Detroit handouts

The nation now lies less than two months from what shapes up as another close election, in which Michigan and Ohio could well turn out to be "swing states."

Under the circumstances, neither major party wants to be identified as the old meanies who wouldn't "do something" for the Midwest's auto industry and its thousands of employees, now struggling in the face of high fuel costs and ongoing foreign competition.

In fact, under the circumstances, the sky's the limit for how much of other people's money -- taxpayer money -- the denizens of D.C. will gladly pledge to buy themselves four years of political "Happy Days."

Sensing his moment of opportunity, General Motors Corp. Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner asked lawmakers at a Senate energy summit Friday to provide funding for a $25 billion "loan" program, which the industry vows to use to increase its vehicles, er ... "fuel efficiency."

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Congress authorized the $25 billion in loans in last year's energy bill but has not funded the program. The loan program was intended to help the industry fudge ... er, meet new fuel economy standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020 -- a 40 percent increase.

Mr. Wagoner said Friday the industry is simply asking for the program to be funded. "I'm not here today ... asking for any bailouts," he said.

Really? Given their current miserable bond ratings, the Detroit companies would have to pay double-digit interest rates to lay hands on that much cash in the open market. But the government interest rate on the loans would be around 5 percent, The Associated Press reports, meaning taxpayer backing would provide about $100 million a year in interest savings for the companies for every $1 billion in loans -- assuming those loans aren't fully or partially "forgiven" the next time the parties discover they need grateful Buckeyes and Wolverines at the polls come November.

"The entire focus of our efforts" will be to modernize plants and develop more fuel-efficient vehicles," Mr. Wagoner vowed.

Vehicles such as the proposed Chevrolet Volt, which GM hopes to launch in 2010. The extended-range plug-in electric vehicle will be heavily dependent on advanced battery technologies, which the loans would supposedly help develop.

But what happens if Americans still refuse to buy the "Volt" and her sisters, based on styling, or maintenance costs or any other variable which congressmen and senators are ill-trained to foresee?

Some doubtless believe such a car uses "no fossil fuel, at all." But if they take a flashlight and spend the night backtracking the electric lines from that plug in the garage, aren't they likely to eventually come upon a big, brightly lit facility consuming vast quantities of coal or natural gas?

How much energy got used making the battery? What were the environmental costs to the neighbors of the battery factory? If this idea is such an economic winner, why do the taxpayers have to fund it -- and what return do we get on our money?

Moreover, note The AP reports Mr. "Wagoner also asked for additional flexibility in receiving the loans so it could be applied to a broad range of fuel-efficient vehicles, not just those vehicles that would get a 25 percent increase in fuel efficiency, as the legislation suggests."

The auto industry helped make America great. They make some great cars and trucks, and we hope they continue to do so. But we've seen the results when politicians take over auto manufacturing. Finding a lot of demand for pre-1990 Soviet Ladas?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Friday he would do "everything that I can" to secure funding for the program "as soon as possible, hopefully this year."

Given the way he doubtless expects Michigan voters to show their thanks in the voting booth, we doubt the senator means "starting on November the fifth."