{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10904-2", "2008-12-11", 110, 2, null, null, "DOMESTIC AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S10904", "S10909", "[{\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Warner\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "154 Cong. Rec. S10904", "Congressional Record, Volume 154 Issue 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 186 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S10904-S10909]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                      DOMESTIC AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY\n\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, the bill that has been filed by the\nchairman\n\n[[Page S10905]]\n\nof the Banking Committee would do for the U.S. domestic auto industry\nwhat governments around the world are doing: providing emergency\nassistance to their auto industries because their survival is\njeopardized by a worldwide recession which has resulted in plunging\nauto sales.\n  That global recession is not the making of the auto industries around\nthe world, including our own domestic industry. Past mistakes of the\nbig three are not the cause of the worldwide recession and resulting\ncredit freeze. People who want to make large purchases, such as\nautomobiles, are unable to get credit, and 90 percent of the people who\nbuy automobiles buy on credit. Many people simply are afraid to make\nlarge-scale financial commitments in these scary economic times. So the\nU.S. domestic auto industry is not alone in needing loans to make it\nthrough the global economic calamity we are in. Look at the rest of the\nauto-producing world. Here are some headlines in the news recently:\n\n  ``Facing a Slowdown, China's Auto Industry Presses for a Bailout From\nBeijing.''\n  Brazil. ``In Brazil, Whiplash on Assembly Lines.'' ``The Government\nstepped in with a $3.5 billion aid package for the auto industry by\nfunding banks to boost the amount of credit available for car loans.''\n  ``European Carmakers Get $50 Billion in Aid.''\n  ``European governments poised to help their automakers.''\n  ``Automakers in other nations get more government help. Requests for\naid made worldwide''--another headline.\n  These are all headlines in papers across the country.\n  Reuters, ``Spain to support car industry.''\n  ``France's stimulus plan includes carmakers.''\n  ``Portugal rolls out loan.''\n  ``Auto industry faces massive job losses without aid,'' according to\nthe chairman of one of the largest automobile industries--not one of\nthe big three.\n  Now, why are nations around the world stepping in to support their\nauto industries? It is because of the drastic decline in sales across\nthe industries around the world--not just domestic, not just the big\nthree--leaving no alternative to every other auto-producing country and\nits government but to support its industry. Hyundai sales are down 40\npercent; Toyota sales are down 34 percent; Honda, down 32 percent;\nNissan, down 42 percent; Mercedes, down 38 percent. These are not the\nbig three. These are automobile makers around the country that are in\nthe same situation as the big three. But the difference, so far, is\nthat other governments are stepping in. We have not yet stepped in to\nsupport our industry.\n  In arguing against these loans for the big three, some continue to\ndescribe the domestic companies of the 1970s and 1980s when fuel\nefficiency was not high on the list of the big three as big three goals\nor achievements. Some would have us ignore dramatic gains in quality\nand vastly greater numbers of fuel-efficient vehicles now being offered\nby the big three. In the area of quality, big three autos are equal to\nor better than their foreign competitors. For example, the J.D. Power\nInitial Quality Study scores the overall quality of Buick, Cadillac,\nChevrolet, Ford, Mercury, Pontiac, and Lincoln--these are objective,\noutside studies on quality for those American brands, Buick, Cadillac,\nChevrolet, Ford, Mercury, Pontiac, and Lincoln--as high or higher than\nAcura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, VW, and Volvo. J.D. Power rates the\nChevrolet Malibu as the highest quality midsize sedan on the market,\nand both the Malibu and the Ford Fusion score better than the Honda\nAccord or the Toyota Camry.\n  On the fuel efficiency side, here are some facts that hopefully\ncolleagues will consider. Long before the credit crisis hit, GM laid\nthe groundwork to offer 15 hybrids by 2012. Thanks to investments they\nhave already made, GM already has 20 models that achieve 30 miles per\ngallon or better--twice the number of its nearest competitor. All the\nbig three are working to ensure that at least 50 percent of their\nAmerican production is capable of running on biofuels by 2012. Domestic\nautomakers produce numerous cars that have equal or better fuel\nefficiency than their foreign competitors. And again, the most fuel\nefficient Chevy Malibu gets 33 miles per gallon on the highway, which\nis 2 miles better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel efficient\nFord Focus has the same highway fuel efficiency ratings as the most\nfuel efficient Toyota Corolla.