House passes Bill to overturn dealership closings

[The_Blur]

Allow me to help provide some perspective on what happened here. A large number of disillusioned citizens called their elected officials demanding action. Any of us can do this, and some of us do so regularly in order to help the democratic process work properly. These representatives of the people then vote based on the information they have, which oftentimes means that they will vote with whatever their constituents tell them. There is the occasional issue on which they won't budge, but this is a case where the elected officials only want to make their local people happy. They, of course, pass the buck onto the other house of legislature, where the same thing happens. Having now passed the same bill in both houses, the legislation goes to the executive branch. In this case, the White House can either pass the bill by signing it, publicly disagree with the bill in a formal veto, or not sign the bill during a 10-day window in what is called a pocket veto.

Obviously, the politics of this can lead to lots of people not being happy with certain elected officials, so the best political move is to pass the bill because that is what the people want. This way, legislators get to keep their jobs, and the executive, the US President, can avoid losing support for future initiatives by reluctantly signing.

How can GM get out of this vicious system? If GM sues, then this will likely get overturned. Only company executives can make these decisions. As a result, judges will point this out, and GM will tout this as a victory for the new company, which is hoping to be an example of sleek business.

The moral of the story is that this is the democratic process working. If it did not allow GM to win the case, then it would be socialism. America truly has a beautiful system of government.

[stovt001]

Two words: British Leyland.

[nester7929]

I need to stop reading the news because every time I do, I can literally feel my pulse in my eyelids.

It sucks for the dealers, it really does. However, GM simply does not have the money to supply all the dealers they had before the closings. If all the dealerships remain open, GM would have to go back into insane amounts of debt to fully stock all of them, or they would keep production the same and spread their products very thin. Either way it's not doable. GM has no option but to become a much smaller company, and unfortunately that also means fewer dealers.

[chevydude26]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

They didn't. At the risk of sounding mean; get that through your head. The union owns a grand total of 11%...and that HAS to be converted into cash soon, because it funds their healthcare trust. As for the governments stake, they've been incredibly "hands off" beyond the initial chapter 11 processes. Even ask Bob Lutz!

If I may use your insult against you: "stop being mindless sheep and acting all paranoid because it's more interesting than the TRUTH."

They may own the company on paper, but there are NO plans to actually run the company, as has been stated by multiple entities on BOTH side...numerous times...PLUS, there are plans in place to take the company public again early next year. So relax.

You are right about one thing, though...this isn't the same GM...This is the GM we've dreamed off for decades. One with a strong product lineup, smart management (smart-er, if you don't totally agree), and no debt or bloodsuckers (retiree benefits) to deal with.


I'm pretty much with you: this exceeds the vanity and stupidity even I thought our congress was capable of.

If they wanted to cancel the contract after they expired due to POOR PERFORMANCE...they can, that's legal...it just so happens that it occured all at once....

On another note...how is this even possible when the Chrysler dealerships are already closed with no cars, and no contract...and the GM dealerships AGREED to close? Wha-huh?

yeah they don't run the company but they can "suggest" that a ceo be fired and can handpick their own ceo... they can just ignore constitutional contract law and divide assets however they see fit but yeah they don't run nothing huh...puhlease buddy.....and i don't care what a politician says clearly if you paid attention a number of things have been said that have been proven to be false that i won't get into to avoid direct political discussion already this year if you want examples on these lies and going back on words you can pm me...its rediculous to take any politician at face value since intention and what is said can be completely different

they can also increase mileage standards which affects the availability of certain products that gm can provide forcing them to make decisions they wouldn't otherwise make...which they have already done to take effect by 2012

they may not "run" the company but their actions reflect on the decisions made by gm and other companies

and no the union isn't fully responsible for the car slide but it sure played a large role...in combination with c.a.f.e since the 70's and forced regulations that add on to the price of the cars which affects the competitiveness with other foreign companies forcing companies like gm to raise the price or skrimp on quality...why do you think the interiors have always sucked on our cars here in america since the 70's? there are things called trade-offs and the market is the market regarldess of whatever faith you may have...

the one thing i do think is positive about gm is that they have a leaner pretty decent product line with the malibu, camaro and the whole cadillac division in the end good product sells regardless of who's running the company...but they gotta step up the impala to compete with the camry

[Hylton]

I'm glad that GM has finally found their brass balls. Even with the upcoming closures, GM will still have way too many dealerships. Wait until you see the new franchise agreements for those who remain - no more treating the consumer like shit. :happy:

[HeatherR]

Originally Posted by Hylton

I'm glad that GM has finally found their brass balls. Even with the upcoming closures, GM will still have way too many dealerships. Wait until you see the new franchise agreements for those who remain - no more treating the consumer like shit. :happy:

Exactly! I get sooo tired of explaining to people why less dealers are an important part of the "New GM"...people generally just don't get it, but as we have witnessed here there are some dealers that need weeded out...most likely more than actually were...

