Let's just say Jennifer Granholm and Neil Cavuto probably won't be exchanging Christmas cards this year. Granholm, the former governor of Michigan, made clear in an op-ed in the Huffington Post (like AutoblogGreen, an AOL site) that she remains all for using federal funds to push electric-vehicle technology and production. Pictured above, is Granholm learning about plug-in vehicles in 2010 in Detroit.

Granholm, whose "home" state (she's originally from Canada) is Ground Zero for the US auto industry, told folks like Rush Limbaugh and Cavuto, the Fox Business Network anchor and ardent opponent to cars like the Chevrolet Volt, telling them to "get over it...and support American products and American jobs."

Granholm, who was Michigan governor from 2003 to 2011, said that the $1.35 billion the state received in lithium-ion battery grants supported as many as 63,000 jobs and she is lobbying for further tax breaks and incentives to spur both electric-drive vehicle production and adoption. Granholm last year blasted Limbaugh, calling his criticism of the Volt "un-American."

You can read Granholm's op-ed here. And, yes, she drives a Volt.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 57 Comments
      SVX pearlie
      • 2 Years Ago
      I'm completely OK with Gov. Granholm's defense of American jobs and American profits - it's the sort of advocacy that she should be making.
      Yarp
      • 2 Years Ago
      Its ludicrous to paint your republican boogeymen as 'hating electric vehicles'. I personally would love an electric vehicle. I like the idea of not having gasoline around me, or going to a filling station. It still doesn't justify me taking $7500 from my fellow Americans to help me pay for my preference, particularly when we're borrowing 30% of every dollar we spend. That's where the hate is: spending money to prop up products that aren't financially viable on their own. And GM failed because they didn't make the cars that people wanted when the cost of gasoline went up, and were hamstrung with fixed high labor costs that made making the cheaper, lower margin, cars financially unviable. Also, you're confused that the right was ever behind the auto bailouts. That, TAARP, and the huge "stimulus" package was the genesis of the tea party movement.
        gpmp
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Yarp
        When conservatives take advantage of tax credits and deductions the government is taking less of their hard earned money. When liberals do it they're getting a subsidy.
        Ford Future
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Yarp
        Yarp, Yes, STOP BUYING GAS, it's subsidized 100 TIMES Larger then All Green Energy Programs Combined. Don't you hate being the sucker?
        HVH20
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Yarp
        As a republican myself and in the EV industry. I don't agree with the $7500 rebates, but I also dont agree with all the tax breaks given to oil companies and the wars fought over securing our oil supply chain. The rebates are there to help level the playing field and speed up the process of bringing a new technology into the market where it competes against a mature 100+yr old technology. Its a chicken/egg senario where volumes are low which causes costs to be high, and it will drop as volumes go up but the price needs to be lower... I'm all for getting rid of the rebates for PHEVs and EVs, but continue to level the playing field and take away oil subsidies as well as add in the cost of the wars/health issues/smog and see who wins.
        Dave D
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Yarp
        What you're ignoring, Yarp, is that many of us on here feel like our tax dollars are propping up products like oil when we pay for the military to keep pipelines open in the middle east. I've never had any of my tax dollars spent to keep some war from breaking out in Pennsylvania that would affect natural gas production.
          Donny Hoover
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Dave D
          Or just the straight up oil subsidies.
          Dave D
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Dave D
          Donny, I agree with you. But I've given up on that argument as you can't convince anyone that it's true if they don't want to believe it. They argue about whether it's really a subsidy or a tax write off or the Easter Bunny brings it or whatever. Tired of arguing the obvious: Money is money, no matter who brings it or how you get to make it or keep it. There is a lot less argument over whether or not our military is the size it is because we're involved in the middle east and oil production, shipping, etc in that area...or at least the countries over there that do it.
