Please disable your Ad Blocker in order to interact with the site.

July has not been a good month for “post-racial” politics. The month started with charges that the Department of Justice was not prosecuting civil rights voting cases where the victim was white, then there was the NAACP bogus charges of tea party racism, followed by the Shirley Shirrod case. Somewhere in the middle was the Mel Gibson rants, and the Journo-list cartel of liberal news people plotting to tag journalists with the charges of racism.

Now there’s a new “racism” story surfacing with the closing of GM dealerships that were part of the the government takeover of the company.  In a new study released by TARP watchdog’s office say that minority status and gender were part of the decision-making process.

 According to the report:

GM determined that dealerships with a DPS Score of 100 were average performers; those below 70 were considered poor performers and would not be retained. SIGTARP noted, however, that GM did not uniformly apply the phase one criteria to the entire network. For example, our analysis found that two of the wind-down dealers did not meet either criterion. Furthermore, we found that, of the dealerships that met only one of the two criteria:

GM retained 355 (or approximately 41 percent) of the 858 dealerships that had a DPS score below 70.16

GM retained 9 of the 394 dealerships that sold fewer than 50 new vehicles in 2008.17

An additional 10 dealerships with a DPS score below 70 were in phase two wind-downs.

GM officials attributed these inconsistencies primarily to a desire to maintain coverage in certain rural areas where they have a competitive advantage over import auto companies that are not typically located in rural areas, although ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas. Other dealerships were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority- or woman-owned dealerships.

On June 1, 2009, GM filed for bankruptcy. As indicated earlier in this report, bankruptcy would permit GM to accelerate the process without the restriction of state franchise laws. Bankruptcy laws supersede various state franchise laws, which could have required litigation or arbitration. GM management had also determined that the company would need to wind down more dealerships than those designated in phase one to get close enough to the “ideal network size” of 3,380 dealerships.

 Holy cow, people’s jobs were destroyed,  others lost high performing family businesses that were in their families for generations because they didn’t fit government motors picture of a diversified dealer network?  Once again we are finding out that this is a government that does not believe in racial equality.

Become a Lid Insider

Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to friend