[Kyle2k]

Originally Posted by chevydude26

yeah they don't run the company but they can "suggest" that a ceo be fired and can handpick their own ceo... they can just ignore constitutional contract law and divide assets however they see fit but yeah they don't run nothing huh...puhlease buddy.....and i don't care what a politician says clearly if you paid attention a number of things have been said that have been proven to be false that i won't get into to avoid direct political discussion already this year if you want examples on these lies and going back on words you can pm me...its rediculous to take any politician at face value since intention and what is said can be completely different

they can also increase mileage standards which affects the availability of certain products that gm can provide forcing them to make decisions they wouldn't otherwise make...which they have already done to take effect by 2012

they may not "run" the company but their actions reflect on the decisions made by gm and other companies

and no the union isn't fully responsible for the car slide but it sure played a large role...in combination with c.a.f.e since the 70's and forced regulations that add on to the price of the cars which affects the competitiveness with other foreign companies forcing companies like gm to raise the price or skrimp on quality...why do you think the interiors have always sucked on our cars here in america since the 70's? there are things called trade-offs and the market is the market regarldess of whatever faith you may have...

the one thing i do think is positive about gm is that they have a leaner pretty decent product line with the malibu, camaro and the whole cadillac division in the end good product sells regardless of who's running the company...but they gotta step up the impala to compete with the camry

How are they losing in the competition with foreign manufacturers? Pretty much every other country that makes automobiles has higher standards than we do.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by chevydude26

yeah they don't run the company but they can "suggest" that a ceo be fired and can handpick their own ceo... they can just ignore constitutional contract law and divide assets however they see fit but yeah they don't run nothing huh...puhlease buddy.....and i don't care what a politician says clearly if you paid attention a number of things have been said that have been proven to be false that i won't get into to avoid direct political discussion already this year if you want examples on these lies and going back on words you can pm me...its rediculous to take any politician at face value since intention and what is said can be completely different
If anybody handpicked Fritz, it was Wagoner. They promoted him to second-in-line for CEO right before Wagoner stepped down. Don't delude yourself. I'm sure they 'approved' Fritz, but he basically "fell" into the job.

If by 'assets' you're referring to the Chapter 11 filing...then, I don't understand...because dividing assets is what it's designed to do.

And I don't take any politician at face-value. I take their actions, and what they say about the future and put it into perspective. But when we have a known tell-it-like-it-is guy saying the same stuff I am...hm...it should make you stop and rethink your assumptions.

they can also increase mileage standards which affects the availability of certain products that gm can provide forcing them to make decisions they wouldn't otherwise make...which they have already done to take effect by 2012
And it's well known that the 2012 standards aren't as bad as they seem. The CAFE standards have been around for decades, so this isn't some new form of gov't control.

they may not "run" the company but their actions reflect on the decisions made by gm and other companies.
Huh?

and no the union isn't fully responsible for the car slide but it sure played a large role...in combination with c.a.f.e since the 70's and forced regulations that add on to the price of the cars which affects the competitiveness with other foreign companies forcing companies like gm to raise the price or skrimp on quality...why do you think the interiors have always sucked on our cars here in america since the 70's? there are things called trade-offs and the market is the market regarldess of whatever faith you may have...
I never denied the Unions role in hurting GM. As for the rest...I say again, "Huh"?

the one thing i do think is positive about gm is that they have a leaner pretty decent product line with the malibu, camaro and the whole cadillac division in the end good product sells regardless of who's running the company...but they gotta step up the impala to compete with the camry.
I agree, though I think they intend to stomp on the Camry with the Malibu. The Impala will be retiring in a few years...

[stovt001]

Is the Impala retiring or to be replaced? Sorry for the off topic. Agreed that the Malibu is the Camacord competitor. The Impala should take on the new Taurus, Avalon, and Maxima.

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Is the Impala retiring or to be replaced? Sorry for the off topic. Agreed that the Malibu is the Camacord competitor. The Impala should take on the new Taurus, Avalon, and Maxima.

The Impala is supposed to go on a bit of a hiatus but it is coming back. They are waiting for one of the new platforms.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Is the Impala retiring or to be replaced? Sorry for the off topic. Agreed that the Malibu is the Camacord competitor. The Impala should take on the new Taurus, Avalon, and Maxima.

FenwickHockey knows more than I. Rumor has it that he Impala will be discontinued in 2012-2013...and return massively refreshed, and potentially RWD (since that's when Alpha's due) a few years later.

[stovt001]

Gotcha Thanks.

[MrIcky]

Le sigh. I used to try to argue about this stuff, but I've since come to learn that it's pointless. Dragonseye, I appreciate your relentless optimisim and I truly hope that you are right. I can't quite seem to turn these lemons into lemonade in my mind quite yet.

[DkknightX]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Well, yes, I do!

Ugh...I dunno....*thinking*...This is purely hypothetical, as was your posted outcome:

Because the majority of the country doesn't like UAW -- in fact, they see them incorrectly as the sole reason GM failed in the first place, and such a bold move would be seen as such dirty politicking that a re-election campaign would be worthless. The 'other' guy would have too much ammo.

Incorrectly?! Are you kidding me?! Not the SOLE reason, but they had a huge part in it. Take, taking and taking GM for a ride, forcing their hand and paying benefits to families long after the original employee is deceased. Millions upon millions being wasted and did you honestly think the UAW was going to make proper concessions for GM? You are completely wrong! They saw GM had an open wound that was gushing money and refused to help stitch it up. Well, thankfully the handouts are over. That's all I can say.