        Grendal
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Yarp
        Yarp, you didn't read siriusvexed comment just before yours. He summarized the issues much better than you did. Your view is very short sighted. I appreciate your concept of a level playing field but that too is short sighted. There is no level playing field when it comes to industry. Gas engines have been subsidized enormously over the last 100 years and industry has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. The government has recognized this as a threat to the prosperity of its citizens in the long term. That's why there are incentives to create change. In the long term it will be beneficial and help to create a stronger industrial base.
        elctrNmbliT
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Yarp
        Someone who purchases an EV or EREV doesn't take anything from their fellow American they just pay $7,500 less in taxes due at the end of the tax year. The customer pays the full price of the car to the dealer. The government has no interaction with the dealer or car company that produced the car. The interaction is only with the federal government and the customer the later only paying less taxes because of the specific commodity they purchased. There are other commodities that people buy every day that allows them to deduct from their federal tax burden. Interest on home mortgages for example can be deducted from your taxes. When you deduct because of your mortgage the government isn't subsidizing the home construction industry directly by taking money from your fellow Americans they are just reducing the tax burden on home owners. In concept it is the same thing. One might argue like you did above that EV's wouldn't be viable as a product without this deduction and houses would be but that is debatable. Sure there might be fewer sales of EV's by some number whether it be 10% or 80% without the deduction but you could argue that without the home mortgage deduction there would be some percent less of home sales each year as well. Having said all that I might argue that we should get rid of most or all of these deductions anyway but to pick on one of these as a polarizing example isn't fair.
          Ford Future
          • 2 Years Ago
          @elctrNmbliT
          SHOCK! Yarp can justify getting ROBBED 100 Times more by Dirty Energy, but not Clean Energy. Secondly, has has been pointed out, this is a tax credit, it doesn't come from the government. The individual taxpayer taxes are reduced JUST LIKE the exploration deductions.
          Yarp
          • 2 Years Ago
          @elctrNmbliT
          That $7500 doesn't just appear from nowhere. It either comes from other stuff the government could have bought with our collective tax dollars, or it comes from borrowing money from the American people. It is, most definitely when we're running a chronic deficit, going directly to the debt and being financed on the backs of every taxpayer. With regards to houses, they would still sell but they'd sell for less. People would build/buy smaller homes, and the economics would still work out because you can make money on nearly all level of homes. It is, however, a market distorting policy device that should probably be phased out slowly (since so many people factored that into the "cost" of purchasing a house and revising it suddenly would be wildly unpopular and probably cause quite a shock to the markets) Homes are also very intangible in nature. Part of the cost is the land and location/convenience that doesn't have a fixed cost of goods. Nobody is making new land these days, so the only way you can get land is by buying it on the open market from somebody else by convincing them the money you offer is worth more to them than the land they own.. A car, however, has well identified costs. If you can't make money on a product and require the government to make it financially viable, then that's a fundamental problem with making that product. As for oil "subsidies", all that really is is allowing the cost of exploration and production to be deducted from the revenue...just like any other business that only pays taxes on their profits.
      EZEE
      • 2 Years Ago
      Un-American? “I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration.” Hillary Clinton...
        Dave
        • 2 Years Ago
        @EZEE
        Thats an excellent quote. Whether she practices what she preaches is, of course, debatable.
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Dave
          Meh, doesn't matter. Good words are good words. When Bill signed welfare reform, it didnt piss me off he signed it, I was just happy it was done. :-)
        Marcopolo
        • 2 Years Ago
        @EZEE
        @ EZEE You are quite right. Even if the criticism is not good for America, doesn't make the person 'Un-American', just exercising a constitutional right to belly-ache. In a nation dominated by a rigid two-party system, it's essential for elected representatives not to slavishly toe the party line. Having said that, I support Jennifer Granholm's defense of US industry, and the Automotive industry in particular. Especially her opposition to the rabid outpouring of sensationalist buffoons like Rush Limbaugh and Niel Cavuto.
