Skip to comments.The GM Scandal Is Worse Than You Think
Posted on 04/05/2014 8:44:43 AM PDT by Kaslin
Here's another reason government should never own a business.
In February 2010, the Obama administration's transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, told America, without a shred of evidence, that Toyota automobiles were dangerous to drive. LaHood offered the remarks in front of the House subcommittee that was investigating reports of unintended-acceleration crashes. "My advice is, if anybody owns one of these vehicles, stop driving it," he said, sending the company's stock into a nose dive.
Even at the time, LaHood's comments were reckless at best. Assailing the competition reeks of political opportunism and cronyism. It also illustrates one of the unavoidable predicaments of the state's owning a corporation in a competitive marketplace. And when we put LaHood's comment into perspective today, it's actually a lot worse. The Obama administration not only had the power and ideological motive to damage the largely nonunionized competition but also was busy propping up a company that was causing preventable deaths.
No one is innocent, of course, but not everyone is bailed out. So Toyota, after recalling millions of cars and changing parts and floor mats even before LaHood's outburst -- and after years of being hounded by the administration -- recently agreed to pay a steep fine for its role in the acceleration flap. This, despite the fact that in 2012, Department of Transportation engineers determined that no mechanical failure was present that would cause applying the brakes to initiate acceleration. The DOT conducted tests that determined that the brakes could maintain a stationary car or bring one to a full stop even with the engine racing. It looked at 58 vehicles that were supposedly involved in unintended acceleration and found no evidence of brake failure or throttle malfunction.
Attorney General Eric Holder kept at it, though, and Toyota finally agreed to a $1.2 billion settlement (it has about $60 billion in reserves) to make it go away. Though it looks as if the company doesn't think the fight is worthwhile, for all I know, it's guilty. I'm certain, though, that General Motors is. It announced this week that it was recalling over a million vehicles that had sudden loss of electric power steering. This, after recalling nearly 3 million vehicles for ignition switch problems that the company had known about since 2001 and are now linked to 13 deaths.
GM has apologized. But does anyone believe that the Obama administration took as hard a look at GM as it did Toyota? As early as 2007, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration knew that there may be problems with air bags but never launched a formal investigation. The NHTSA's acting chief, David Friedman, testified that GM never told the agency that faulty switches were at the root of the air bag problem. Fine. Before plowing billions of tax dollars into saving the United Automobile Workers, did the car czar or any other Obama officials take extra care to review DOT records to ensure that taxpayers would not be funding the preventable deaths of American citizens? Would DOT and Holder exhibit the same zealousness for safety with GM as they did when it came to Toyota? In the midst of the bailout debate and subsequent "turnaround," news of a cover-up and major recall would have been a political disaster.
So it's difficult to understand why this isn't a huge scandal. If every obtuse utterance by an obscure Republican congressman gets the media juices flowing, surely the possibility of this kind of negligence is worth a look. Can anyone with access to the administration ask some of these questions? Because if you take credit for "saving" a company (actually, an "industry," as no one would have ever driven again if Obama hadn't saved the day), you also get credit for "saving" the real-life unscrupulous version of the company. "I placed my bet on the American worker," Obama told union workers in 2012. "And I'll make that bet any day of the week. And now, three years later, that bet is paying off." Betting $80 billion of someone else's money to prop up sympathetic labor unions isn't exactly fraught with political risk. Unless it turns out that your administration is less concerned about the safety defects of the company you own than it is about the company you dislike. That would be corruption.
Good flower bed
Never thought of that. hee hee hee
Not sure it is worth hauling to the wrecking yard. It looks good, motor still intact and reliable. But with no transmission, is worthless.
Looked like the Toyota stopped to me, just took more distance.
And he was only using his left leg which is likely weaker.
BS to your BS.
Unless someone’s dumb enough (why?) to intentionally fade the brakes by repeatedly applying and disengaging them against full-throttle acceleration (yes, you can intentionally damage your brakes that way). What the fool in the video did. (Again, why?)
Simple question: What’s the 0-60 vs. 60-0 time of your car? There’s your answer to brakes vs. engine. Brakes win. Every time.
OTOH, there’s no protection against being stupid. A Darwin Prize awaits.
NASA did a cool DPA on the Toyota throttle assembly and control
As I recall, the fed gov undertook the operation of a Nevada whore house some time back with the resultant F.U.B.A.R. result. (pun?)
The difference between 140 feet and 500 feet can be the difference between life and death.
And once the brakes were pumped (depleting the vacuum in the power brake accumulator), the car wouldn't slow down at all (unless the engine was shut off altogether).
What the "fool" did in the video was to demonstrate a worst case possibility in a car he didn't own, so he wasn't worried about damage.
And he also demonstrated that the problem was fixed by Toyota through a relatively simple software change.
This wasn't a matter of fading the brakes, it was causing the power assist to stop working by bleeding off the vacuum that couldn't be replenished because the engine was at full throttle. It's the same thing that happened in olden times with vacuum-operated wipers. They worked fine at idle and low-throttle cruise, but when accelerating, they slowed down to practically nothing.
The point of the video, which you apparently missed, was that in a panic situation, a not-so-strong driver could have had a very difficult time stopping the car if the throttle was stuck open. Toyota did find that some of their cars did have pedal assemblies that had a tendency to stick, and they also had problems with floor mats getting out of place.
The bottom line is that Toyota recognized their problem, and took the necessary actions to fix them, unlike GM, which tried to avoid the problem while their customers were dying on the road.
There's no question that politics entered into this, both in the publicity over the problem and the fine that was levied on them.
But it's not valid to claim that there was no underlying problem with Toyotas, as many people seem to believe.
The only American vehicle that I would buy again is a Ford F-150. It is a great pickup truck.
But, no matter how much I'd like to have something like a new Corvette, there's no way I'd buy a new GM car or truck.
I went from the "Chevrolet's the only way" of my youth to "No way I'd buy a Chevrolet" today.
GM took a bite from the apple, liked it, then ate the whole thing and now the poison flows freely in their veins, killing the good while rewarding the bad.
None for me, thanks. Trying to quit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.