(Sources: Autoblog Green , Green Car Congress, NY Times Wheels, Green Car Reports)

The internet as well as the automotive world has been abuzz with a lot of discussions since this morning after General Motors CEO Fritz Henderson revealed what the company’s mysterious ‘230’ ad campaign was about.  It turned out to be the official mileage rating for GM’s upcoming 2011 Chevrolet Volt extended-range electric car.

GM must be basking in the new found glory (though it sounds more temporary as the intelligent folks around the web are starting to dig out the details behind this 230mpg claim). GM’s Twitter account was proudly re-tweeting a post that goes like this: 230 mpg city, great. More than 100 mpg combined, even better. Not being stranded after 300+ miles, priceless.   Mind you!  This is just a sample of what’s been such a flood of good PR for GM. after this 230 unveiling.

For many smart folks, a number like that seems outlandish, absurd. How can the US Environmental Protection Agency possibly measure fuel consumption that low? The answer, it turns out, is all in the assumptions.

Our friends at Autoblog says “Without access to the actual method that the EPA is tentatively going to apply to plug-in vehicles (we have requests for clarification out to the EPA), all that GM’s Dave Darovitz would tell us is that the number is “based on city cycles and we’re not really talking in detail yet.” Instead, the press release says that: Under the new methodology being developed, EPA weights plug-in electric vehicles as traveling more city miles than highway miles on only electricity. The EPA methodology uses kilowatt hours per 100 miles traveled to define the electrical efficiency of plug-ins. Applying EPA’s methodology, GM expects the Volt to consume as little as 25 kilowatt hours per 100 miles in city driving. At the U.S. average cost of electricity (approximately 11 cents per kWh), a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.

Which leads to the big question: What assumptions should the EPA make in its emissions and gas-mileage tests about how the Volt is used (also known as the car’s “duty cycle”)?

For decades, gasoline cars (and ) have been testing using two cycles: city and highway. That gives us the two quoted EPA mileage ratings, and the EPA also calculates a “blended” number for overall usage. The distance driven doesn’t really matter.

But for the Volt, mileage assumptions become much more political.  If the EPA tests a Volt over a cycle of less than 40 miles, it will never burn any gasoline, and it’ll get that “infinite” mileage. The daily distance matters much more for the Volt than for a gas engined car.

The answer appears to be the EPA has adopted a cycle described by GM-Volt.com, among others, that assumes the Volt is driven until the battery is discharged–and then slightly more on gasoline power.

A similar test routine proposed by Mike Duoba at Argonne National Laboratories repeatedly drives the car on four EPA highway test cycles until the battery is discharged, then drives one city cycle–totaling 51 miles. (The EPA city cycle is roughly 11 miles, the highway cycle about 10 miles.)

If the engine runs for 11 miles at 50 mpg, that will use 0.22 gallons of gasoline. But that amount is used over a total travel distance of 51 miles, which works out to 232 mpg. Sounds like 230 mpg to us!

Jim Motavalli wrote on his Wheels column on  New York Times : The problem with claiming 230 miles a gallon was that to get at numbers like that you can’t simply measure its fuel consumption. The plug-in hybrid’s small gas engine is there to provide power for the electric motors, not drive the wheels, and the first 40 miles are on the batteries alone.

G.M. can plug its numbers into the E.P.A. city driving cycle and get stellar results, but, as they say, actual results — and planetary impact — will vary quite a bit. How and where you drive the Volt will matter quite a bit, too. “If you’re heavy footed, you’re not going to get 230 miles per gallon,” said Roland Hwang, transportation program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

In a detailed article published by Green Car Congress one can learn how this fuel economy rating is measured.  While the fuel economy (FE) for combustible fueled vehicles (such as gasoline, diesel, compressed natural gas, or an ethanol blend) can easily be expressed in mpg, and fuel economy for an all-electric vehicle can be expressed in miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent (mpge), the arrival of new technologies that can operate in all-electric mode, a conventional hybrid mode, or some combination of the two complicates the situation.

The EPA is revisiting the FE label provisions as they apply to those types of vehicles, and is working with automakers, the SAE, the State of California, the Department of Energy and others to address these issues. The EPA anticipates issuing guidance and/or a rule this year.

According to US Department of Transportation data, nearly eight of 10 Americans commute fewer than 40 miles a day. A Volt driver’s actual gas-free mileage will vary depending on how far he or she travels and other factors, such as how much cargo or how many passengers they carry and how much the air conditioner or other accessories are used. Tony Posawatz, Vehicle Line Director for the Volt, said that the Volt is delivering 40 miles all electric in both city and highway cycles.