        SVX pearlie
        • 2 Years Ago
        @EZEE
        Instead of parroting stale blather from Hillary, maybe you might add some comment of your own.
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          How is it pointless? I am hoping people who call others UN American, including a former governor, will be shamed into remembering what they thought 5 minutes ago. It's a bit more subtle. Wat I wrote above is more of a wrecking ball.
          SVX pearlie
          • 2 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          That's actually a lot better then the largely pointless quote you posted earlier. Since you actually have something halfway intelligent to say, then you can and should stop quoting Hillary.
          Marcopolo
          • 2 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          @ SVX pearlie Or, instead of merely slighting Ezees' legitimate use of quotation's, you could explain where he's wrong ?
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @SVX pearlie
          Okay. Here is my point, that I did not think I had to explain. During the bush administration, while liberals were protesting the war, shouting death to America, smash the Jewish state, holding signs that said, 'we support our troops - the ones that shoot their officers', along with, 'we support the insurgents', while burning flags (if anyone needs links to show all of this stuff, let me know), the left was screaming tht we should not call them unpatriotic. But in the grand tradition of 1984, where people instantly believe the latest thing stated by the government or talking heads, now a y disagreement with liberals is labeled as unpatriotic. Burning the flag and shouting death to America is a patriotic display of dissent, whereas not being fond of a $30,000 car that goes 80 miles on a charge is an affront to freedom and an agregious slam against America. There. Does that make my view clear enough? Do I hold all of you that parrot 'unpatriotic because you don't fully bow down to anything a liberal says in complete and total contempt, where your inner workings of your mind could not form a rational thought due to being so conditioned to parrot the hate spewed by your masters in media and government that you cannot even remember protesting 5 minutes ago against anyone who might call you unoatriotic, and now you scream that others are unpatriotic for not liking a product that does not suit people? I hope tht makes my view of those people perfectly clear, that you are given the greatest gift of a human mind, yet you refuse to use it and cannot even comprehend that you totally contradict what you said was important 5 minutes ago. I quote Hillary Clinton in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, some minor start of human intelligence will rise to the surface and you will remember that 5 minutes ago, questioning patriotism was a bad thing. By quoting Hillary, I am hoping that there won't be an immediate knee jerk reaction to ignore the words, because someone that was quoted you disagree with. In the future, when I quote Hillary, or other liberals, this is the point I am making. Thank you.
      Ford Future
      • 2 Years Ago
      What Oil Industry Pols say Can't Be Done, has already BEEN DONE, by Germany. http://climatecrocks.com/2012/12/02/the-weekend-wonk-osha-gray-davidson-and-germanys-renewable-breakout/
      Nick
      • 2 Years Ago
      She is right!
      carney373
      • 2 Years Ago
      Saying "get over it" to someone never works.
        EVnerdGene
        • 2 Years Ago
        @carney373
        yeah, typical liberal either agree with what they say, or they'll start calling you names
      Ford Future
      • 2 Years Ago
      http://cleantechnica.com/2012/11/30/chevy-volt-drivers-savings-after-one-year-getting-980-mpg/
      stabner
      • 2 Years Ago
      The Volt base price is @ 40 grand. they cost GM 75 grand to build
        Ziv
        • 2 Years Ago
        @stabner
        Stabner, don't be stupid. Just how could the Volt possibly cost $75k to build? The article that you read that postulated this bare a**ed lie is a lesson in stupidity. Don't join the author of that garbage in his idiocy. The base Volt probably cost $43k to build in 2010 when it was first built. Which is more than they originally sold for. GM refused to sell at a loss in large numbers and built few Volts. The economies of scale built up, the cost of Volt production went down, GM built more Volts, and sales have gone up to nearly 10,000 Volts sold in North America in the last 3 months. Plus JD Powers newest report on the car that is most loved by its owner? Volt. Stabner, drive a Volt. You haven't done so yet, so you don't know why people love them so much.
