Detroit sees President Obama's decision to dump General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner as a knee-jerk attempt to atone for the sins of executives at American International Group. Here was an easy target for a president who needs a way to channel his newly found populist anger over taxpayer-funded bailouts.
Yet even before AIG became a household term synonymous with greed, and even before auto industry CEOs became a punch line on "Saturday Night Live," Americans were less than enthusiastic about the government's role in propping up the auto industry.
Opposition to an auto industry bailout transcends class, education and income lines.
Days before the auto industry executives flew their private planes to Washington to plead their case before Congress in November, a Gallup/USA Today poll found that only 20 percent of respondents considered it critical or very important that automakers receive "loans and other help."
More recently, the Diageo/Hotline poll (Feb. 28-March 4) showed just 28 percent of voters supporting more government loans to GM and Chrysler. More telling was the fact that only 39 percent thought the government should play a role in ensuring that the major U.S. auto companies don't fall into bankruptcy. Even among those who didn't think that these companies should be allowed to go bankrupt, just 26 percent said they strongly support the idea of putting more money into GM and Chrysler.
Opposition to an auto industry bailout transcends class, education and income lines. Among voters with a high school education, 45 percent said they strongly disapprove of more loans to GM and Chrysler. Among those with a college degree or better, 44 percent strongly disapprove.
As for income groups, those making less than $50,000 a year were the most supportive of government spending on GM and Chrysler, but support among these voters was still an unimpressive 30-32 percent. Among those making less than $30,000 a year, 15 percent strongly approved of the plan while 42 percent strongly opposed it.
This data suggests that taking on Detroit seems to come without political risk -- at least among rank-and-file voters. No one thinks GM's doing well, so why would they be upset to see the head honcho thrown out on his tail? Yet it also suggests that Wagoner's ouster alone likely won't be enough make voters feel more comfortable about sending their tax dollars to Detroit.
More importantly, while some are worried that Obama's move could alienate those on the left (liberal bloggers were grumbling Monday that the administration had little trouble forcing concessions from blue-collar industries but were unable to get white-collar Wall Street executives to cave on bonuses), Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who is still desperately seeking investors in the toxic asset bailout, may find that Wagoner's ouster on top of the AIG outrage only makes his job that much harder.
And so goes Obama's difficult balancing act. He needs to get consumers to believe that government can be trusted as a steward of their money -- holding those receiving their tax dollars to the highest standards while also convincing investors that the government is a trustworthy partner who'll have their back.
Want to stay ahead of the curve? Sign up for National Journal’s AM & PM Must Reads. News and analysis to ensure you don’t miss a thing.
Join the Discussion