Solyndra - Worthy of Its Own Thread

[PapaG]

Follow the money...

U.S. Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), a senior member of the Energy & Commerce Committee, says House Republicans are widening their probe of the Obama administration’s loan guarantee to solar manufacturer Solyndra, which plans to file for bankruptcy.

In an interview with energyNOW! correspondent Lee Patrick Sullivan, Stearns says the committee is investigating loan guarantees provided to other clean-energy companies besides Solyndra. Stearns also says the committee is demanding documents from the White House about Solyndra, and may issue a subpoena to get them.

Stearns is the chairman of the House energy panel’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

 

[Masbee]

Can you link me to where Obama made a campaign promise to evaluate government loans more thoroughly? I missed that one. You and PapaG are acting as if accepting a normal loan risk is so hideously unethical it's like breaking one of the 10 Commandments or something.

I used to read some little thing like this at least weekly during the Bush years. Everyone immediately forgot them because of bigger things he was doing wrong.

Really? You are going to argue that millions of folks who voted for Obama DID NOT think that an Obama Administration was no longer going to be a corporate bitch.

You are rewriting history in your own mind.

 

[PapaG]

Follow the money.

I want to know who arranged for the private investors to be first in line to get their money back, but I imagine we'll find that out once the hearings begin.

Obama Officials Sat In On Solyndra Meetings

By RONNIE GREENE and MATTHEW MOSK
iWATCH NEWS and ABC NEWS
Sept. 9, 2011

Officials from the Department of Energy have for months been sitting in on board meetings as "observers" at Solyndra, getting an up-close view as the solar energy company careened towards bankruptcy after spending more than $500 million in federal loan money.

Word of the Energy Department's unusual arrangement came as federal agents on Thursday converged on the California headquarters of the failed solar company, focusing fresh attention on the first corporate beneficiary of President Obama's stimulus program to create new clean energy jobs.

The company, which closed its doors last week and laid off 1,100 workers, has been a subject of an ongoing series of stories by the Center for Public Integrity's iWatch News in collaboration with ABC News.

continued at link

 

[PapaG]

Some of the Dem House leadership is starting to ask questions and distance themselves from this hand-out.

Why was the DoE sitting in on Solyndra board meetings?

Solyndra investigation expands with raid of executives' homes and files

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/09/0...ation-expands-raid-executives-homes-and-files

Members of Congress leading a House investigation of the Energy Department loan have focused specifically on visits Harrison made to Washington in July, when he said the company was on sound footing and expanding.

Less than two months after that visit, Solyndra fired 1,100 workers and filed for bankruptcy – a stinging collapse for the Obama administration, which has made the loan a showpiece as its first investment in job-creating green energy technology.

Republican members of the House have said that failing proves the deal was doomed from the start. Now, even Democratic leaders are questioning whether Solyndra misled the government.

“Less than two months ago, Mr. Harrison met with us and other Committee members to assure us that Solyndra was in a strong financial position and in no danger of failing,” Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wrote to Republicans leading the investigation. “These assurances appear to contrast starkly with his company’s decision to file for bankruptcy last week.”

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

told y'all green energy is a scam.

 

[huevonkiller]

No doubt.

 

[PapaG]

Not soon to be seen on your nightly news...

SOLYNDRA SCANDAL WIDENS: Auditors Raised Red Flags About Obama's Favorite Green Company.


Two months before the federal government provided a $535 million federal loan to the company, auditors found that Solyndra, the bankrupt solar company, had significant financial difficulties, Bloomberg reports.

In a deepening scandal that threatens to ensnare members of the Obama administration, PricewaterhouseCoopers found that the company's finances “raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern.” Two months later the company was awarded the loan under a green jobs program.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/soly...ntroversial-federal-loan-2011-9#ixzz1XnqbONjP

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/soly...ntroversial-federal-loan-2011-9#ixzz1XnqF3lUP

No wonder Chrisinpdx wants to shut down political debate on the S2/Blazer/OT board.