        SVX pearlie
        • 2 Years Ago
        @stabner
        Guys, planned economy of scale was built into Volt base price based on an estimated total production run. If the run is larger, then GM has options to reduce price, accelerate production of spin-off & next-gen model(s). If the sales are slower, then GM would be stuck with an actual loss. As for what it costs, it actually costs GM roughly $28k to build, generating a $10+k operating profit against a $1.2billion development cost. If GM can sell 100k units before they move to the next generation of technology, then they will recoup their investment cost. If GM can sell $200k units, then they have potentially $5k in additional profit / price reduction.
        Jon
        • 2 Years Ago
        @stabner
        Interesting. And yet, Tesla will sell the model s with a much bigger battery at a profit for 60 grand... I wonder who gave you that 75 grand figure. It couldnt have been conservative media could it? Just a guess.
        Ford Future
        • 2 Years Ago
        @stabner
        Repubs have to get over it. You picked a candidate who outsourced jobs, while he was running for President to "create" jobs. Do you people fall for everything they say?
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Ford Future
          I know - it really pissed me off how when I went to staples, sports authority, guitar warehouse, AMC Theatres, that there were no employees there, and they simply had signs, "all jobs in China" - and no one was there to help me. NO employees whatsoever to help me buy stuff because Mitt Romney outsourced all of those jobs. Do you people fall for everything they say?
        Dave D
        • 2 Years Ago
        @stabner
        Hey Stabner, It cost Toyota $120,000 per Yaris to build the new model last year, and they only sold them for $13k!!! My god, they're insane! I bet they got government money and wasted it! I bet they're communists!!! Or you could grow up and realize that they have to wait for their volume to go up and defray the cost over YEARS. This is a car we're talking about, not a swing set manufacturer. Time to grow up.
      sirvixisvexed
      • 2 Years Ago
      It's crazy to think how if a Republican won the 2008 Election, whether McCain or whoever else, the entire anti-electric and anti-GM/Chrysler hate fest that Fox and other pundits decided to run with, would never have happened. In late 2007 and most of 2008, George W. was dealing with the auto crisis, and any bailing out (which he supported) was viewed by the left as the right wing "being in bed with big business" and everyone on the left attacked him for it. Now the left is embracing the auto bailout because they won the 2008 election, and the Republicans flipped to hating it! Imagine that! I can't buy the hate against GM and Chrysler.... the Fox pundits and those who follow them like to say that no business deserves a bailout (again, they cheered it when the candidate they liked was in the white house) but what I never hear mentioned is the fact that GM and Chrysler DID NOT DIE IN A FREE MARKET, they died in a market where a real estate bubble had just popped and had been part of the cause of a stock market crash, all due to too much government involvement/bad government rules regarding housing, which the left likes to hatefully call it "deregulation" even though that "deregulation" was a left leaning economic idea when it was introduced, which was to make more "poor" be able to "afford" houses; then a bunch of people started defaulting everyone thought home prices would go up forever, magically creating a retirement for everyone without anyone having to work or save or invest beyond their house! Imagine that...it didn't work. The rose colored glasses had to come off. But again, GM and Chrysler didn't die because the free market was choosing so little of their product that they couldn't survive as a normally functioning business, it was because of the mess of 2008. They would have been able to make the transition away from SUVs to more efficient vehicles, with much less hurt and no bankruptcy, if it hadn't been for the crash, and the reasons for the crash.
