GM Back on Capitol Hot Seat in Search for Answers

Your next video will start in

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments


June 18 (Bloomberg) - Bloomberg’s Matt Miller and Mark Yusko, Chief Executive Officer and CIO at Morgan Creek, discuss opening statements from lawmakers in the second round of questioning of General Motors executives on Capitol Hill and concerns over ongoing recalls stemming from ignition-switch problems. They speak on Bloomberg Television’s “Market Makers.”

Her opening statement.

The lawmakers have had an opportunity to make their statements.

What did they tell you about the mood inside this room?

They do not seem to be as angry as they were last time.

They are interested in political showmanship.

If you came to this hearing hoping it was just an inquiry, focused on getting answers, then you would be mistaken.

It is definitely about the pr that the congress can get themselves.

Diana brought back her prop of the ignition switch and held it up to the cameras.

It does not add anything or help us learn anything more.

It is just about her making a statement, maybe making a press appearance for her reelection next time, i guess area on the other hand, there are some very serious questions here.

One of them is the same we have heard from the time we found out about this.

How can something like this happen and what is wrong with the culture at general motors that would allow something like this to happen.

A lot of people were asking mary barra to give them specific examples of how she is going to change gm's culture beyond the installation of a senior executive in charge of safety.

There were a lot of calls for legislative changes, to give more power to knit some -- to nhtsa.

You are going to hear about some kind of restitution.

Ken feinberg was supposed to be into action 30 to 60 days after the last hearing.

It has been almost 80 days and that is a concern for the congresspeople here.

One comment earlier was that she looked more confident this time in her speeches or in her commentary, that she was taking a more bold response.

Do you see that?


It you see that from her.

If you came here to the first set of hearings and if you listened to her give her first public appearance speeches about this issue, you can tell she had been -- a lot.

Her lawyers warn her not to divulge too much information.

It is difficult to answer questions without -- if you are not used to.

She has gained self-confidence and is putting more -- i am not saying she was lying to begin with, but she is giving more honesty.

She is not giving the answers you want, because she claims she positively did not know about this and neither did any senior executive.

The report seems to support that.

The representative from berger posed the question -- who is anton valukas working for?

He is getting paid by general motors.

These congresspeople may ask more interesting questions of anton then they can of mary barra.

Have you seen any movement of talking about the future as opposed to the past?

I am not sure eating the dead horse over and over is giving us new information.

Are they giving her some opportunity to respond to how they're going to move forward as opposed to beating up on what is going on?

You hope to hear something like that.

It would be nice if the political showmanship was dialed back a little bit and we got something useful out of these hearings.

She has been saying that her focus is squarely on making sure something like this does not happen again.

She repeated that again at the shareholder's meeting and again in her opening statements.

We have not gone to a more lax -- a more relaxed q&a session.

We are going through the incredible amount of opening statements.

Then, anton valukas is just finishing up now.

I am going to go back in there.

I want to ask mark a question about general motors.

You invest with managers.

Many are in equities.

You do some of your own investing in equities.

What purpose is this hearing serving, not to americans in general, because this is supposed to be a nexus size -- an exercise in democracy, challenging major actors in the economy and society.

From a shareholder's point of view, is it helping?

I do not think it is helping at all.

Do you think the gm may be able to skirt some of the scrutiny and controversy?

I think we are seeing so much of this because the role of the government in the bailout.

I do not think there would be so much grandstanding without that.

The reality is, it is a big company.

It impacts a lot of people's lives.

There should be good scrutiny on it.

This was many years ago.

Let's focus on today and things going on.

Let's talk about the safety record of current vehicles and the things they are doing to make sure they deliver good products.

The fact that 13 people died is a fact that congress and the rest of us cannot escape.

More than 20 million cars have been recalled.

Matt, i wish congress were still asking mary barra more about why gm cannot seem to get control of its recall problem, as opposed to focusing on the one issue around which anton valukas prepared his report.

That is my question to you.

They will ask her that question.

Diana was saying i cannot believe you are recalling cars as late as monday night.

Another 3 million cars.

Some of those were 2014 models.

It is shocking and hard to get your head around.

I think it is important to note that this is still a company that sells a lot of cars.

Consumers recognized the improvement in quality of the cars that they are selling now.

In the last month, they sold more cars than ever before.

This has not deterred people from buying the cars.

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.


BTV Channel Finder


ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change