\n  In the area of productivity, Chrysler tied Toyota as the most\nproductive automaker in North America this year, according to the\nHarbor Report on Manufacturing, which measures the amount of work done\nper employee. Eight of the ten most productive vehicle assembly plants\nin North America belong to Chrysler, Ford, or General Motors.\n  Now, there are also some who want to ignore the reduction in benefits\nthat have been taken already by UAW workers and retirees. In the\ncollective bargaining agreements negotiated in 2005 and 2007, the UAW,\nalong with GM, Ford, and Chrysler, achieved billions of dollars in cost\nsavings and set the companies on the course to bring labor costs,\nincluding benefits, in line with their foreign competitors in the\nUnited States by 2012. Wages were cut and pension and health care\nbenefits were greatly reduced as well.\n  The UAW is taking responsibility for managing its own retiree health\ncare benefits beginning in 2010 by setting up its own voluntary\nemployee beneficiary association, or VEBA. The VEBA plan will transfer\nresponsibilities for health care benefits for existing employees from\ncompanies to an independent trust. This eliminates half of the\ncompanies' liabilities for retirees' health care, with billions of\ndollars of savings.\n  The memory of mistakes made decades ago lingers and remains the\nimpression that many have of the big three despite all the facts I have\njust outlined. Beliefs are always hard to change. So the facts I have\njust shared about improved quality and more fuel efficient vehicles and\nalternative-energy vehicles being produced by the big three may not be\nreadily accepted by people who have beliefs that are to the contrary.\nBut one fact is indisputable and will hopefully influence some who are\nopen to argument: Auto industries around the world are seeking the\nsupport of their governments through loans and other methods and are\ngetting it. I went through that series of headlines, from Brazil to\nEurope, all the way to China. The Chinese automobile industry is asking\nfor loans from the Chinese Government. No other auto-producing country\nthat I know of in the world is failing to act to make sure its industry\nis alive when the deep global recession is over, and we shouldn't\neither.\n  There is also a national security aspect to the American auto\nindustry, and I wish to spend some time on this because there was\ntestimony that was prepared for delivery to the Banking Committee when\nthey met on this subject by the Director of the U.S. Army Tank\nAutomotive Research, Development and Engineering Center, called TARDEC.\nSo this is the Army R&D and engineering center. It is located in Macomb\nCounty, MI. TARDEC develops, integrates, and sustains the right\ntechnology solutions for all of our manned and unmanned Department of\nDefense ground vehicle systems and combat support systems in order to\nimprove force effectiveness and provide superior capabilities for the\nfuture forces of this country.\n  The Director of TARDEC is Grace Bochenek. Because of the security\nimportance of what I am going to relate, I am going to read from her\nprepared testimony, and this is going to take some time. I am going to\nread from her prepared testimony, though it wasn't actually delivered.\nIt ended up that they had too many witnesses, and so she wasn't\ninvited, but this testimony is a compelling story of the continuing\nrelationship between the big three, the domestic auto industry, and our\nU.S. Army vehicle program.\n  We all look back--some of us nostalgically--to what Detroit did\nduring World War II. That is the past. There is a present which is\ncritically important in terms of the security of this country. Some\nhave pointed out the need to have a manufacturing base in order to\nquickly expand in the case of need, and that is a powerful argument--a\nnational security argument for keeping our big three auto industry\naround the way other countries keep their auto industries around. Some\nother colleagues\n\n[[Page S10906]]\n\nhave pointed out in some detail the relationship between the suppliers\nof the big three and the suppliers of vehicles for the Army and how\nmuch trouble those suppliers would be in--these are Army vehicle\nsuppliers--if the big three did not survive, and that is another\npowerful national security argument. But I am going to focus on what\nGrace Bochenek focused on, the Director of TARDEC, which is the\nrelationships, the synergies that exist between the big three now and\nthe Army in terms of current products and current technologies which\nare inserted into our vehicles and future technologies which are being\ndeveloped as we speak.\n  I am going to quote from her testimony, and this will all be quotes\nexcept where I insert my own words, which I will try to make clear. But\nthis will be a long quote, for those who are listening to this\ntestimony and, hopefully, reading it.