Re: Toyota Corolla May Be Recalled over Steering Problem

"C. E. White" wrote in news:hluc6l$2ko$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

Shhh... don't tell anybody, but Google's cache contains the whole article.

Here's the URL to the cached copy:

You'll probably get a couple of errors as the page loads, but the text is all there.

Reply to
Tegger
Loading thread data ...

"C. E. White" wrote in news:hludqu$95v$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

The Google cache copy is here:

Ignore any errors; the text is all there.

Reply to
Tegger

THANKS!

It is an interesting read (once I got past IE not letting me read it - FireFox did).

I agree with most of what was said. I do think the Government over reacted. I also think all sorts of polictical pressure is being applied with a lot of it coming from the groups that have a vested interest in toning things down (pro-Toyota voices so to speak). The article never indicated there weren't grounds for a recall, just that the whole thing was over blown and was mishandled by the Obama administration. I can agree with that sentiment. But I also think the original 2007 compalints were mishandled when the Bush administration was in power. So what we have, in my opinion, is two Goverment screw-up leading to a massive over reaction.

I liked the following line form the final paragraph:

"Only a year ago, Democrats were wailing about economic damage if GM or Chrysler went bust. They forestalled that with government ownership. They, and Toyota, are now dealing with the all-too-easy-to-predict political behavior that followed such meddling in the private economy."

Some medling is justified, even necessary ( some level of safety standards for instance), but all to often politicians try to micro-adjust the economy to buy votes. It rarely works out well.

Ed

That vague screeching noise you hear in D.C., the slight odor of burning rubber? That's the government trying to brake its anti-Toyota campaign. It may be a little late. The Toyota spectacle has become slightly surreal, as a few uncertain questions about "sudden acceleration" morphed into a media and political firestorm over the safety of its entire fleet. It is also proving an interesting case study in the treacherous politics that accompany government ownership of U.S. industry.

Washington's initial enthusiasm in bashing Toyota is beginning to backfire.

There's no question that in the first, heady days of recall, at least some in the Obama administration and Congress saw advantage in undermining Toyota. The majority owner of Government Motors felt it couldn't hurt to fan the image of a "foreign" auto maker disregarding the safety of American drivers. Shoppers might just buy a Chevy instead, propping up government investment and bolstering United Auto Worker union jobs. And of course the trial bar would be thrilled by a fat new class-action target.

Vehicle recalls (there were 16.9 million in 2009 alone) are usually handled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-but the Toyota case was commandeered by Obama Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. He skewered the firm for being "a little safety deaf," complained it hadn't been responsive, and bragged it was the government that forced a recall.

"This is a big deal, this is a big safety issue," he exclaimed as part of the LaHood Vs. Toyota Media Tour. It was, in fact, the "most serious safety issue" of his tenure. It was, to repeat, such a huge, scary, safety deal that his "advice is, if anybody owns one of these vehicles, stop driving it." Mr. LaHood later claimed he'd misspoke.

Over in Congress, a geographically notable contingent of representatives piled on. Rep. Bart Stupak (D., Mich.) announced an investigation into "dangerous" malfunctions. Toyota was ordered to report to his Oversight subcommittee hearing next week. Rep. John Dingell (D., Mich.) berated the company for taking "two years" to step up and ripped them for not recalling more models.

UAW lobbyist Alan Reuther demanded Toyota make amends by keeping open a unionized factory in California, currently scheduled for closure. Chrysler, GM and Ford started offering cash incentives for car buyers to trade in recalled Toyotas for domestic wares.

The results of this campaign are now making pols queasy. It was inevitable that such a loud attack would lead to questions as to whether the administration was carrying water for the domestic industry. The White House is today fielding as many queries about its role as owner and regulator as Toyota is fielding about recalls.

This thinking also inspired reporters to dig into Congress's Toyota ties and to question, conversely, whether it can be tough enough. The press dredged up Senate Toyota investigator Jay Rockefeller's role in landing his state of West Virginia a Toyota plant. Did you know, the head of NHTSA, David Strickland, worked eight years for Mr. Rockefeller? Or that California Democrat Jane Harman, who sits on the House investigating committee, once made money selling stereo systems to Toyota? You do now.

It is also occurring to some Democrats that, while Toyotas are mainly assembled in red states, they are, uh, sold in blue ones. In addition to idled Toyota factory workers, Toyota dealerships and suppliers are getting hit by the company's sharp drop in sales. Some of these folks even live in Michigan.

The angry phone calls to Washington only increased last week when four governors-three Republicans and Kentucky Democrat Steve Beshear-sent a sharp letter to Congress, accusing the administration of a "conflict of interest." They unsubtly noted that many recent recalls were "as serious as or more serious" than Toyota's.

