It’s not often that you hear one of the titans of industry respond to a comment by a presidential frontrunner by saying: Is he on drugs?
But that’s exactly what happened when the head of Fiat-Chrysler said Friday that Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney must have been “smoking illegal material” when he argued in 2008 that the U.S. auto industry could be resurrected without federal financial assistance.
In an interview with CNN, Sergio Marchionne, chief executive of Fiat and Chrysler, said government support was pivotal.
The comment contrasted with a 2008 Op-Ed column in which Romney urged the federal government not to provide an industry bailout but instead force automakers into a “managed bankruptcy.”
Marchionne told CNN: “Whoever told you that is smoking illegal material. That market had become absolutely dysfunctional in 2008 and 2009. There were attempts made by a variety of people to find strategic alliances with other car makers on a global scale and the government stepped in, as the actor of last resort. It had to do it because the consequences would have been just too large to deal with.”
Marchionne added that the taxpayers were served well by the outcome of the rescue loans.
“I think it was a phenomenal deal for U.S. taxpayers,” he said. “When you look at the consequences of a failure of Chrysler as an entity, just to pick up the pieces of what would have been left, the impact of the supplier base, unemployment levels here in Michigan and other states, it would have been a real mess.”
Marchionne added that the taxpayers were served well by the outcome of the rescue loans.
“I think it was a phenomenal deal for U.S. taxpayers,” he said. “When you look at the consequences of a failure of Chrysler as an entity, just to pick up the pieces of what would have been left, the impact of the supplier base, unemployment levels here in Michigan and other states, it would have been a real mess.”
Romney and his best flip-flopper consultants argued recently that President Obama actually followed his advice, linking their financial help with a corporate overhaul at Chrysler and General Motors.
They point out that, in his New York Times Op-Ed, Romney wrote: “It is not wrong to ask for government help, but the automakers should come up with a win-win proposition. … The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.”
However, the Romney spin doctors leave out the fact that he began that Nov. 18, 2008, guest column this way: “If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.”
Only the most ardent Romney supporter could argue that he was in favor of a bailout, just not the kind of bailout that the Big Three wanted.
However, the Romney spin doctors leave out the fact that he began that Nov. 18, 2008, guest column this way: “If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.”
Only the most ardent Romney supporter could argue that he was in favor of a bailout, just not the kind of bailout that the Big Three wanted.