        Donny Hoover
        • 2 Years Ago
        @sirvixisvexed
        That's because the only people who disagree with it are partisan hacks. There's nothing bad about having invested in our future so that we can now call ourselves the world's leader in hybrid and electric vehicle technology or about producing a product that allows us to send less of our money to a bunch of damn A-rabs who hate us anyway. A $7500 tax break is deserved merely for helping to cut off all that money we are sending over to people who hate us. You know what? I don't even like the Democrats. The amount of money that has been wasted over the past 4 years...scratch that....12 years, disgusts me. The government wastes money on so much stupid sh*t, its unbelievable and no, I'm not happy about it at all. Know what though? As long as we're paying for some quack to go study ants in Alaska or for some deadbeat's 40oz, er I mean welfare money, then yes, we damn sure have enough money left over for things that are actually important. Yes, they are un-American. They complain because of partisan hackery and the need to get their way and discredit the other party, not because they care about the problems this country faces. It has gotten to the point where half the country turns on Faux News and the other half, MSLSD and every time an issue comes up, they pick a side and argue for the sake or arguing. No wonder this country has so many problems lately. These people spend so much time and effort looking for someone to blame but they need not go farther than their own bathroom mirror.
        Val
        • 2 Years Ago
        @sirvixisvexed
        That doesn't explain why the japanes which have factories in the US didn't have such problems. Management at GM made bad decisions, and government making one mistake (actually multiple mistakes) and repairing it with another mistake doesn't make it right. Two wrongs don't make a right. Ford didn't make the same bad decisions, at least not on such grand scale. They took some money from the government on different programs, but nowhere near the amount needed to bail out chrysler, let alone GM.
          sirvixisvexed
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Val
          The American 3 were not without fault, they just would not have gone bankrupt in a non-crash situation where they simply had to experience the growing pains of switching to more fuel efficient quality vehicles. The non-American companies that assemble in the US were still hurting for sales during that time and still in the red, just not enough to go bankrupt. Japanese non-free market advantages include: subsidized steel, no UAW, and high import taxes in any foreign automaker in their home country.
      Actionable Mango
      • 2 Years Ago
      So a state governor "remains all for using federal funds" to support industries in her state. Shocking!
        Rotation
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Actionable Mango
        She hasn't been state governor for over a year. She currently hosts a TV show out of San Francisco.
      Ford Future
      • 2 Years Ago
      Another Al Gore Prediction from "An Inconvenient Truth" comes true, just 9 years later, Not 100. http://climatecrocks.com/2012/11/30/fort-lauderdale-highway-disappears-into-the-sea/
      EVnerdGene
      • 2 Years Ago
      ironic she's standing between a car made in France/Germany and one made in the UK $7500 tax incentive to buy a Volt, and the average buyer's family income is $175K. OK? Oh, but the money didn't come from the government, it was just your own money that you didn't send to the government? OK Then, the US spends more than revenue. Hey, but we can borrow the short-fall from China. OK !!! another note from reading below: You have no friggin' idea what GM's or Toyota's or Tesla's or Frisker's costs are. So please stop quoting costs, margins, profits, and losses. (unless of course Daniel, or Akio, or Elon, or Henrik would like to chime-in) and I'm not so sure 3 out of 4 of them have a clue - no disrespect intended to most of them.
        Rotation
        • 2 Years Ago
        @EVnerdGene
        In the spirit of your complaints, if you don't know where the US borrows its money from, so stop acting as if you do. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/biggest-holders-of-us-gov-t-debt.html
          Ford Future
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          Sorry, Ev..., but the US is not looking like a poor credit risk. The US economy is 15 Trillion in size. And if the Bush Tax Cuts expire, we will look even more Solvent, as happened under the Clinton administration.
          Rotation
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          EVnerdgene: If the US was looking like a poor credit risk Treasury Bond rates wouldn't be so low. They are sold at auction, so if buyers were worried about default they would demand a higher return before buying them. As to China being #2, the point is they do not represent the majority. Not even close. Not even 20%. You seemed to respond angrily to others misinformation, I figured you'd hold yourself to the same standard. I guess not. QE3 is being used to buy mortgage securities (bonds, i.e. private debt), not the Federal debt. So, the $7500 you speak of is not coming from QE3, just as an example.
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          Also, there is talk of another downgrade on our credit rating... Howard Dean said in an interview that no deal on the fiscal cliff stuff would be the greatest thing for progressives, so question motivation on negotiations...