 

[barfo]

Not soon to be seen on your nightly news...

Nor should it be. 'Going concern' is a term of art in the audit world, and basically indicates that the company doesn't have the resources (cash, revenue) to continue operating indefinitely. Many startups are in that position and thus fail this test. It's a huge red flag if it happens to an established company; it's not out of the ordinary for a startup.

Wake me up when you find some actual wrongdoing.

barfo

 

[PapaG]

This is much bigger than Watergate. It's a flat-out scam involving the administration and one of their billionaire bundlers.

Hearings begin next week, under oath.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...nvestigation/2011/09/13/gIQAr3WbQK_story.html

By Joe Stephens and Carol D. Leonnig, Updated: Tuesday, September 13, 5:01 PM

The Obama White House tried to rush federal reviewers for a decision on a nearly half-billion-dollar loan to the solar-panel manufacturer Solyndra so Vice President Biden could announce the approval at a September 2009 groundbreaking for the company’s factory, newly obtained e-mails show.

The Silicon Valley company, a centerpiece in President Obama’s initiative to develop clean energy technologies, had been tentatively approved for the loan by the Energy Department but was awaiting a final financial review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Solyndra LLC CEO Brian Harrison and Chief Financial Officer Bill Stover have postponed their previously scheduled congressional testimony until sometime next week. Harrison and Stover were scheduled to testify tomorrow after the company filed for bankruptcy protection following a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee. (Sept. 13)

President Obama has put a special spotlight on clean technology during his time in the White House, personally visiting and praising 22 companies for their work on energy innovation and efficiency in high-profile trips. These visits made up more than half of Obama's out-of-town travel to businesses.


The August 2009 e-mails, released to The Washington Post, show White House officials repeatedly asking OMB reviewers when they would be able to decide on the federal loan and noting a looming press event at which they planned to announce the deal. In response, OMB officials expressed concern that they were being rushed to approve the company’s project without adequate time to assess the risk to taxpayers, according to information provided by Republican congressional investigators.

Solyndra collapsed two weeks ago, leaving taxpayers liable for the $535 million loan.

One e-mail from an OMB official referred to “the time pressure we are under to sign-off on Solyndra.” Another complained, “There isn’t time to negotiate.”

“We have ended up with a situation of having to do rushed approvals on a couple of occasions (and we are worried about Solyndra at the end of the week),” one official wrote. That Aug. 31, 2009, message, written by a senior OMB staffer and sent to Terrell P. McSweeny, Biden’s domestic policy adviser, concluded, “We would prefer to have sufficient time to do our due diligence reviews.”

White House officials said Tuesday that no one in the administration tried to influence the OMB decision on the loan. They stressed that the e-mails show only that the administration had a “quite active interest” in the timing of OMB’s decision.

...continued at link...

 

[barfo]

This is much bigger than Watergate.

Not only that, it's bigger than 9/11. It's bigger than WWII. It's bigger than the entire universe, and that doesn't even begin to tell the story.

barfo

 

[PapaG]

It's now at Biden's doorstep. You know, the guy who was supposed to be in charge of making sure the Stimulus money was being spent on the up-and-up. Between this obvious pay-for-play scam and the Fast and Furious/Gunrunner scandal, how soon until the Dems seriously start considering running a primary challenger against this corrupt (or is it incompetent/clueless?) President?

The rapidly evolving scandal surrounding a $535 million government loan to Solyndra, a California solar energy company, that shuttered its doors and filed bankruptcy last week, has now been connected to the office of Vice-President Joe Biden.

Emails obtained by investigators for the House Energy and Commerce Committee and released to ABC News demonstrate how deeply involved the White House was at the highest levels in fast-tracking the approval of the politically well connected start-up in direct conflict with numerous private as well as government warnings that the survival of the company was very doubtful.

On March 10, 2009 according to ABC a White House budget analyst warned in an email that "This deal is NOT ready for prime time." That followed an email from Ronald A. Klain, Chief of Staff to the Vice-President on March 7 that said, "If you guys think this is a bad idea, I need to unwind the W[est] W[ing] QUICKLY."

