GM-PAC? GOP Should Just Say No — But They Won’t
You try to tell yourself that you’re not really seeing this:
When you convince yourself that your eyes really aren’t playing tricks on you, you can’t help but wonder: How in the world is this even possible?
First, how is a U.S. government-controlled entity legally allowed to form a political action committee (PAC)?
Oh, I forgot. Despite the fact that it is 61% owned by the United States government and 12% by Canada and the government of Ontario, and despite the fact that the United States government has a car czar and a cadre of cronies clearly overseeing affairs at the company (if you doubt, ask yourself why CEO Ed Whitacre suddenly “stepped down” mere days after he told an audience: “We want the government out. Period. … We don’t want to be known as ‘Government Motors’”), General Motors is technically a “private” company. Though it has been doing so since late last year, the company isn’t legally required to file financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission. One gets the sense that GM feels like it deserves the world’s admiration for deigning to bless us with its financial information.
Despite taxpayers’ majority stake, GM has revived its PAC and has collected and distributed money from its employees to advance the company’s interests. Those interests, and the politicians and organizations which have benefited and will benefit, are, according to the company’s “Political Contributions and Expenditures Policy,” determined “by a Steering Committee and a separate Campaign Selection Committee appointed by the Chief Executive Officer of GM” — overseen by car czar and Mao admirer Ron Bloom (“We know that the free market is nonsense. … We kind of agree with Mao, that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun”) and his clan.
There’s nothing wrong with shareholder-owned and truly private companies doing this. Companies have a duty to ethically advance and protect their shareholders’ and owners’ interests, especially when government actions threaten their well-being. The Supreme Court ruled in January that companies, labor unions, and others are free to do this, and that Congress’s past efforts to limit their giving have been unconstitutional.
Legalities aside, GM is self-evidently different. First, the policy statement cited earlier also permits “corporate funds and facilities … (to) be used to provide the administrative support for the operation of GM political action committees.” That gives a whole new meaning to “your tax dollars at work,” doesn’t it?
Far more critically, as long as two sovereign governments have combined majority or controlling stakes in the company, political contributions from GM’s PAC are substantively no different than if HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius started taking collections from her employees and then gave the money directly to congressmen, senators, Health Care for America Now, and anyone else who has either said good things about ObamaCare, voted for its creation, or pledged to assist in building its oncoming bureaucratic nightmare. If the president and his apparatchiks had even a passing acquaintance with ethics, they would not have allowed GM to resurrect its PAC.
Well, the only thing I can say is that at least it’s not a lot of money that was given to each candidate. These candidates probably make more money in one afternoon at a barbecue. I’m sure the UAW, the union that had the most to gain from Government Motors not going under, gave Democratic candidates a lot, lot, more. So there was the circle of life. Government Motors is about to go under, it is saved by a Democratic Congress, and then the UAW gives even bigger donations to the Democrats as a major “Thank You.” I’m just surprised that the Republicans got anything at all. After all, if you’re going to give contributions to a political party, don’t you expect something in return? So what does GM or the UAW expect from a Conservative Republican Congress? Hopefully, nothing.
If I had a GM to return I would.
The solution is simple: (1)note those Representatives and Senators who are in your state; (2)via email or snailmail, notify them that you expect them to return that contribution (and any others from similar sources); (3) mention that you’re not going away nor are you going to forget if they fail to return such a … hmm … contribution from rent-seeking, favor-begging, corrupt source; (4) remind them that they’re up for re-election in (2012 for the Rep, whenever for the Senator) and you’re going to remember their action or inaction on this matter, publicize it and in the primary and in the general election vote for or against them accordingly and mention it loudly and often to your voting friends. Of course, it’s kind of like trying to pass a law against using your cell phone while driving: if the threat of increasing the risk of dying in an auto accident doesn’t deter the conduct, a law fining the cell phone using driver isn’t likely to deter it either. *sigh* What’s a conservative patriot to do, eh?
Let me see if I’ve got this straight – GM is losing money out the patoot. GM gets bailed out with my money. GM bondholders get the shaft and the UAW gets the gold. GM doesn’t pay back my money, they give it to those crooks?
Rep. Cantor! Return my $2000 you got from GM!
So we’ve got RAHM on his way to take over as the new crime syndicate boss seated on the kings throne in chicago. In detroit the crime bosses there send
tax dollars back to washington to influence elections.
What we have here is organized crime goes communist on it’s way to rule the world via the USA.