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          @Ford One more - you say we are a fine credit risk, as our economy is $15 trillion in size....you know our debt is currently at $16 trillion.... right? Going up $1 trillion per year.... 2007 the deficit was $187 billion...
          EZEE
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          @Ford Raising taxes on the rich, as we read in the articles, will raise $826 billion yay! Unfortunately, what they don't say, is that is over 10 years. Boo. This takes us from $1.3 trillion in debt per year, to $1.22 trillion in debt per year. Not exactly a dent. We are rushing toward the bankruptcy cliff with our foot on the gas pedal. And, as rotation points out, we are buying our own debt. Think about that - we are buying our own debt....if that doesn't scare you...
          EVnerdGene
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          Oh, excuse me. China is #2 on the list; and will probably be falling even further as they slowly back out of our debt - because we're looking like a poor credit risk (like Greece). I just can't understand why ? Passed up by #1, the Federal Reserve. Where does the Federal Reserve get it's money? A lot from QE's. As we speak, QE3 - $40Billion per month. I used to say they were just printing money - nothing to back it up. But, much simpler now; just digitally move figures from one agency to another. No problema. And since the election, brilliance are already chatting about QE4 ! Yeah !
          mylexicon
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          FordFuture, expiration of the Bush tax cuts will barely make a dent in our deficit. A big part of our deficit is being driven by the explosion of unemployment, welfare, Medicaid, food stamps, etc. to cover all of the people who were working prior to 2008. If the expiration of the Bush tax cuts puts recessionary pressure on our economy, we will be less solvent. The success of raising the top bracket to Clinton-rates is predicated on spending cuts from other programs. By reducing the waste from the Federal budget we can eliminate the dead-weight strain on our economy, and reduce unemployment. By reducing unemployment we eliminate unemployment and welfare spending, and we increase tax revenues. The Democrats are operating under the assumption that they will lose the Senate in 2014. They will try to raise taxes on the rich to score a political victory now. Then they will force Republicans to cut spending in 2014, which Obama will sign as a great 'post-partisan' maneuver, while the machine politicians agitate the base heading in the 2016 Presidential election.
          Val
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          The debt is sold at an auction, and the only reason the interest rates are so low, is that the fed is the biggest buyer, as has been mentioned. Without the fed pushing prices down, interest rates would be much higher. Also, 2 months before the greek bonds hit 7% interest rates, greece was able to borrow at 2-3%. Are you saying that for a few months greece did something so horrible and stupid that their rates spiked so much? No, it had been doing the same thing for 10 years, it's just that investors woke up. Same thing can happen to the us treasuries. FED is printing money to buy debt, and then prints more money to roll-over that same debt. This is devaluing the dollar, and obviously foreign nations that hold debt will lose money. US has the "advantage" that th dollar is the world reserve currency, so it can export dollars and a large chunk of the inflation created, but this may not last forever.
          EVnerdGene
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Rotation
          Interest rates are intentionally being kept low in an attempt to keep the economy moving - manipulation by the Federal Reserve. That's what most of the QE money has been used for since the beginning. We are indeed buying our own debt right now. Not all of it of course, but there is a shortfall in the market. Our leaders can only think of taxing the filthy rich to make-up a very small portion of the shortfall (you know, the guys that make payrolls), when they should be in panic mode making cuts, cuts, and more cuts. Right now, all they are cutting is defense. Ironic that defense is really the only significant duty of the Federal government enumerated in the Constitution - and some other pittallyassed government agencies like the post office and patent office (all running deficits mostly from being over-burnened by their pension costs). An artificial market. I don't look forward to "when the chickens come home to roost" as some like Rev. Wright and people that sat in his church think we deserve. The pendulum will eventually be allowed to swing and it won't be pleasant. Some people are using the H-word. hyperinflation
    • Load More Comments