The White House and the Department of Energy pressed forward and fast-tracked the approval of the first green energy loan of the Obama Administration in March, 2009. In addition to questions about possible political cronyism and corruption, the terms of the loan included a subordination of the taxpayer's interest to private investors and the lowest interest rate of any such loan approved by the Obama Energy Department.

...continued at link...

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

A couple of things. The White House wanting to put pressure for a fast track payout is no big deal to me. One could state they didn't want the deal held up to the light, but also in politics expediency can create a lot of goodwill. So far I see nothing in the emails that hurt Obama at all.

The second thing is odd in that the executives from Solyndra have opted not to show up for the capitol hill hearings. Their excuse doesn't wash and that does raise a small red flag to me.

 

[Denny Crane]

It's hard to imagine a company like this burning through $500M so quickly.

I think Biden is mostly an honest guy. He's owned by the credit card companies, tho.

 

[Masbee]

When are folks going to focus on the real issue?

It is not a mad attempt to discover if there was or wasn't "corruption".

It is the (mostly left wing, but all stripes fall for it) fundamental falsehood that politicians or government officials can do a better job of picking "winners" in a competitive envirnoment than those who do it for a living.

The idea is insane in theory and even worse in practice.

The real scandal here is not corruption. The real scandal is the Administration shouldn't have been trying to pick a "winner". Not their job. And it all comes back to an adminstration that is inexperienced, and frankly, just plain "stupid".

 

[PapaG]

The real scandal here is not corruption.

I disagree. The administration structured the bankruptcy so the private investors (Kaiser and another bundler) were first in line to recoup their assets. The $535 million of taxpayer money has apparently disappeared as well, and I think asking where that money went, and why the private investors are first in line, will lead to corruption/graft. I wonder how much of that money ended up in union coffers, and even back in Obama's re-election fund. Plus, in 1/09, the Bush DoE unanimously voted to not process the loan based on OMB recommendations, yet 4 months later, and after multiple WH visits by Solyndra officials/investors, the Obama DoE approved the loan.

This is a big 'effing deal, as Joe Biden might say.

 

[barfo]

When are folks going to focus on the real issue?

It is not a mad attempt to discover if there was or wasn't "corruption".

It is the (mostly left wing, but all stripes fall for it) fundamental falsehood that politicians or government officials can do a better job of picking "winners" in a competitive envirnoment than those who do it for a living.

The idea is insane in theory and even worse in practice.

The real scandal here is not corruption. The real scandal is the Administration shouldn't have been trying to pick a "winner". Not their job. And it all comes back to an adminstration that is inexperienced, and frankly, just plain "stupid".

Given that this program existed prior to this Administration (Soylendra applied for the loan in 2007), I'm not sure the 'blame' for the program can be laid at the feet of this administration alone.

I also think the 'picking winners' meme is a little inaccurate. It was a loan, not an investment.

barfo

 

[Masbee]

Given that this program existed prior to this Administration (Soylendra applied for the loan in 2007), I'm not sure the 'blame' for the program can be laid at the feet of this administration alone.

I also think the 'picking winners' meme is a little inaccurate. It was a loan, not an investment.

barfo

Dude, that's what commercial bankers do. They pick winners. If they fail they go out of business. Or, if big enough, go to DC to get bailed out.

 

[Masbee]

I disagree. The administration structured the bankruptcy so the private investors (Kaiser and another bundler) were first in line to recoup their assets. The $535 million of taxpayer money has apparently disappeared as well, and I think asking where that money went, and why the private investors are first in line, will lead to corruption/graft. I wonder how much of that money ended up in union coffers, and even back in Obama's re-election fund. Plus, in 1/09, the Bush DoE unanimously voted to not process the loan based on OMB recommendations, yet 4 months later, and after multiple WH visits by Solyndra officials/investors, the Obama DoE approved the loan.

This is a big 'effing deal, as Joe Biden might say.