\n\n       The synergies between TARDEC and the U.S. automotive\n     industry and the collective challenges we face. TARDEC's\n     connection to the automotive industry dates back to 1947,\n     when the Tank Automotive Components Laboratories, now known\n     as TARDEC, was established. The level of cooperation between\n     the Army and the auto industry was strengthened by the\n     Secretary of the Army's charter of the National Automotive\n     Center, NAC, in 1992 to champion the development of dual-use\n     automotive technologies and their application to military\n     ground vehicles. Today, the NAC remains the connective piece\n     and continues to engage through many different mechanisms to\n     leverage the capabilities, skills, and facilities of the\n     automotive industry.\n\n  Referring to the Department of Defense and the domestic automobile\nindustry, she continued:\n\n       For the past 70 years, we have shared common research\n     goals, leveraged investments in technology, mutually\n     benefitted from those technical developments, and\n     collectively owned the responsibility for our Nation's next\n     generation of automotive engineers and scientists.\n     Technologies may have changed, but the importance of working\n     together to collectively drive innovation has not. The Army's\n     specific challenges are as follows: First, significantly\n     increasing fuel efficiency to reduce the logistics burden on\n     our troops. In some cases, fuel is 70 percent of the bulk\n     tonnage that we take to war. Second, substantially increasing\n     electric power available on the battlefield and developing\n     the next generation of electronic warfare tools. Third,\n     increasing soldier protection through the development and\n     application of advanced light-weight material solutions.\n     Fourth, utilizing sensor technology throughout our vehicle\n     platforms to collect prognostic data allowing for overall\n     improved reliability and reduced sustainment costs. Fifth,\n     engaging the enemy without putting soldiers in harm's way\n     through the fielding of unmanned systems.\n\n  Another word for that is robotics.\n  Continuing now with Grace Bochenek's prepared testimony.\n\n       Often the only difference between military and commercial\n     automotive technologies is a matter of scale both with regard\n     to the market (quantity) and component durability (military\n     specifications). The goals and the technologies leading to\n     their accomplishment, however, remain very similar. Our\n     motivations may differ, but our technological goals are\n     shared ones. Both the Army and the automotive industry seek\n     to achieve technical advances in the areas of power and\n     energy, vehicle intelligence, robotics, safety, advanced\n     lightweight materials and leading-edge manufacturing methods.\n\n  Then she goes into examples in each of those areas, where there is a\nworking together, a cooperation, a synergy between the American\nautomobile industry and the Army vehicle program. She continues:\n\n       In 1997, TARDEC began a commercially based tactical truck\n     program focused on leveraging GM, Ford and Chrysler's\n     commercial truck platforms to meet some of the military's\n     light tactical vehicle requirements. Chrysler and GM provided\n     hybrid electric vehicles that included start-stop operation\n     and vehicle exportable power providing TARDEC with\n     information critical to defining future requirements.\n       A Cooperative Research & Development Agreement (CRADA)\n     between Ford and TARDEC launched the development of a thermal\n     management software modeling tool. This further matured under\n     multiple Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contracts\n     utilizing tri-service investment. The dual use software\n     produced has been fully commercialized and is now sold\n     worldwide by one of the SBIR, recipients, resulting in a new\n     Michigan business with revenues of about $10M per year.\n     Ford's initial investment was absolutely critical in the\n     development of this world class product the application of\n     which has also become the Army, Navy, and Air Force standard.\n     This is an example of how an Automotive OEM--TARDEC\n     partnership was able to leverage resources to create jobs and\n     develop useful technologies.\n       TARDEC continues to partner with automotive industry OEMs\n     and suppliers on advanced powertrain technologies including\n     fuel cell technologies, power and thermal management, and\n     advanced automotive batteries all of which are necessary for\n     the next generation of military systems. TARDEC leverages\n     fuel cell developments primarily through the automotive\n     supplier base with companies such as Ballard, Delphi, and\n     United Technologies. TARDEC also has a longstanding\n     relationship with General Motors in the demonstration and\n     evaluation of light duty commercial fuel cell vehicles. This\n     program has allowed TARDEC to assess multiple generations of\n     fuel cell technologies.