However, Posawatz notes that since the Volt results are based on a single charge per day—and that given the recharge time of 6-8 hours on a standard 110V outlet or half that on a 240V charger, the Volt has the potential to deliver better than 230 mpg performance if it can charge multiple times per day.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Washington Post, Jalopnik, Autoblog)

Car can extend its range to more than 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.

Image Courtesy: Autoblog

In case you missed it this morning, General Motors CEO Fritz Henderson made some big news just one month after the “new” GM emerged from bankruptcy protection.

General Motors announced today that its forthcoming electric vehicle, the Chevrolet Volt, will achieve city fuel economy of 230 miles per gallon, under testing that used draft federal fuel economy methodology standards for plug-in cars.

The Volt will become the first mass-produced vehicle to obtain a triple-digit MPG rating, the company said.

“The Volt is becoming very real, very fast,” chief executive Fritz Henderson said. “The price of oil is going to go up.”

According to Frank Weber, vehicle chief engineer for the Volt, the number is based on combined electric only driving and charge sustaining mode with the engine running. He declined to get specific about the proportions, but did say that the urban cycle would be predominantly EV only. The EPA has been studying real world vehicle usage and is developing the formulas to try and provide a representative number of what most customers could expect to achieve. In addition to the composite number, the new EPA stickers will likely also get numbers for mileage in charge sustaining mode and electric efficiency in EV mode.

Initial prices for the car may be as much as $40,000, analysts said.

But company officials said the car’s price is expected to come down over time. They note, moreover, that gas prices will rise again, making fuel-efficient cars more valuable.

The Volt, which is scheduled to start production late next year, is expected to travel up to 40 miles on electricity from a single battery charge. The company says the car can extend its range to more han 300 miles with its flex fuel-powered engine-generator.

Assuming the average cost of electricity is approximately 11 cents per kilowatt-hour in the United States, a typical Volt driver would pay about $2.75 for electricity to travel 100 miles, or less than 3 cents per mile.

This story’s still developing, but if our sources are correct, it would blow the Toyota Prius out of the water. Heck, it’d blow every other vehicle currently on the market out of the water with the exception of the Tesla roadster — and that’s no four-door mid-size sedan. So for GM this represents a huge marketing coup — the ability to claim the most fuel efficient vehicle in the world and a big blow to detractors who claim the big, sweaty ‘merican manufacturer can’t build quality products.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Green Car Congress)

GM’s domestic sales of the automaker and its joint ventures in China jumped to 144,593 units—an increase of 77.7 percent compared to last year. This was GM China’s best July ever, extending an uninterrupted series of single month sales records that started in January 2009.

For the first seven months as a whole, GM China and its joint ventures sold 959,035 vehicles, up 42.8% in comparison with the first seven months of last year.

Shanghai GM registered year-on-year sales growth of 60.6% in July to 56,489 units.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: AP via Yahoo, Forbes & Autoblog)

TransportGooru was one of the earliest portals that notified about the Swedish love affair that originally reported by the Swedish National Television.  Though it was not officially confirmed by the companies involved (GM & Koenigsegg), pretty much everyone knew what is coming.  General Motors made it official this morning, Saab will soon be back in Swedish hands. In many respects, this is the most fitting result for quirky brand. Koenigsegg is an oddball itself, building insanely fast supercars in a Scandinavian country where you can’t legally drive over about 60 mph.

GM said in a memorandum of understanding that the sale would include an expected $600 million funding commitment from theEuropean Investment Bank, guaranteed by the Swedish government. Additional funding for Saab’s operations and investments would be provided by GM and Koenigsegg Group AB, it said.The sale is expected to be completed by the end of the third quarter and is subject to regulatory approvals by authorities.

Image Courtesy: Autoblog

“This is yet another significant step in the reinvention of GM and its European operations,” GM Europe President, Carl-Peter Forster, said in a statement. “Closing this deal represents the best chance for Saab to emerge a stronger company,” he said, adding “Koenigsegg Group’s unique combination of innovation, entrepreneurial spirit and financial strength, combined with Koenigsegg’s proven ability to create world-class Swedish performance cars in a highly efficient manner, made it the right choice for Saab as well as for General Motors.”

The company behind the consortium, Koenigsegg Automotive, was founded in 1994 by Christian von Koenigsegg, a Swedish sports carfanatic and entrepreneur, who remains the chief executive. It makesluxury sports cars at its headquarters, a former air force base near Angelholm, in southern Sweden.

