Safety stonewall: Government Motors sure sounds like the same old GM

Remember when then-General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner went to Capitol Hill and told members of Congress that GM had to be saved by the taxpayers because, in part, it had been part of the "arsenal of democracy" that made tanks instead of cars during World War II? Why, you couldn't let a virtuous company like that go out of business.

If that was a legitimate argument, then this is a legitimate question: Could you give up the ghost on a company that knew about a deadly safety defect in its cars, but covered it up for more than a decade, even though fixing it would cost a mere 57 cents?

In written testimony released ahead of the House subcommittee hearing, acting National Highway Traffic Safety Administration chief David Friedman said GM had information connecting defective ignition switches to the non-deployment of air bags, but didn't share it until last month. Committee members want both officials to explain why neither the company nor the safety agency moved to recall millions of small cars with a defective ignition switch, even though GM knew of the problem as early as 2001.

---

"Sitting here today, I cannot tell you why it took so long for a safety defect to be announced for (the small car) program, but I can tell you we will find out," Barra said. GM has recalled 2.6 million cars for the faulty switch. That recall prompted GM to name a new safety chief and review its recall processes.

Barra hastens to remind committee members that she wasn't the CEO when this happened. But she's been the CEO for the better part of a year now and the coverup continued until now. Her stonewalling inspired thoughts of Lois Lerner, except that in this case Democrats as well as Republicans were frustrated by the constant efforts to evade the issue. Members of Congress are the last people who should be surprised by this. It is a core principle of economics: If you subsidize something, you get more of it. When Congress bailed out General Motors in 2009, it subsidized the arrogant corporate culture that would cover up a simple safety issue because of the attitude that exposing it would not be good for the company. That same arrogant culture persists to this day, as GM only admitted the problem once it absolutely had no choice, and even now Barra is trying everything she can to avoid answering questions about it. The fact of the matter is that GM has earned its Government Motors monicker. It operates just like a government agency. Its primary function is to provide employment to unionized workers, and it is protected by politicians so it can continue to do so. These same politicians feign outrage when a clear betrayal of the public trust is revealed, but it makes no difference. They'll go back to protecting the agency tomorrow because all those union employees vote. That's what U.S. taxpayers preserved when they bailed out GM. Some deal, huh?