I said it was a bad idea to float the Detroit automakers on a pool of public money when it was 1st suggested. When they did what I said they’d do and came back for more when they’d burned through what we handed them the first time, I said it again. Bankruptcy was what was needed there, not more taxpayer cash going to float a busted business model.
Well, among others, I’m finding I’m in the position of getting to say “I told you so” to those people who told me we just had to “loan” them the money. The newly annointed GM CEO apparently thinks bankruptcy might be the best option for GM and he’s saying so on the record:
General Motors’s new chief executive told CNBC that filing for Bankruptcy may be the best option for the struggling automaker.
In a taped interview to be aired tonight on NBC Nightly News, Fritz Henderson said that because of greater demands from the Obama administration to restructure, GM is considering the bankruptcy option. The auto giant previously had ruled out such a move, saying it would discourage people from buying GM cars.
So, here we are now, after having been forced into making a $14 billion dollar investment into a company that I wouldn’t have bought 10 cents’ worth of stock in, and in spite of all of the due diligence telling anyone who had any idea what they were looking at that dumping money into GM was a fool’s errand we’re now looking at a failed investment. You cannot be seriously looking at the state of that company and the intransigence of both the management and the unions who have made it the money-losing monstrosity it is and think we’re ever going to see a dime in repayment.
Bankruptcy is what this company should have been allowed to enter 5 months ago when this was all being bandied about. It would have been better for the company in the longrun, for the economy in the mid- to long-run, and for the taxpayer in the here-and-now.
As is the procedure in Virginia, the General Assembly is reconvening on April 8th to consider responses to Governor Kaine’s actions regarding the bills passed in the session that was just completed. According to Virginia law, the Governor has 4 options open to him when a bill is sent to his desk.
- Sign the bill. It becomes law either immediately or on a certain date as described in the law.
- Veto the bill. He then returns the bill to the General Assembly.
- Modify the bill. The Governor can make modifications to any bill sent to him. He then returns the bill to the General Assembly so they can vote on whether to accept his modifications.
- Do nothing. In the absence of action on the Governor’s part, the bill becomes law just as if he’d signed it.
As I mentioned a few days ago, Governor Kaine vetoed several firearms-related bills that passed the GA pretty handily. The Assembly will now consider whether to override the Governor’s veto. Among those bills being considered (summaries from a Grassroots Bulletin from the NRA-ILA):
SB1035 would permit a Right-to-Carry permit holder to carry concealed in a restaurant, provided he or she does not consume alcohol. The House amended SB1035, improving it by removing the requirement that Right-to-Carry permit holders notify the alcohol beverage manager when they carry concealed in their establishment.
After vetoing SB1035, Governor Kaine said, “Allowing concealed weapons into restaurants and bars that serve alcohol puts the public, the employees, and our public safety officers at risk. I take seriously the objections of law enforcement to this measure.” Last year, the Governor signed a bill permitting Commonwealth Attorneys to carry concealed in restaurants even while consuming alcohol. It should be noted that SB1053 prohibited the consumption of alcohol while carrying concealed by licensed Right-to-Carry permit holders.
SB877 would allow “retired” law enforcement officers to carry concealed in a restaurant that serves alcoholic beverages. Unlike SB1035, this bill applies only to retired law enforcement officers.
HB1851 would exempt active duty military personnel or Virginia National Guardsmen from Virginia’s “one-gun-a-month” law on handgun purchases.
SB1528 would have allowed a safety course conducted by a state-certified or National Rifle Association-certified firearms instructor required for obtaining a concealed handgun permit to be done electronically or online.
HB2528 would establish that no locality or entity may participate in a gun “buyback” program where individuals are given anything of value or money in exchange for surrendering a firearm to the locality unless the governing body first passes an ordinance authorizing the gun “buyback.” The legislation also requires that any locality holding gun “buybacks” sell the firearms to a federally licensed dealer “or be disposed of in any appropriate manner” if they could not be sold.
