IBJNews

  • Home

Dems attack Mourdock on Chrysler bankruptcy fight

Associated Press
July 9, 2012
Keywords
Elections, Government, Government & Economic Development, Politics
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indiana Democrats attacked Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock on Monday for opposing the 2009 Chrysler bankruptcy, a position they see as his biggest weakness.

Mourdock was state treasurer when Chrysler filed for bankruptcy.

Democratic Party Chairman Dan Parker released legal invoices from Mourdock's attempt to block the Chrysler deal, which he says put the state in a bad spot. Democrats plan to follow the rollout of the legal invoices in the next six weeks with a statewide tour targeted at communities that would have lost the most jobs if Mourdock's 2009 legal challenge was successful.

"I think this goes to the judgment of the two candidates," Parker said, shortly after ticking through a legal document Monday. "Richard Mourdock was politically motivated. They wanted to blow up the company; it would have cost us thousands of jobs."

Mourdock has credited his 2009 fight against the Chrysler bankruptcy with building his national profile. He has said consistently since then, including throughout his successful primary battle against U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, that he would do the same thing again if given the chance.

Mourdock "stood on principle and fought for Indiana's retired teachers and state police officers against the federal government takeover of Chrysler," Mourdock spokesman Chris Conner said in a prepared statement.

The state Democratic party released a series of invoices it says shows the fight cost the state $2.8 million. The treasurer's office contests that figure, saying only $2.05 million was spent on the case after the law firm, White and Case, agreed to reduce its costs.

Both campaigns are entering a critical final stretch, with four months to go before November's election. The equivalent play by Republicans has been grilling the Democratic candidate, U.S. Rep. Joe Donnelly, for voting in favor of the federal health care law.

The new push from the Democrats came as Donnelly's campaign announced it raised roughly $900,000 in the last three months and has $1.2 million cash in the bank. The Mourdock campaign announced it raised $1.6 million in that same period but did not immediately say how much cash it had on hand.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Bumper sticker
    Wm AdamsOctober 6, 2012 3:09 PM
    Where can I get one of the "don't blame me I voted for Lugat" bumper stickers
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Bumper sticker
    JimJuly 31, 2012 11:45 AM
    Care to send me one?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • bond holders
    ChrisJuly 10, 2012 1:32 PM
    Let's face facts, Mr. Murdock was grandstanding for the tea party and will continue to waste our tax dollars grandstanding whenever he can (whether it be $2.05 or $2.8MM is really not the issue - he spent a LOT of our money on a wasted cause that only benefited him and some attorneys). We need someone like Mr. Donnelly who is willing to understand what it takes to get things done, not someone who believes that compromise and collaboration are bad words and will continue to do all he can to pander to the right wing of our party.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • biggest weakness
    Fred PfenningerJuly 10, 2012 1:30 PM
    His biggest weakness is that he defeated Richard Lugar who is the greatest elected official in Indiana history. I am a Republican precinct committeeman. My Lugar yard sign remains in my front yard till November. I just had printed 2500 "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Lugar" bumper stickers.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Not in State's interest
      BK LawyerJuly 10, 2012 1:28 PM
      regardless of how one feels about the C bk, it is clear that any alternative would have resulted in up to 10,000 OMB, Tier 1 and Tier 2 job losses in Indiana. The investment was stupid from the get go, and was not worth trying to protect at the expense of our citizens. There was no justification for RM's hopeless crusade. It was clear to every bk lawyer and Judge in the Country that C would not survive without the gov't deal. RM was advised on the bk issues at the very beginning, and chose to ignore the informal opinions provided by all the experts. He had to literally search for a firm willing to rep the State on this challenge.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Not in State's interest
      BK LawyerJuly 10, 2012 1:28 PM
      regardless of how one feels about the C bk, it is clear that any alternative would have resulted in up to 10,000 OMB, Tier 1 and Tier 2 job losses in Indiana. The investment was stupid from the get go, and was not worth trying to protect at the expense of our citizens. There was no justification for RM's hopeless crusade. It was clear to every bk lawyer and Judge in the Country that C would not survive without the gov't deal. RM was advised on the bk issues at the very beginning, and chose to ignore the informal opinions provided by all the experts. He had to literally search for a firm willing to rep the State on this challenge.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • dumb
      um...July 10, 2012 10:39 AM
      The point is, Chrysler went through a govt-backed expedited bankruptcy and the plan was approved (regardless of how various entities were treated under it). Done deal. Mourdock was playing politics when he brought this case, which any competent bankruptcy attorney would tell you was a loser, and he took this loser case all the way to the supreme court, where it (drumroll) ... lost. So yea, he made a name for himself from it in front of the tea party, but he also wasted a whole bunch of taxpayer money. A bunch. So now the moderate voters get to see this for what is.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • So.......
      Bob AddingtonJuly 10, 2012 9:07 AM
      Mr. Murdock was trying to make sure the bondholders (State Police & teacher pension plans along with the other fund involved) did not lose the principal they invested in Chrysler. A normal bankruptcy plan would have thrown out all the labor and wage agreements on both sides and new ones that the company could financially handle be negotiated. However, the UAW got what they wanted and the pension funds got screwed which the taxpayers may have to make up the difference. That decision by the bankruptcy court should make any investor (indiviudal, investment company, or govt pension fund) think twice about investing in Chrysler or any other company's debt as they may not get their principal investment back which was s standard in common law for the prior 400 or so years. Then the only source would be the govt (taxpayers) which would suit the Democrats very much-no more private investment.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
      • So.......
        Bob AddingtonJuly 10, 2012 9:06 AM
        Mr. Murdock was trying to make sure the bondholders (State Police & teacher pension plans along with the other fund involved) did not lose the principal they invested in Chrysler. A normal bankruptcy plan would have thrown out all the labor and wage agreements on both sides and new ones that the company could financially handle be negotiated. However, the UAW got what they wanted and the pension funds got screwed which the taxpayers may have to make up the difference. That decision by the bankruptcy court should make any investor (indiviudal, investment company, or govt pension fund) think twice about investing in Chrysler or any other company's debt as they may not get their principal investment back which was s standard in common law for the prior 400 or so years. Then the only source would be the govt (taxpayers) which would suit the Democrats very much-no more private investment.
        Reply to CommentFlag Comment

      Post a comment to this story

      COMMENTS POLICY
      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
       
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
       
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
       
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
       
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
       

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      ADVANCED SEARCH
      Sponsored by
      ADVERTISEMENT

      facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
       
      Subscribe to IBJ

      1. liek the rest of America

      2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

      3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

      4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

      5. whoa!

      ADVERTISEMENT