\n       Batteries are critical to implementing advanced automotive\n     powertrains. As such, there is a growing body of\n     collaborative work between TARDEC, the automotive OEMs, and\n     their suppliers. The cornerstone of TARDEC's efforts in this\n     area is the development of manufacturing technologies needed\n     to mass-produce high power and energy density Lithium-Ion\n     (Li-Ion) batteries--particularly critical for the Army's\n     Future Combat Systems platforms. Additionally, there are many\n     ongoing military battery technology development efforts that\n     leverage emerging automotive battery technology providers\n     such as Al23, AltairNano, Boston Power, GS Yuasa,\n     Inanovation, EnerDel, EnerSys, Firefly, Kokam America,\n     Quallion, and SAFT America. With the help of the Automotive\n     OEMs and the Department of Energy, TARDEC is escalating\n     efforts to define the boundaries for dual-use commercial and\n     military applications of advanced battery technologies\n     through the U.S. Advanced Battery Consortium. Additionally,\n     General Motors is supporting TARDEC advanced battery\n     requirements through direct, individual collaboration through\n     a CRADA and an additional newly awarded contract.\n       TARDEC and the automotive OEMs have both identified\n     advanced automotive batteries as a key area for collaboration\n     going forward. In the support of expanding collaboration in\n     advanced batteries, TARDEC has worked with the automotive\n     OEMs and suppliers of battery technologies to assess the\n     scope of effort around establishing a robust, diverse\n     manufacturing base for advanced automotive batteries. This\n     effort recently culminated in a two-day Battery Summit, which\n     involved over 70 participants from industry and government.\n     Discussions covered the technology, policy and manufacturing\n     implications of having a domestic base for the manufacture of\n     advanced batteries. TARDEC intends to continue to work with\n     key stakeholders to identify near term opportunities in the\n     area.\n\n                          Vehicle Intelligence\n\n       The Army faces high operating and support costs in its\n     aging fleet of vehicles. Currently the Army reduces this\n     heavy cost burden through periodic scheduled inspections and\n     sustainment efforts. To further reduce this cost burden, the\n     Army must move towards an intelligent vehicle architecture.\n       Both the Army and the automotive industry have vested\n     interest in enhancing their platforms by providing predictive\n     maintenance enhancements through prognostic capabilities.\n     This requires equipping vehicles with computing devices,\n     sensors, middleware, and wireless infrastructure. Through\n     these enabling technologies, vehicle intelligence is made\n     possible. This could ultimately enhance operational readiness\n     and reduce lifecycle maintenance costs for ground vehicle\n     platforms by reducing the heavy cost burden of periodic\n     scheduled inspections and automating the supply chain to\n     proactively provision for part replacements to optimize the\n     maintenance repair process.\n       Vehicle intelligence is also an enabling technology for\n     Condition Based Maintenance and (vehicle) Health Monitoring\n     technologies. It is related to existing developments in the\n     commercial automotive industry such as the installation of\n     electronic control units (ECU) and electronic control modules\n     (ECM), computing devices, and sensors. These devices\n     facilitate diagnostic analysis at the vehicle subsystem\n     level. This in-vehicle network provides the ability to\n     diagnose such components as the powertrain, ABS, and critical\n     safety systems. GM Diagnostics has taken this a step further\n     by enabling cellular transmission of data off platform for\n     off-board analysis and status updates through their OnStar\n     system. The Army is working with commercial automotive\n     partners to develop this technology for military use via\n     secured communication pipelines.\n\n  Robotics--now she addresses robotics in her prepared testimony. I am\ngoing into this at some length because what has not been focused on\nenough in this debate is the security implication of the failure of the\nbig three. There has been a lot of discussion about why it is essential\nthat we not allow the big three to go under in terms of this economy.\nBut what has not yet been focused on specifically, other than general\nstatements about the connection, the current and future connection, is\nthe essential synergy between the big three and the Army particularly\nbut also the military in general.\n  People's minds tend to go back and say that was all World War II,\nthat was all the ``arsenal of democracy,'' and yes, it was, and we are\nproud of it. But\n\n[[Page S10907]]\n\nit is also 2008, 2010, 2015, 2020. What kind of equipment our troops\nwill have will depend upon whether we have the kind of connection\nbetween our military and our commercial worlds. In the area of\nvehicles, to disconnect that connection, to rip it apart, to allow the\nbig three to go under, has a massive negative security impact on this\ncountry and on the well-being and survival of America's troops.\n  She goes on:\n\n                       robotics, unmanned systems\n\n       The U.S. Army has a long history of working with the\n     automotive industry on the development of enabling\n     technologies for manned and unmanned systems. Unmanned\n     systems are key resources for our fighting men and women in\n     the Global War on Terrorism.