With a full-time staff of 45, Koenigsegg makes around a dozen cars a year, customized for every buyer. The company doesn’t advertise prices for its models, but they are believed to range between 8 million and 18 million kronor ($1 million-$2.3 million) each.  Saab, on the other hand, has more than 4,000 staff worldwide, is represented in some 50 countries, and typically produces more than 100,000 cars a year.

One of the key details about the deal is the now obligatory government backing, this time in the form of a $600 million loan from the European Investment Bank, guaranteed of course by the Swedish government. That explains why minuscule Koenigsegg picked up Saab for free. It’s all about being Swedish.

“‘Saab needs to be left alone to proceed with its strategy,” says Matts Carlsson, an analyst of Goteborg Management Institute, noting that any tampering with its five-year plan to produce premium cars that are not aimed at competing with luxury brands such as BMW or Lexus ‘could destroy it.’

Crucially GM is pledging Koenigsegg its “platform and powertrain technology.” It’s very likely to include the “Epsilon 2” platform — the model (metal frame, geer box, technology) on which the latest GM European cars are based, such as the Opel and Vauxhall Insignias, says Tim Urquhart, an analyst at IHS Global Insight in London. That’s hugely significant for Koenigsegg as research and development of these platforms are a massive expenditure for automakers, he added.

Koeningsegg’s technology could prove valuable to Saab too. Koeningsegg has made a big push into green technology, making low emission, high-efficiency cars such as a flex fuel super car operating on both ethanol and petrol. It’s an area where Saab has been lagging behind its competitors, and could eventually help the company sell more cars.

It should help it increase sales volumes at Saab, which have fallen off sharply in recent years. Having access to GM’s technology will give the Swedish car maker several years to come up with a model for the future.

Koeningsegg also appears to have trumped other suitors, including Italy’s Fiat ( FIATY.PK – news – people ), which was interested in buying Saab after losing out in the race for Opel to Canada’s Magna International ( MGA – news – people ). (See “Fiat Keeps An Eye On Saab.”)

The sale of Saab to Koeningsegg marks a return to Swedish ownership after nine years in GM hands. Last year Saab posted a loss of 3 billion Swedish kronors ($384 million). It says it needs $1 billion to overhaul its business.

(Source: The Jakarta Globe)

Swedish luxury sports car maker Koenigsegg will buy Saab Automobile from US giant General Motors with the backing of Norwegian investors, Swedish television reported on Thursday.

The buyers have signed a letter of intention to buy Saab, SVT said on its website, citing anonymous sources and naming Koenigsegg and added that the negotiations could last for months.

“We are getting close to a deal done, but there are some final steps to be taken,” a source close to the matter told AFP, but would not confirm the identity of the leading bidder.

Both Saab and its parent company GM declined comment. Saab was put up for sale by General Motors, which filed for bankruptcy after being brought to its knees by falling demand amid the world economic downturn.  Saab’s reorganisation process began separately in Swedish courts in February.

Koenigsegg, set up in 1994, produces just 20 of its deluxe sports cars a year and sells each one for more than a million euros (1.4 million dollars).

Saab’s sell-off drew a little closer on Thursday after Stockholm announced it had authorised the Swedish Debt Office, which acts as a public bank to the state, to discuss guaranteeing a 500-million-euro loan made to Saab by the European Investment Bank (EIB).

“We have always said that the debt office could start negotiations on guaranteeing the loan when Saab has a new owner,” state secretary for business Joran Hagglund said in a statement.

Media reports had also said Italy’s Fiat was keen on buying Saab, but observers say such a move is now unlikely because of Fiat’s failure to acquire GM’s other European brand Opel.

Opel and its sister marque, Vauxhall, share a lot of technology with Saab.  The Saab automaker — not to be confused with a Swedish defence company also called Saab — sold 93,000 cars worldwide in 2008, according to its website.

It owes 9.7 billion kronor (1.3 billion dollars, 924 million euros) to GM — its largest individual creditor — as well as 347 million kronor to the Swedish government. Other creditors are owed 647 million kronor.

Saab, the automaker, employs about 3,400 people in Sweden. Including suppliers, some 15,000 jobs in the country are believed to be at risk if the company were to disappear.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Bloomberg)

Edward E. Whitacre Jr. built AT&T Inc. into the biggest U.S. provider of telephone service over a 43-year-career. By his own admission, he becomes chairman of General Motors Corp. knowing nothing about the auto industry.

