Congressional Oversight Panel Says Auto Bailout May Have Been Illegal

CNSNEWS/The Lid ^ | 9/10/09 | The Lid

[Shellybenoit]

The bail out of General Motors and Chrysler is turning out to be a bigger problem for the country than originally thought. In creating the bankruptcy the POTUS turned things on their heels by forcing the primary investors to take a secondary stance in recovering their objection to the UAW. Basically he bailed out the UAW more than the Detroit auto industry.

Earlier this week we found out that taxpayers face losses on a significant portion of the $81 billion in government aid the UAW though GM and Chrylser. The Congressional Oversight Panel (COP) did not provide an estimate of the projected loss in its latest monthly report on the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. But it said most of the $23 billion initially provided to General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC late last year is unlikely to be repaid. Just what we need in this time of great deficits.

It gets worse, because according to the COP, the entire use of Tarp funds to bail out the auto industry may have been illegal:

[cranked]

If so, like we are getting to get that bailout money back, huh?

[SandWMan]

“Congressional oversight panel says auto bailout might have been illegal.”

The hell you say.

[cc2k]

---

the entire use of Tarp funds to bail out the auto industry may have been illegal:

<snip>

The report, issued Wednesday, confirmed what CNSNews.com had previously reported: that the law which created TARP--the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA)--did not grant the government specific authority to use taxpayers’ funds to rescue the auto industry.

“EESA does not explicitly state that the TARP is available to provide assistance to the automotive industry (or to any specific industry except arguably the financial and banking industry),” the report finds.

What the law did authorize was the purchase of distressed, mortgage-backed securities and other financial assets based on those securities, from American financial institutions.

---

And this just in. The Contstitution of the United States might not have given Congress the authority to enact the TARP law, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA).

[wilco200]

Good enough for me. Time to haul Zero away in cuffs

[ravingnutter]

Bush would have to go to jail too, the auto bailout was in Dec 2008. Although you know...Obama would, of course, blame it all on Bush and play the victim.

[K-oneTexas]

There was never any real expectation on the part of Congress or the ‘troubled’ companies that they would repay these loans. Significantly or insignificantly. It was political payback ... nothing more.

Many missed that course years ago on OPM ... Other Peoples Money.

[Oldpuppymax]

Gee...I THOUGHT I noticed Hussein shaking last night. And who is going to PROSECUTE HIM? HOLDER???!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Darth Reardon]

The Constitution[sic] of the United States might not have given Congress the authority to enact the TARP law, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA).

Well there's their out, then. EESA wasn't Constitutional, so the bailouts didn't break the law.

Seriously, though, "may have been illegal"?

[rolling_stone]

Time to get the billions back out of the Congress Critters paychecks.

[BlueNgold]

200 Days late
700 Billion short

[Vendome]

Really? REally!!!???

[radioone]

No Sh** Sherlock!!!!!!!!!! Now tell us something we didn’t know...