\n       Many of the key technologies currently used on ground\n     robots have their start in cooperative programs between the\n     U.S. Army and the Big 3 Automotive and their tier suppliers.\n     The Army and the automotive companies have several aligned\n     activities in unmanned systems. For example, the Army has\n     several overriding objectives we are trying to achieve for\n     the development and deployment of future unmanned vehicle\n     systems. Primary among these goals are Safe Operations (Safe\n     Ops) and Total Situational Awareness (SA) around the\n     vehicles, necessary because a robot operates by sensing the\n     environment around it at any given moment. Safe Ops and 360\n     degree SA are also critical for the safe operation of\n     passenger cars on automated highways, which means our goals\n     are aligned perfectly with the programs in the auto industry.\n       Recently, both GM and Ford participated in the series of\n     DARPA Autonomous Vehicle Grand Challenges. The 1st Grand\n     Challenge was held at the California Motor Speedway and it\n     tested the ability of vehicles to move autonomously over\n     structured roads. The 2nd Grand Challenge was a 170 mile\n     cross-country road race in the deserts of Nevada. The 3rd and\n     final challenge, called the DARPA Urban Challenge (DUC), was\n     designed to push the state-of-the-art in autonomous\n     navigation in urban environments, where each competitor had\n     to obey the rules of the road and contend with other robots\n     and driven cars. Many of these robust automotive sensing\n     methodologies are being transitioned to Army programs for\n     integration into both manned and unmanned systems.\n       In every one of these competitions both Ford and GM\n     partnered with leading universities in the U.S. to put\n     together winning teams that finished in the top 5 percent of\n     race finishers (the GM-Carnegie-Mellon team won the DUC in\n     2007). The close coupling of robotic sensors, actuators and\n     intelligence was enhanced by the collaboration of automotive\n     engineers at the OEMs.\n\n  Then she goes on with her description of safety issues.\n\n       There are multiple overlapping safety goals between the\n     commercial automotive industry and the military ground\n     vehicle fleet. Just as injury risk mitigation and thorough\n     modeling and simulation of technologies is important to the\n     commercial automotive manufacturers; these precautions must\n     be taken to reduce the impact to our Soldiers, Sailors,\n     Airmen, and Marines.\n       Automotive industry OEMs and key suppliers have worked with\n     TARDEC in the development of advanced modeling and simulation\n     efforts to characterize occupant impact during rollover and\n     side impact crashes. TARDEC recently developed ground-\n     breaking full vehicle underbody blast models and\n     methodologies to both accurately predict occupant injury\n     during an energetic event such as a mine/IED blast, and to\n     develop new countermeasures. This effort would not have been\n     possible without heavy leveraging of automotive tools and\n     methodologies from the automotive crashworthiness area.\n     TARDEC's commercial partners have also been critical in\n     advanced technology product development, testing and\n     validation, design studies, and developmental tests. Finally\n     TARDEC relies on the commercial partners for prototyping and\n     large quantity manufacturing capabilities.\n\n  Advanced lightweight materials is the next subject that she took up\nin her prepared testimony.\n\n       One of TARDEC's mandates is to research, develop, engineer,\n     and to leverage lean, agile, advanced manufacturing\n     technologies used by the U.S. Auto Industry, Academia, and\n     other segments of the U.S. Industrial Base. This is\n     accomplished through partnerships and contracts with\n     manufacturers, suppliers, and universities, taking advantage\n     of manufacturing capabilities developed to service the high\n     volume needs of the auto industry and adapt the technologies\n     for manufacturing the low volume production of military\n     components.\n       With the auto industry leading the charge, TARDEC is\n     pursuing several advanced manufacturing processes such as\n     friction stir welding, laser additive and subtractive\n     manufacturing, flexible manufacturing cells using robotics,\n     and water-based environmentally safe painting processes.\n\n  Then she addresses automotive expertise, knowledge, and education.\n\n       To maintain technological superiority now and in the\n     future, we need top quality scientists and automotive\n     engineers in our workforce. Alongside the automotive\n     industry, we have always had a shared commitment and felt the\n     collective responsibility to develop the next generation of\n     engineers, and recognized the challenge to do so.