I am not saying don't investigate.

I am saying in the longer view, it is fairly irrelevant.

If the mainstream view agreed that pols and officials are not the right folks to pick winners, that the notion was a typical excessive government overreach, then the Executive and Legislative branches would have limited rights and ability to pick winners. If they lose the power to do something, the corruption fades.

 

[Ed O]

I also think the 'picking winners' meme is a little inaccurate. It was a loan, not an investment.

How about "not pick losers that can't pay back their loans"?

I don't see a big corruption deal sprouting up here--individuals giving $5k to $25k for a Presidential candidate isn't really that much money in the grand scheme of things--but I agree with Masbee that the bigger issue is whether tax dollars (or dollars borrowed in the name of the American people) should be used to invest in private enterprise.

(And, yes, a loan is an investment even if it's not equity. There are expected returns and opportunity costs involved.)

Ed O.

 

[barfo]

Dude, that's what commercial bankers do. They pick winners. If they fail they go out of business. Or, if big enough, go to DC to get bailed out.

How about college loans? Are you against the government making those loans? Because that's 'picking winners' in exactly the same sense.

We have a national interest in alternative energy. It makes sense for us to invest in it. The alternative is to have a purely government operation, where government employees do the research, build the factories, etc. The alternative is not to sit and do nothing. Partly due to these government loans, we've got some solar companies in the US now. If we'd done nothing, all of the solar companies would be Chinese instead of just most of them. How would that have been a better outcome?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Dude, that's what commercial bankers do. They pick winners. If they fail they go out of business. Or, if big enough, go to DC to get bailed out.

It's government's job to pick losers. Not a good idea, period.

 

[PapaG]

How about "not pick losers that can't pay back their loans"?

I don't see a big corruption deal sprouting up here--individuals giving $5k to $25k for a Presidential candidate isn't really that much money in the grand scheme of things--but I agree with Masbee that the bigger issue is whether tax dollars (or dollars borrowed in the name of the American people) should be used to invest in private enterprise.

(And, yes, a loan is an investment even if it's not equity. There are expected returns and opportunity costs involved.)

Ed O.

Kaiser bundled nearly a million dollars for Obama.

 

[oldguy]

...

We have a national interest in alternative energy. It makes sense for us to invest in it. The alternative is to have a purely government operation, where government employees do the research, build the factories, etc. The alternative is not to sit and do nothing. Partly due to these government loans, we've got some solar companies in the US now. If we'd done nothing, all of the solar companies would be Chinese instead of just most of them. How would that have been a better outcome?

barfo

I have an interest in alternative energy that makes sense. Photovotaics do not make sense. At a seminar put on by the PV industry, they admitted that the payback for PV is about 100 years (at current energy rates) without a Federal Subsidy. When I see PV on a person's roof, I sometimes laugh that the people there are fools, or sometimes I want to cry because I am having to pick up part of the tab for them to save money on their energy bill.

How about an alternative where the government provide research grants for private industry to the research?

If memory serves me, I think Bush (at the end of his term) declined to loan money to Solyndra.

Go Blazers

 

[barfo]

I have an interest in alternative energy that makes sense. Photovotaics do not make sense.

That remains to be seen. In any case, it isn't like the government is going all-in on solar energy. Government is looking at lots of different technologies.

At a seminar put on by the PV industry, they admitted that the payback for PV is about 100 years (at current energy rates) without a Federal Subsidy.

When was that seminar? Part of the reason Solyndra went belly up is because the cost of solar decreased by 42% just in the past year. Things change.

How about an alternative where the government provide research grants for private industry to the research?

Government is doing that too.

barfo

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

When are folks going to focus on the real issue?

It is not a mad attempt to discover if there was or wasn't "corruption".

It is the (mostly left wing, but all stripes fall for it) fundamental falsehood that politicians or government officials can do a better job of picking "winners" in a competitive envirnoment than those who do it for a living.

The idea is insane in theory and even worse in practice.

