WaPo: Obama used phony accounting on auto buyouts

Horn6721

Hook'em
Shocked!The Link
Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency.”

— President Obama, June 4, 2011

This post has been updated.

With some of the economic indicators looking a bit dicey, President Obama traveled to Ohio last week to tout what the administration considers a good-news story: the rescue of the domestic automobile industry. In fact, he also made it the subject of his weekly radio address.

We take no view on whether the administration’s efforts on behalf of the automobile industry were a good or bad thing; that’s a matter for the editorial pages and eventually the historians. But we are interested in the facts the president cited to make his case.

What we found is one of the most misleading collections of assertions we have seen in a short presidential speech. Virtually every claim by the president regarding the auto industry needs an asterisk, just like the fine print in that too-good-to-be-true car loan.

Let’s look at the claims in the order in which the president said them.

“Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency — and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule. And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake. That means soon, Chrysler will be 100 percent in private hands.”

Wow, “every dime and more” sounds like such a bargain. Not only did Chrysler pay back the loan, with interest — but the company paid back even more than they owed. Isn’t America great or what?

Not so fast. The president snuck in the weasel words “during my presidency” in his statement. What does that mean?

According to the White House, Obama is counting only the $8.5 billion loan that he made to Chrysler, not the $4 billion that President George W. Bush extended in his last month in office. However, Obama was not a disinterested observer at the time. According to The Washington Post article on the Bush loan, the incoming president called Bush’s action a “necessary step . . . to help avoid a collapse of our auto industry that would have had devastating consequences for our economy and our workers.”

Under the administration’s math, the U.S. government will receive $11.2 billion back from Chrysler, far more than the $8.5 billion Obama extended.

Through this sleight-of-hand accounting, the White House can conveniently ignore Bush’s loan, but even the Treasury Department admits that U.S. taxpayers will not recoup about $1.3 billion of the entire $12.5 billion investment when all is said and done."

more at link
 
lots of creative accounting going on, GM will end up losing about 15 billion from recent reports and AIG will cost about 350 billion instead of the 140 billion previously reported.
 
If you pretty much assume he's lying from the beginning then the details don't matter much.
 
To go back to the article here is President Obama's statement to which the blogger wanted to pick apart:

"“Chrysler has repaid every dime and more of what it owes American taxpayers for their support during my presidency — and it repaid that money six years ahead of schedule. And this week, we reached a deal to sell our remaining stake. That means soon, Chrysler will be 100 percent in private hands.”

When the blog isn't editorializing it does point out an actual fact that:

"Under the administration’s math, the U.S. government will receive $11.2 billion back from Chrysler, far more than the $8.5 billion Obama extended."

That seems very consistent with President Obama's statement. I fail to see the 'phony accounting'. Can the statement be taken as a bit misleading as I guess all the loans given out under Bush and President Obama totalled 12.5 M? Sure. But that doesn't make it phony accounting or a false statement that he made.

Ultimately the blog states that the combined loans have 90% repaid. And it does not disprove the fact that the 2nd statement that the company will not longer be government owned and thus in "private hands" when the Fiat deal is completed. Seriously this is actually good news. And this blog is just another sad attempt to try and attack the President.
 
Pharm
Are you sure Chrysler repaid only the money Obama loaned?
Did Chrysler mark the repaid money as " Only applying to the money Obama loaned"?
What if Chrysler meant 4 Billion of the money be used to pay off the 4 billion Bush loaned?
Then Chrysler would have paid off ALL that Bush loaned and not quite half of what Obama loaned.

In fact using this explanation Chrysler is sticking Obama ( and through Obama's bad decision sticking us, the taxpayer)
for 1.3 billion.
 
Help me out here.
what is the equivalency between Obama playing cute with words and pretending the money Chrysler paid back ONLY applied to money given during Obama admin
and Bush, Clinton, Gore, Pelosi Etc saying intel showed Saddam had Wmds?
 
Break both points down to the simplest explanation. As President/Commander in chief, isn't this role the CEO of the country? And if so doesn't the buck stop with this position regardless of which department was ultimately responsible.

Whether intentional or not:
Bush lied
Obama lied
 

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top