all accounts the results of the bail out have been good for the economy.

    Of course demagogy is something that politicians of all stripes use to manipulate minds. However, I must admit that Republicans are specially good at distorting facts and ideas.

    I hope Mr. Romney maintains a sense of decency and veracity in his campaign.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    June 9, 2011 11:25 a.m.

    My apologies! In my previous comment I wanted to say Mr. Larry Ring and not Mr. Larry King.

  • johnnylingo62 Gray, TN
    June 9, 2011 11:30 a.m.

    @Pagan it was a Decomcrat controlled CONGRESS that set up the TARP system, Bush just signed the law "cuz we have to do somethin'". But the Auto Deal was totally Obama's auto czar creation. Romney thought BK for GM was good, but not in the manner that the Gov't did it. Hence you have the same "Plan", but totally different "Execution" of how to get a more positive and fair outcome without burdoning the Federal Gov't (we the people). The BK should have been a private bankruptcy and the gov't shouldn't not have propped up the unions (took away the creditor's position). So, Romney is correct on his stance of the Auto Bailouts - there were already laws in place to deal with it, the gov't just shouldn't have intervened and you would have had a meaner, leaner and more profitable GM.

  • MenaceToSociety Draper, UT
    June 9, 2011 11:31 a.m.

    UH, oh!! Do we have another flip-flop for The Mittster?

    Imagine what unemployment would be today if The Mittster was President right now and let Chrysler and GM shut down. Then again, how many people has The Mittster laid off in his business career? It's what he does. That's what he knows. That's his history.

  • Doug10 Roosevelt, UT
    June 9, 2011 11:39 a.m.

    Cudos to Mitt on this one. He opposes his own party and has the backbone to say so.

    Estimates range from 2-10 billion it will cost the taxpayer for the auto bailout program.

    What is Mitts feelings towards the Bush tax cuts which have so far cost the taxpayer 1600 billion (sixteen hundred billion)? Are those somehow good for the economy?

    What about the GOP taxbreaks for big business such as Exxon etc as they continue to make billions each QUARTER tax free? Does Mitt intend to leave those in place?

  • screenname Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 11:52 a.m.

    Baccus-

    Obviously, we will never know exactly what would have happened without the bailouts. You and I may disagree about whether the bailouts should have happened at all, but consider a few points:

    We have forever ingrained in the minds of Americans the concept of "too big to fail." We have encouraged the largest companies in America to take risk after risk. After all, if you can reap the benefits of risks and none of the detriments, why not go all in?

    We have saved companies that had no economic viability, at the expense of potential competitors who could do the same job but more effectively and more efficiently.

    Some good may have come from the bailouts. I imagine the recovery would have been prolonged without it. But a person with pain can take a pain killer and feel better for a little while, but pain killers don't address the root cause; only its symptoms.

    Were the bailouts a pain killer or a cure?

  • Prodicus Provo, UT
    June 9, 2011 12:09 p.m.

    Anybody who looks at the positions GM and Ford are in right now has to say that the bailout was a mistake. Ford turned it down, made necessary changes and restructurings, turned things around, and is doing fairly well. GM is a wreck and only miraculous levels of Volt sales can possibly make it look less moribund. Romney was absolutely right.

  • DocSarvis Logan, UT
    June 9, 2011 12:16 p.m.

    Romney is good at taking over businesses, firing people, and making money for the rich. He isn't any good at helping anyone out. If you want a heartless, corporate lackey as your president, vote for Mitt the flip flopper.

  • Sokol Las Vegas, NM
    June 9, 2011 12:23 p.m.

    A majority of Republicans and Conservatives do not support the existance of global warming...and now Romney says it is a fact...From bailouts, Obamacare and now this...Please tell the Republicans, I will vote for anyone, but Romney in the GOP....

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    June 9, 2011 1:19 p.m.

    paganette:
    When was the last time the government bailed you out, unless you are unemployment by choice?
    Get a grip and a job.

  • the longview North Salt Lake, UT
    June 9, 2011 2:30 p.m.

    What I love about Romney is that he is a real moderate -- he won't gut Obama's health care bill, I promise you. He'll consider a bailout if it is needed for the economy and, I suspect, he'll propose reasonable immigration solutions like our own Guest Worker bill. Its the Demopublicans or Republicrats -- like Romney -- that actually solve the country's problems.

  • Belching Cow Sandy, UT
    June 9, 2011 2:51 p.m.