The real scandal here is not corruption. The real scandal is the Administration shouldn't have been trying to pick a "winner". Not their job. And it all comes back to an adminstration that is inexperienced, and frankly, just plain "stupid".

A lot of truth in this.

 

[Masbee]

How about college loans? Are you against the government making those loans? Because that's 'picking winners' in exactly the same sense.

We have a national interest in alternative energy. It makes sense for us to invest in it. The alternative is to have a purely government operation, where government employees do the research, build the factories, etc. The alternative is not to sit and do nothing. Partly due to these government loans, we've got some solar companies in the US now. If we'd done nothing, all of the solar companies would be Chinese instead of just most of them. How would that have been a better outcome?

barfo

You think like a lefty don't you? "the only options are deep govt involvment a, or deep govt involvement b." You guys always forget about option A+: Set the groundrules for a fair game, then get out of the way and watch things happen.

The "solution" was a hefty "dirty" energy tax. I would have an energy tax that is based on two components: carbon emmissions and air pollutants. The more pollutants, the higher the tax. To nuture the alternative energy industries of solar, wind, wave, geothermal, etc., they would be tax exempt and that exemption guaranteed by law for many years.

In fact, this is a policy I have supported for decades.

 

[barfo]

You think like a lefty don't you? "the only options are deep govt involvment a, or deep govt involvement b." You guys always forget about option A+: Set the groundrules for a fair game, then get out of the way and watch things happen.

No, I listed another option, sit and do nothing. I reject that option.

The "solution" was a hefty "dirty" energy tax.

Man, you think like a lefty, don't you? Instead of picking winners, you want to pick losers, and tax them into the ground.

Well, that sounds just fine by me

I would have an energy tax that is based on two components: carbon emmissions and air pollutants. The more pollutants, the higher the tax. To nuture the alternative energy industries of solar, wind, wave, geothermal, etc., they would be tax exempt and that exemption guaranteed by law for many years.

In fact, this is a policy I have supported for decades.

I don't have a problem with that policy. However, note it isn't something that the administration can unilaterally do. In fact, given the current Congress, it isn't even remotely possible.

So I don't blame the administration for doing what they could, instead of wishing upon a star.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

LOL barfo. The govt. picks losers and taxes the winners into the ground. Add to that the notion it can create wealth out of thin air by printing money and borrowing like it's going out of style -- you have a recipe for the new normal.

 

[Masbee]

No, I listed another option, sit and do nothing. I reject that option.



Man, you think like a lefty, don't you? Instead of picking winners, you want to pick losers, and tax them into the ground.

Wrong.

Instead of extra taxes on, say income, taxes are assessed on an externality - pollution. Something that is now lightly taxed in our economy.

In the U.S. we have a progressive income tax. If you are in the energy business or use a lot of energy in your line of work you aren't penalized for your pollution, but if successful, you pay a lot of income tax. Income is "punished" or in your lingo, income producers are picked as "losers".

If, as a public policy decision, the government chooses to tax income less, and tax polluting energy a lot more, than those in the energy business will see their taxes shift. Less on income. More on pollution. Those in the energy business that are in position to reduce their pollution the fastest will pay less in taxes than those that continue to pollute.

 

[barfo]

Wrong.

Instead of extra taxes on, say income, taxes are assessed on an externality - pollution. Something that is now lightly taxed in our economy.

In the U.S. we have a progressive income tax. If you are in the energy business or use a lot of energy in your line of work you aren't penalized for your pollution, but if successful, you pay a lot of income tax. Income is "punished" or in your lingo, income producers are picked as "losers".

If, as a public policy decision, the government chooses to tax income less, and tax polluting energy a lot more, than those in the energy business will see their taxes shift. Less on income. More on pollution. Those in the energy business that are in position to reduce their pollution the fastest will pay less in taxes than those that continue to pollute.

Like I said, I like your plan. I've got no problem with it whatsoever.

But if you go asking why Obama didn't implement your plan instead of what he's currently doing, the answer is simple: he does not have the power to enact your plan.

barfo