The 6-foot-4-inch Texan nicknamed “Big Ed” said steering the nation’s largest automaker after bankruptcy is “a public service.” People who know him say he can meet GM’s need for the type of transformation he orchestrated at Dallas-based AT&T.

“I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

Whitacre’s selection bucks more than a half-century of tradition at GM, where the only non-executives to lead the board since 1937 were interim ChairmanKent Kresa and John Smale, who held the job from 1992 through 1995. Whitacre will take the post when Detroit-based GM exits Chapter 11, perhaps by Aug. 31.

A bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering and record in shaping a “monolithic” AT&T into a diversified enterprise make Whitacre “a good choice,” said Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics auto-consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan.

“He was one of the guys who helped create a new AT&T that wasn’t so dependent on land-line phone service,” said Hall, a former GM engineer. “There’s a parallel with General Motors. GM is not now about just making cars. It’s about re-creating itself as a 21st-century car company. They have to have somebody at the top that understands they have to make a new GM.”

“Lots of conversations” followed with Steven Rattner, the Wall Street dealmaker running President Barack Obama’s car task force, said Whitacre, adding that Treasury’s message was: “We need your help. It’s a great company. You could be a lot of assistance to GM.”

(Source:  The Auto Channel)

Edward E. Whitacre, Jr., former chairman and CEO of AT&T Inc., will become chairman of the New GM when the company is launched later this summer, GM’s interim Chairman Kent Kresa announced today. Kresa will continue to serve as interim chairman until the launch.

Whitacre, 67, was chairman and CEO of AT&T Inc. and its predecessor companies from 1990 to 2007. During his tenure, which began with Southwestern Bell, Whitacre led the company through a series of mergers and acquisitions–including that of AT&T in 2005–to create the nation’s largest provider of local, long distance and wireless services. He serves on the boards of ExxonMobil Corporation and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation and holds a degree in industrial engineering from Texas Technological University.

The six other members of the current board will most likely retire no later than the approval of the sale of GM assets to the new entity. A selection process is currently underway for four more directors to serve on the board of the New GM. In addition, the Canadian government and the new UAW Voluntary Employee Benefit Association (VEBA) will each nominate one director, bringing the total number of New GM directors to 13.

Click  here to read the entire article.

(Source:  Foreign Policy Magazine)

Cartoon Courtesy: Slate Magazine

Outside a small group of nihilists and committed free marketeers who’d have let General Motors go under, no matter the price, few question the necessity of the Obama administration’s plan for the once great American company’s reorganization in bankruptcy. But as a U.S. taxpayer, and therefore one of GM’s brand-new owners, I have my doubts about our ability to manage this new property. Yes, GM’s previous owners proved unable to run a competitive car company in a global marketplace, but is the U.S. government really the best one to transform it? Already, the particulars of the Chapter 11 arrangement lead me to fear that the same sort of internal politics, unthinking nationalism, and generalized aversion to engineering risk that have hobbled GM for decades will continue to haunt its new incarnation.

One place where you won’t hear for-attribution criticism of the “new” General Motors these days is GM headquarters. Perforce they are obligated to display their gratitude with the unfailing enthusiasm that a $50 billion-plus investment in a failing business minimally entitles its benefactors to expect in return. Although the collegial tone of the new rapprochement comes 50 years late, it is heartening nonetheless to see American industry finally welcome Washington’s involvement in matters like safety, fuel economy, and emissions regulation.

Even Robert “Maximum Bob” Lutz, GM’s outgoing product czar and vice chairman, and a fierce critic of government meddling from the “give me back my bullets” wing of Detroit’s old school, has experienced an astonishing change of heart, at the ripe age of 77. Speaking to a gathering of journalists in Motor City the other week, Lutz unhinged every jaw in the house when he shared his thoughts on how the White House automotive task force ought to become a permanent fixture. Of the unprecedented government-industry collaboration the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies begat, Lutz, an ex-Marine attack pilot and near-libertarian known for making his daily commute in a decommissioned Czech jet fighter, quipped: “Jeez, it only took 30 years for somebody to finally figure [government-industry partnership] out.”

Er, right. Thirty years and a couple of epochal bankruptcies.

Questions about the government’s intentions for the new GM Lite already abound. Notably, what will and what should the company’s policies be, now that it is controlled (in theory) by and for the benefit of U.S. taxpayers, who own 60 percent of its shares?