This sent the media digging into the recall record of U.S. auto makers, which may have to revisit their own safety issues. Some politicians are worried about Japanese retaliation against U.S. auto makers.

All of which accounts for Washington's recent piping down. Mr. LaHood devoted a lot of this week to touting stimulus grants. Quite a few Democrats have gone mute, leaving the issue to NHTSA and wishing it would go away. Some lawmakers are even stepping up to defend Toyota.

Yet having revved up the drama, the administration is now all but obliged to take action against Toyota, say with civil penalties. Mr. Rockefeller and other Democrats with ties to the carmaker are under pressure to get rough. And if Toyota bungles Washington as badly as it did the initial recall PR, this could go on a long time.

Toyota has not yet laid off a single one of its 34,000 U.S. workers, but that may change. Only a year ago, Democrats were wailing about economic damage if GM or Chrysler went bust. They forestalled that with government ownership. They, and Toyota, are now dealing with the all-too-easy-to-predict political behavior that followed such meddling in the private economy.

Write to snipped-for-privacy@wsj.com

Reply to
C. E. White

Ignore

Thanks for that. I saved it as a PDF.

Reply to
Conscience

She was saying the fruhaha is because of the GM takeover. Bullshit. She was saying Lahood was taking an unusaul role. Bullshit. He was summoned by the Congress for a subcommitee hearing, then put his foot in his mouth when questioned by the press, which is leading the charge against Toyota, and demanded his attention. She's all Dem this and Dem that, not mentioning Republican Issa wanted to supoena old man Toyota. You're right about interests more likely to tone it down than not. And they are Dems.

formatting link
But that's not how she played it. It was the big bad gov Dems and GM versus Toyota. She makes a big deal about LaHood (not mentioning he's a lifelong Republican) now being out touting the stimulus, as if this proves something about her "conspiracy theory". Duh. Stories die down without new revelations or press persistence. And LaHood never gave a shit about it anyway. Typical pol enjoying camera time.

The biggest meddler here is the press - including her - and Toyota owners who want the issues resolved. And most of the "pressure" is coming from Toyota owners. The conspiracy wackos and fanboys are in another category.

Reply to
Bob Cooper

correct.

Reply to
jim beam

oh, i know a little. and i've even driven cars with it. unlike the blowhards that apparently haven't but still [amazingly] feel qualified to have an opinion.

Reply to
jim beam

just like real cars actually use???

couldn't agree more. we put men on the freakin' moon, but we can't engineer a decent car? utterly ridiculous. and if you've ever looked at gm's public accounts, you'll see why - it's a bunch of whining crap from idiots that have no interest in making cars, but who spend their whole lives politicking and whining for handouts. that's what's WRONG with the gm picture.

Reply to
jim beam

Latest news is the Toyota Memo where they all pat themselves on the back for talking their way out of a recall (which has now backfired) and saving $100 million in the process. When Ford allegedly did that with the Pinto you Toyota fan boys were all over Ford for it, where's your condemnation for Toyota?

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

It's an opinion piece without a shred of evidence for it's allegations. A typical right wing hit piece aimed at undermining the Obama Administration. The WSJ has no credibility anymore.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

Look up Ford Automatic Transmission Recall. 14M vehicles. Ford printed 14M stickers for the dash that said "This vehicle may go from Park to Reverse at any time without warning."

My roomate stuck his to our refrigerator.

Reply to
Hachiroku

Reminds me of the VW solution to cars that burned oil: a "check oil" sticker around the fuel filler.

Reply to
AZ Nomad

I see you avoided answering the question.

Reply to
Ashton Crusher

In message , jim beam writes

The first time they went to congress it was in the private jets of the "big3" and were effectively to go away, and think about their approach more seriously.

Reply to
Clive

There isn't nor has there every been a toyota with an engine remotely as strong as the brakes. If you stomp on the correct pedal and the brakes have been maintained, the car will stop.

Reply to
AZ Nomad

A few facts might be in order here:

You are wrong about what the label said. What was said was:

IMPORTANT SAFETY PRECAUTION Before leaving the driver's seat, you should always :

1) make sure the gear selector lever is engaged in Park 2) set the parking brake fully 3) shut off the ignition. Unexpected and possibly sudden vehicle movement may occur if these precautions are not taken. Refer to your owners manual. for other important safety information.