\n       TARDEC has long recognized that a scientifically and\n     technologically literate citizenry is our Nation's best hope\n     for a diverse, talented, and productive workforce. To achieve\n     this goal, we have partnered with the automotive industry and\n     universities to develop curriculum that will benefit both\n     TARDEC and the American automotive original equipment\n     manufacturers.\n       We have also been able to address this challenge through\n     our Automotive Research Center, which has created ways for us\n     to partner with universities and allow students the\n     opportunity to develop and work on relevant automotive\n     engineering challenges.\n       Over the years, the automotive industry has made\n     significant contributions to the Army through technology\n     exchange processes available in the ARC [which is the\n     Automotive Research Center]. And in recent years, an\n     increased emphasis on research involving high mileage, low\n     polluting vehicles, as well as the new high technology needs\n     for large trucks, off-road vehicles and robots has provided\n     invaluable data and resources for us towards the Army's long\n     term transformation goals and objectives.\n       In 2007 and 2008, TARDEC supported 52 ARC research projects\n     spanning Power, Mobility, Survivability, Modeling and\n     Simulation technology areas. Ford, Chrysler and General\n     Motors and at least 12 Tier-1 suppliers provided their\n     resources and expertise towards 36 of the 52 research\n     projects. The remaining projects had industry involvement\n     from Tier-2 and Tier-3 suppliers such as large software\n     companies, industry consultants and automotive small\n     businesses.\n       The fact remains [and I will conclude with this] that the\n     need for partnerships and the consistent leveraging of\n     resources is critical for continued innovation, technological\n     breakthroughs. American automotive original equipment\n     manufacturers partnership with TARDEC in events such as [then\n     she lists a whole lot of events] inspires young engineers to\n     consider careers in math and science and helps to develop\n     many needed automotive skill with applicability in DOD's\n     ``real'' workforce environments.\n       Automotive industry support has been crucial in developing\n     the educational infrastructure that has allowed the\n     development of an automotive engineering talent base here in\n     the United States. And that talent base will be central to\n     future efforts to create a safer Nation and a robust\n     manufacturing environment.\n       At this time, when we have to [these are her last words] at\n     this time, when we have to break the dependency on foreign\n     oil, provide energy security for the Nation, and increase\n     soldier protection, it becomes even more critical, [even more\n     critical] to leverage investments, exchange technical ideas\n     to drive innovation, and provide the breakthroughs that are\n     necessary to maintain the dominance of the American military.\n\n  I very much appreciate the time that I have taken to share with this\nbody the statement of the head of the organization in the Army which is\nresponsible for the technologies in current vehicles and future\nvehicles.\n  I have done this because there is kind of yet the unstated critical\nneed for the survival of the big three. The stakes for our economy\nnationally are huge. The failure of the big three would send a tsunami\nthrough this already battered economy.\n  Millions of workers would lose their jobs. Dealers in every town and\non every Main Street are already reeling from the economy's plunge.\nAutomotive component suppliers, who are in fully half our States, are\non the knife's edge already, waiting for us to act.\n  Men and women who work for steel mills and textile factories and\nglass factories and computer chip factories are waiting and hoping.\n  The financial industry would be at risk as well. A collapsed auto\nindustry would lead to defaults on over $1 billion in corporate bonds,\ncredit default swaps and other financial instruments tied to the auto\nindustry and could send the stock market into another, deeper tailspin.\nMajor additional damage to U.S. financial institution balance sheets\nwould result, throwing our credit markets into even deeper turmoil.\n  Despite these facts, there are still some who say, ``let them go\nbankrupt, let them go under,'' even though 1 in 10 jobs in this country\nare tied to the auto industry. In addition to hoping that they will ask\nthemselves why no other government is allowing that to happen to their\nauto industry, I would also hope they would listen to some experts on\nthe subject of bankruptcy for the auto industry.\n  A recent report released by J.P. Morgan titled, ``Cost of the\nAlternative,'' described the scenario where one or\n\n[[Page S10908]]\n\nmore of the Big Three are left to file for bankruptcy as ``Credit\nCrisis Part II.'' It indicated that unemployment would shoot up by 2\npercent if one of the Big Three failed, and this failure scenario would\nrequire the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to take over more\nthan $100 billion in obligations that the Big Three currently hold. It\nnoted that Ford and GM and their financial arms ``comprise over 10% of\nthe high-yield bond market and the auto sector represents one of the\nlargest sectors in leverage finance for banks.''