"Car czar"

I'd like to address this idea of a "car czar." The "car czar" is featured in the Auto bailout bill as the person to oversee the industry and make sure the loans that will undoubtedly be granted are paid back to the American taxpayer. Or that is what we are told, anyway. However, it goes way beyond simple "oversight."

"The car czar would have say-so over any major business decisions by the automakers while they were taking advantage of federal aid, with veto power over any transaction of $100 million or more. The companies — including the private equity firm Cerberus, which owns a majority stake in Chrysler — would have to open their books to the government overseer.And if Chrysler defaulted on its loan, Cerberus would be responsible for reimbursing the government."

What does this mean? It means that this person, who is appointed by the President and not elected by the people, mind you, will have his or her hands in virtually everything GM, Ford, or Chrysler does. He will be responsible for telling the industry what cars to make, how to make them, where to make them, and what technologies they should include in them. Does anyone see a problem with this? Since when has a government-appointed bureaucrat ever done anything successful?

Barney Frank notes that "at least this appointee is accountable to the President, where a bankruptcy lawyer is accountable to no one." Hmm, is a bankruptcy lawyer going to be determining the product mix of the Big 3? I think not Mr. Frank.

Another argument by Frank is that "the Big 3 can opt out of the Federal loans at any time, or choose not to accept them at all if they think the car czar mandates are too restricting." That's all well and good Mr. Frank, but that doesn't mean this appointee will do any good. It's clear that the Big 3 want the government's help, but if you're going to put up $15 billion in taxpayer funds, wouldn't it be in the best interest of Congress to at least give them a chance to succeed? Giving them the money and at the same time seizing any chance of control is a ridiculous waste of time and money.

The main power of the "car czar" is that he or she can force the companies into bankruptcy at any time if they don't comply with the government's demands, or if their plan is not working. Lets put ourselves in the position of the "car czar" for a moment. If I am appointed as a "car czar" and the companies are still failing miserably, am I going to force them into bankruptcy, thus eliminating the need for my cushy job in Washington? Of course not! Why would I? Does anyone in Congress think about that? Does Mr. Frank have the intellect to foresee that scenario? Of course not, because Mr. Frank has no more knowledge of how free markets work than your average housecat.