The Hill News

Roughly fifty years ago, when General Motors was the largest U.S. corporation, its CEO was reported to have said, “What’s good for General Motors is good for America.” While GM’s fortunes have changed dramatically over time, that infamous adage remains true today, especially after the recent government bailout. Lately, however, so-called “public interest” groups have condemned the lobbying efforts by GM and fellow bailout recipient Chrysler as being against the country’s best interests. Simply put, this criticism is an unfounded attempt to manufacture an ethical conflict of interest where none exists.

As the critics apparently see it, a conflict of interest arises when corporations with significant government ownership lobby the same government for policies that will benefit t! he corporations. For example, GM, in which the federal government retains a substantial ownership stake even after the recent initial public offering, spent $6.6 million in 2010 on lobbying against increased fuel economy standards, more safety regulations, and unfavorable terms in the South Korean free trade agreement. Given that money is fungible, some of these funds theoretically came from Uncle Sam’s pockets.

Read more...