\n  Another recent report by the Anderson Economic Group and BBK\ncalculated the costs in the first year following the failure of two of\nthe Big Three. Such a scenario would cost States $12 billion in tax\nrevenues; it would cost the Federal Government $40 billion in income\nand Social Security taxes, and it would cost an additional $8 billion\nin unemployment insurance and $5 billion in significantly increased\ncosts to the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. The report\nindicates a high risk that inaction by Congress would result in a\npermanent shift of manufacturing jobs out of the United States and a\ndependence on foreign technology.\n  Mr. President, these are risks we cannot take. We must pass this\nlegislation. Without this legislation, one or more of the Big Three\nwill likely collapse in the coming weeks. The U.S. taxpayers would\nprovide a bridge loan to avoid this catastrophe under this bill, but\nwith important protections for their investment, including stock\nwarrants for the Government; limits on excessive executive\ncompensation; a prohibition on golden parachutes; and a prohibition on\npayments of dividends until the loans are fully repaid. And the so-\ncalled auto czar has the ultimate power under this legislation to\nenforce compliance with the long-term plans of the auto companies that\naccept these loans: he can call or cancel the loans if he disapproves\nthe auto companies' restructuring plans.\n  We cannot afford to further destabilize Wall Street, and we cannot\nafford to allow millions of jobs on Main Streets in communities across\nthe country to disappear. The domino effect of failure would ripple\nacross our entire Nation and add untold suffering to an already dire\nsituation.\n  I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.\n  As chairman of the Armed Services Committee, I wanted to focus on an\naspect of this debate that has not achieved adequate attention. That is\nthe tight, important connection between our domestic auto industry and\nthe future security of this Nation and our men and women in uniform.\n  We have no greater responsibility than that. That factor, that\nsynergy, that relationship, that connection, is an essential component\nof this debate.\n  I hope when our colleagues look at all of the factors, they will\nconsider that important reason for sustaining and supporting an\nautomobile industry in this country. Again, no other Nation is allowing\ntheir automotive industry to go down in this global economic disaster\nwe are all in. They have all taken steps to support their industry.\n  We should too, for many reasons. But one of those reasons, one of the\nmost important reasons we are here in the Senate is to make sure that\nour men and women in uniform always have the best equipment that can be\nproduced in the world. They put their lives at risk. They are entitled\nto every advanced technology we can give them.\n  Part of the production of those technologies the big three is playing\ntoday, tomorrow, and hopefully in the future, is a critical role.\n  Mr. WARNER. Would the Senator entertain a question?\n  Mr. LEVIN. I did not see my dear friend from Virginia come to the\nfloor. I wish I had, because I wanted to put those parts of my\nremarks--and they were lengthy, but at a time when he might be hearing\nthem either here or in his office.\n  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we had the opportunity to speak on this\nsubject earlier today. And I reminded my good friend of the\nextraordinary chapter in American history that was performed by the\nindustrial base in your State and elsewhere across America under the\nleadership and guidance of those companies manufacturing automobiles\nafter Pearl Harbor, I mean who were in the business of manufacturing at\nthe time of Pearl Harbor. They shut those lines down very quickly and\nturned to full military production. That is a great chapter in American\nhistory. And, fortunately, I am old enough to remember it quite well as\na young man.\n  But today, it is a different industrial base in the automobile\nindustry. Whereas they had a very dominant position in the production\nof vehicles, particularly tanks, and they did some aircraft and so\nforth, that has given way to the high-tech aspects which the Senator\nfrom Michigan addresses here on the floor for the benefit of our\ncolleagues.\n  That is a great chapter in American history. I would hope this Nation\nwould never again be faced with as serious a problem as it was in World\nWar II, namely that we had let our Armed Forces get down to very small\nlevels and the equipment was old and tired.\n  You remember the pictures that they used broomsticks to practice\ntheir military maneuvers with and the Model T and Model A automobiles\nthat were used for tanks. But that chapter reflects the potential of\nnot just the companies themselves but the workers and how quickly they\ntook their knowledge and their skilled hands to swing into action and\nproduce the war materials that we needed very quickly.