You might want to consider what Ford actually claimed and quit depending on trail lawyers for your misinformation. See:

formatting link
My parents and I owned Fords of that vintage (1970-1980). I never had any problem with a Ford automatic jumping out of park. It also seems unlikely that every Ford, no matter which automatic transmission installed could have exactly the same problem. Ford sent the stickers to everyone who owned a Ford with an automatic from that era (more like 21M than 14M). Ford sold vehicles with at least 5 different types of Automatics during the period (FMX - supplied by Borg-Warner, C-3 from Ford of Europe, C-4 and C-6 manufacturerd by Ford in the US, and Jatco - sourced from JATCO in Japan). Some had column shifts, some had floor shifts. They were installed in multiple models with completely different shift linkages. The claim that all these automatics, which were internally quite different, installed in different vehicles, with multiple different shift linkages, all potentially had the same defect is beyond ridiculous. Ford was sure there was not a problem. NHTSA was being run by Claybrook disciples (the Nader shark lawyer team so to speak) at that time. Back then NHTSA was out for automaker blood. The

1980 NHTSA wasn't the sort of "let it slide" organization that allowed Toyota get away with blaming the problems on bad drivers and the internet we have today. The sticker recall was actually a tacit admission by NHTSA that there wasn't a significant problem. Having Ford send out stickers allowed the NHTSA exces to claim they had won a victory, when in fact, they had only managed to waste a lot of the Government's and Ford's time and money. It was a sham recall for a sham problem so as to cover the asses of a bunch of NHTSA execs who tried to trump up a non-problem and justify their existence.

Maybe the Toyota UA problems will turn out to be the same. Maybe not. I still say, if NHTSA had been vigilent in 2007, there would not be a fire storm over Toyota UA problems now.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Ford did that too...at least for some 4 cylinder vehicles

We also got a sticker warning us not to use certain types of oil in my Dad's 1978 Ford Courier (as I recall we weren't supposed to use any oil that claimed "CC" compliance)..

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

While it is an opinion piece, I think it offers an opinion to consider. The column never addresses the truth or untruth of the allegations about Toyota engine speed control problems. It merely highlights how poorly the whole situation has been handled. I can agree with that. It has turned into a witch hunt. If NHTSA had responded properly to the large number of complaints in 2007 and to the warnings from State Farm, it is likely there would not be the massive over reaction we are seeing today. Both Toyota and NHTSA are to blame for the frenzy. Unfortunately for Toyota, they are likely to suffer more than NHTSA. Congress may chide NHTSA for mishandling the complaints, but in the end, government bureaucracies rarely suffer for long. Probably NHTSA will be hyper-sensitive to complaints for a few years. I'd hate to be the next company that gets a lot of complaints....

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

The flaw in your argument is obvious. How do we know that any accident is related to a mechanical failure? We only know because 1) of an accident investigation that finds a cause, or 2) because someone in the car survived and told us what happened.

Consider the claims against Toyota - the vehicle speed control problems are alleged to be related to several different factors - pedal entrapment (admitted by Toyota), sticky pedals (admitted by Toyota), and mysterious malfunctions of the electronics (denied by Toyota). If everyone in an accident dies, how would you be able to tell if one or more of these alleged problems was involved?

In the now infamous California accident we had both a cell phone call and a floor mat melted to the pedal that strongly suggested pedal entrapment as the cause (along with driver panic). But how about for hundreds of other accidents involving Toyotas? If the people in the Toyota died, how do you know a problem with vehicle speed control wasn't the cause?

Saying things like "not ONE of those 34 deaths has been PROVEN by the NHTSA to have been the result of ANY kind of mechanical malfunction" is not meaningful (and not true, since I think even you have to agree that the CA incident involved pedal entrapment). Dead people can't tell what happened, and none of the alleged vehicle speed control problem can easily be consistently diagnosed after the crash. The only thing we can go on is the information provided by people that survived Toyota crashes. Many of those incidents are alleged to have been caused by vehicle speed control problems. This clearly implies that some percentage of the fatal crashes also involved vehicle speed control problems.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Point of order...

Don't you think Toyota has spent time "politicking and whining for handouts?" If not, you might want to check out the following reference:

formatting link

- Toyota said it had been granted about $296 million in tax incentives by Mississippi

formatting link

- The incentive package offered to Toyota totals $75 million

formatting link

- Texas is providing Toyota with $133 million in incentives.

formatting link

- Some politicians criticized the state's $147 million incentives package to Toyota.

formatting link

-According to reports in Japan's local media, Toyota is in talks to borrow a little over $2 billion from the state-backed Japan Bank for International Cooperation

The only difference between Toyota and GM is that Toyota has been more successful in recent years. Toyota's whole business was based on Japanese government funding and the exclusion of foreign competition from the Japanese market. I believe that Toyota owes a lot more of their success to government support that GM does.

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.