One of our local members of the GOP and of several pro-2nd Amendment organizations, Greg Stone, put out an e-mail calling for concerned citizens to take a moment and make their voices heard to their members of the General Assembly, particularly those who had voted “no” during the floor vote. He writes:
If YOUR Senator is one of the following:
Blevins, Colgan, Herring, Lucas, Norment, Northam, or Petersen
And/Or YOUR Delegate is one of the following:
Albo, Amundson, Caputo, Dance, Hamilton, Hargrove, Mathieson, May, Melvin, Paula Miller, Poisson, Rust, Shannon, Sickles, Tata, Tyler, Vanderhye, or Watts
You need to call them NOW and let them know that since they supported RETIRED police officers carrying concealed in restaurants, even if they are drinking alcohol, they NEED to change their vote and override the Governor’s veto to SUPPORT concealed handgun permit holders carrying concealed in restaurants if they don’t drink!
These legislators simply cannot justify what they have done by their contradictory votes. We MUST call them and let them know we expect them to make it right by overriding the veto.
His e-mail included phone contacts for these Senators and Delegates. I’ll include them here and toss in e-mail addresses, too.
Mark Herring, 703-729-3300
Thomas Norment, 757-259-7810
Chap Petersen, 703-349-3361
Dave Albo, 703-451-3555
Kristen Amundson, 703-619-0444
Phillip Hamilton, 757-249-2480
Frank Hargrove, 804-550-2900
Bobby Mathieson, 757-470-3000
Joe May, 703-777-1191
Ken Melvin, 757-397-2800
Paula Miller, 757-587-8757
David Poisson, 703-421-6899
Thomas Rust, 703-437-9400
Stephen Shannon, 703-281-5200
Mark Sickles, 703-922-6440
Bob Tata, 757-340-3510
Roslyn Tyler, 434-336-1710
Margi Vanderhye, 703-448-8018
Vivian Watts, 703-978-2989
It’s important to contact your Senator or Delegate and ask them to vote to override the Governor’s veto of these bills. It is crucial that you do so for 1 of these bill especially, SB1035 and to show you why, I’ll quote from Greg Stone’s e-mail again:
SB 1035, the restaurant ban repeal, needs 5 more votes to be overridden in the Senate … The House only needs 1 more vote to override the veto. (Senate 22 to 16, House 66 to 33) …
SB 877, the restaurant ban repeal for retired police, passed by a large veto proof margin. (Senate 40 to 0, House 84 to 15)
SB 1851, One Handgun A Month exemption for active duty military, passed by a large veto proof majority. (Senate 31 to 8, House 86 to 13)
SB 1528, internet training for CHPs, passed by a large veto-proof majority. (Senate 29 to 10, House 99 to 0)
HB 2528, gun buy-up bill, passed by a large veto-proof majority. (Senate 28 to 12, House 85 to 11)
Emphasis mine. All 4 of the other bills already passed by a margin capable of overriding the veto. We need to ask those who voted “no” on them to reconsider but all that really needs to happen is for all of the Assembly to vote again as they voted before. SB1035, however, is a different situation. We need 5 Senators and 1 Delegate to change from a “no” to a “yes” and that’s where you come in.
Note that all 40 Senators voted to permit retired police officers to carry concealed in those same restaurants and bars and they voted to permit those same people to drink while doing so. In other words, these Senators who voted for that bill but against SB1035 are saying they trust a drunk retired cop to carry a gun but they don’t trust you stone cold sober. I don’t recommend you actually say that in your correspondence with them, but definitely keep it in mind as you decide whether you’ve got the time to call them.
I’d also remind everyone that Gov. Kaine already signed a bill last year that permits Commonwealth Attorneys to carry concealed and drink while doing so. Perhaps they can argue that police training means something where their current inconsistencies are concerned but Attorneys are no more trained regarding firearms than are regular citizens like us. Again, something to keep in mind.
Your action is needed. Your efforts do matter. Make a couple of calls, please.