\n  Today our military is much stronger, well equipped, thanks to the\ndistinguished chairman and others who have served with us on that\ncommittee. I think the likelihood of our Nation ever being confronted\nwith a conflict that would have to require that enormous buildup is\nnot, hopefully not there, but nevertheless we should remember that\nchapter.\n  It documents the capabilities of the workers and the families in this\nindustry. I think you pointed with great pride to that era. I might add\nto my colleague's comment, he closed by asking all Senators to consider\nthis very carefully. As I finish up my 30 years, I have been to a lot\nof Republican caucuses. We had one yesterday at noon. We just completed\nanother. And the gravity of this issue is reflected in the gravity of\nthe careful, very careful consideration being given by every member in\nour caucus. I can tell you that without any question. I am not\nsuggesting exactly which way they are going to go. But I know that they\nhave the best interests of the country in mind, and the gravity of the\nsituation is enormous. You can detect it as you hear the colloquies\ngoing on on our side. I am sure the same is taking place the Senator's.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first, I thank my dear friend from\nVirginia. This will probably be, we keep saying, the last opportunity\nwe have to speak with each other on the floor of the Senate. It may be,\nit may not be, as it turns out. But I know of no Member of this body\nwho has put the interests of this Nation more deeply in his heart than\nthe Senator from Virginia.\n  There are others who probably share that with him; I know there are,\nbut the focus which I gave here today outlining the current\nrelationship between the big three and the technologies that are\nembedded right now in our vehicles, and the effort in a collaborative\nway between our domestic automobile industry and our Army vehicle\nindustry, to give us lighter vehicles, more survivable vehicles,\ncrashworthy vehicles, vehicles that use less gasoline, vehicles that\nhave the global positioning devices that can say exactly where they are\nand communicate that, these technologies are embedded now and will\ncontinue hopefully to always be at the forefront, at the cutting edge\nof technology to give our troops what I know the Senator from Virginia\nhas devoted his life to; that is, to giving our troops every edge we\ncan.\n  The big three not only has been part of that on the vehicles, as the\nSenator notably points out in terms of looking back, but that is the\ncurrent situation--deep connections, synergies, collaboration going on\nas we speak, and planned for the years ahead.\n  If we rip apart that connection, by allowing the big three to go\nunder, that tremendous capability they have to join with the Army on\nvehicles, particularly, will be rendered useless or will no longer\nexist. That would be a terrible tragedy for our Nation's security.\n  Again, I am glad my great friend from Virginia was able to come to\nthe\n\n[[Page S10909]]\n\nfloor to share with me some thoughts about this relationship that is\nnot only historical and one which we take great pride in as a nation,\nthat ability to quickly expand, to turn a manufacturing, an industrial\nbase into an arsenal of democracy.\n  That hopefully will not happen, as the Senator points out. Maybe it\nis less likely to happen. But we must be there when it does. That\naspect has been focused on by others, the need to be able to have a\nmanufacturing base for our national security and to have a base of\nsuppliers for our national security. I have tried to add another aspect\nto this argument that points to the relationship between the survival\nof our big three and our national security by pointing out the ongoing\nrelationship in the area of research and development, which has\nproduced critically important technologies currently in our vehicles\nand developing today the technologies which will make future vehicles.\n  Mr. WARNER. Our military vehicles.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Absolutely.\n  Mr. WARNER. I wish to make that clear because that technology has\nbeen available in the open market to those manufacturers, other than\nthe oil industry, which have, in a remarkable way, taken these up-\narmored vehicles, that general category we have today, very quickly, to\nthe great credit of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary Gates, he put\ntogether a structure of five companies to get into immediate production\nof those vehicles and into those vehicles has gone the development and\ntechnology that our distinguished colleague from Michigan has\ndescribed.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Thankfully, we still have a few colleagues, including the\ngreat Senator from Virginia, who have a personal connection to that\nwar.\n  Mr. WARNER. It was very minor, but it was a privilege to have been\nassociated with that generation.\n  Mr. LEVIN. I thank my friend from Virginia.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-2008-12-11-pt1-PgS10904-2"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 44.72030699253082, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}