    He doesn't need to defend himself. He was right.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 2:53 p.m.

    [it was a Decomcrat controlled CONGRESS that set up the TARP system, Bush just signed the law "cuz we have to do somethin'".]

    Actually Democrats worked with the Bush Administration, and particularly the treasury department, to put that together. As a strong supporter of the bailouts which averted a great depression and are already almost entirely paid back with interest, I give credit to the Bush Administration and the Democratic Congress for getting that done.

  • cval Hyde Park, UT
    June 9, 2011 3:08 p.m.

    MenaceToSociety | 11:31 a.m. June 9, 2011
    Draper, UT
    UH, oh!! Do we have another flip-flop for The Mittster?

    Imagine what unemployment would be today if The Mittster was President right now and let Chrysler and GM shut down. Then again, how many people has The Mittster laid off in his business career? It's what he does. That's what he knows. That's his history. {End Quote}

    You are really not paying attention... His point was they would not have shut down. They would have reorganized under current bankruptcy laws and be right where they are today, without having to use taxpayer bailout money to get there.

    The current laws and system are set-up to deal with this without a bailout, but Obama didn't allow that to happen.

  • Jake2010 orem, ut
    June 9, 2011 3:24 p.m.

    Not one company has deserved to be bailed out. Where is my federal bailout when my poor spending habits shoot me into the depths of poverty and pushing bankruptcy? How is corporate foolishness less offensive and worthy of bailing out than private foolishness and the complete lack thereof? I think that the idiots in office that bailed out AIG and the others are absolutely shameful. Kudos to Mitt for seeing reality for what it is. Anyone that thinks that a corporation is in deserving status for a bailout needs to think twice. It is overpriced executive salaries, bonuses and perks that send them into bankruptcy. Not a lousy economy. WAKE UP AMERICA WAKE UP!

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    June 9, 2011 3:37 p.m.

    Romney supported TARP in the fall of 2008---that was the first bailout which most people agreed with. Not all bailouts are bad. Bailouts are investments in the future.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    June 9, 2011 3:55 p.m.

    "How is corporate foolishness less offensive and worthy of bailing out than private foolishness and the complete lack thereof? "

    Because we don't want another great depression which is what happens when you let the financial sector collapse. Yes, I know, you're going to say "what's to stop them from doing it again?". The answer is regulation but of course when Democrats worked on the regulatory bill Republicans weakened it.

  • I see nothing! Casa Grande, AZ
    June 9, 2011 3:57 p.m.

    Romney is a moderate, but only because the t-party has moved the republican party so much farther right.

    When Romney proposed and passed his health care reform it was considered a very right wing free market idea compared to the single payer program proposed by Clinton.

    He'll bend with the political winds if elected. Good and bad depending on what you want from him but there's no way he will be moderate.

  • Jake2010 orem, ut
    June 9, 2011 4:51 p.m.

    No, the answer is in lowering the executives salaries, investing the money they do make even still today more wisely, cutting out unnecessary perks until the market or profit margin is worthy of having them again and just doing what the other companies not needing bailouts are and have been doing for years. As for Mitt bending with the winds of insanity that blow through Washington? I doubt it! I hope America does the right thing for the first time in years and votes the right man in.

  • Instereo Eureka, UT
    June 9, 2011 8:27 p.m.

    Romney is wrong on this issue. If GM and Chrysler had not been bailed out and Republicans would have had their way we would have lost a lot of American jobs not just with those two companies but rippling all through our country. There would not have been a American free enterprise company that could have preserved those jobs and a large portion of our dollars would then be sent to overseas auto companies.

    Romney's insistence on not backing down shows that he doesn't really care about American jobs but is more interested in the global economy at the expense of our country's economy.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    June 9, 2011 10:55 p.m.

    I believe Mr. Romney would favor any outcome that left auto workers making the sacrifices and auto bosses getting bonuses, even following bad years. That way, there's more employment for gardeners. It's called the "trickle down" effect, referred to whenever the GOP's donors want another tax cut. How did the last one pay off? Don't ask.

  • dbfox Grand Junction, CO
    June 10, 2011 6:08 a.m.

    If you want to hear a real conservative voice listen to Herman Cain. Romney is no different then the current WH occupant.

  • johnnylingo62 Gray, TN
    June 10, 2011 1:09 p.m.

    So many opinions, so many candidates, so many half-truths with skewed factoids attached to people who never said what is being put into their mouths... politics is alive in America (15 more months to go)