Will GM be underwritten so as to lead the market in the direction of fuel saving and new technologies? Or will it trim its sails and attempt to get by on its sometimes-profitable religion of pickup trucks and SUVs, perhaps ones that get slightly better mileage? GM is still tooled up to build them.

Ever since the 1920s, when GM’s Alfred P. Sloan introduced the precepts of what came to be known as Sloanism — a car for every purse and purpose — a good day at a car dealership was one when you sold someone “more car than they need.” Automobile marketing often appeals to man’s baser emotions. Greed, lust, and envy come to mind, as do excessive horsepower and other costly and unnecessary options that have been larded on to new cars to boost profits for longer than any of us have been alive. So, you can’t help wondering, has the U.S. government entered the business of encouraging people to live out their most insane automotive dreams? Will it labor to create demand for automobiles when and where there is no need, as generations of car companies have done before it?

And where do GM’s new taxpayer/shareholders stand on the matter of outsourcing work to Mexico or South Korea or China or anywhere else, as the old GM did whenever it got the chance? Will Chevy production lines in places like Toluca and Silao, Mexico, come home to the USA? The old GM went in for cheap overseas labor. Has the government now entered the business of using taxpayer money to export jobs? Is this the change we need?

Myriad practical and philosophical quandaries aside, one vital series of questions about the “new” GM — which brands will be kept, sold, or terminated — has already been answered. Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, GMC, Australia’s Holden, and South Korea’s Daewoo are to be spared. To be sold: Saturn, Hummer, and Sweden’s Saab are available outright, and operating control of GM’s German division, Opel, is to be sacrificed in a deal brokered by the German government outside U.S. bankruptcy proceedings. For the scrap heap: Pontiac, the venerable division that once claimed to “build excitement.” In limbo: Opel’s English sister brand, Vauxhall.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: AP via Yahoo)

General Motors Corp., just days after the bankrupt carmaker sold its Hummer brand, said Friday that it has reached a deal to unload Saturn to racing legend and auto dealer Roger Penske.

 General Motors Corp. has a tentative deal to sell its Saturn brand to former race car driver and dealership group owner Roger Penske, both companies said Friday.

Penske has signed a memorandum of understanding that would give his dealership chain, Penske Automotive Group, Saturn’s 350 dealerships, the companies said. Penske said that he expects to offer all the dealers new franchise agreements and will retain all 13,000 Saturn employees for the immediate term.

“I would expect that the model that we’re putting together, the distribution model, will be profitable day one,” Penske said in an interview with The Associated Press. “We’ll have less costs. We’ll not be in the manufacturing side.”

Neither Penske nor GM would say how much Penske is paying for the brand. Penske said he expects the deal to close in the third quarter.

Penske Automotive Group also distributes Daimler AG’s Smart subcompacts in the U.S., but Smart has its own dealership network and Saturn dealers will continue to exclusively distribute Saturn vehicles, Penske said.

Initially, GM will continue to produce on a contract basis the Saturn Aura sedan as well as the Vue and Outlook SUVs, the companies said. But Penske said he is in talks with manufacturers around the world about building Saturn cars in the future.

GM Chairman Roger Smith first unveiled the Saturn brand in November 1983, describing it as a revolutionary new way to build and sell small cars in America. But the project was slow to develop and the brand did not officially launch until 1990. It featured the iconic tag-line “a different kind of car company.”

GM’s hope was that Saturn would attract younger buyers with smaller, hipper cars to better compete with Japanese imports. It built a new plant in Spring Hill, Tenn., devoted to Saturn production. The factory had more flexible work rules than traditional GM plants for the employees who built the cars.

Image Courtesy: Penske Automotive Group

Despite a cult-like following that drew thousands to annual reunions in Spring Hill, the brand never made money for GM. The factory stopped making Saturns in 2007 and currently builds only the Chevrolet Traverse.

As GM focused more on high-profit pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, Saturn began to languish in the late 1990s. Then in 2006, car buyers began to find Saturn’s new models more appealing. But after a good year in 2007, sales dropped 22 percent last year as the U.S. car market withered.

Penske Automotive also distributes Daimler AG’s Smart subcompacts in the U.S., but Smart has its own dealership network and Saturn dealers will continue to exclusively distribute Saturn vehicles, Penske said.

Carl F. Galeana, who owns two Saturn dealerships north of Detroit, said Friday he was thrilled that Penske would be the Saturn buyer.

“Roger Penske is an icon in the business world,” Galeana said. “I’ve worked with him personally. Nobody works harder than Roger Penske.”

Galeana said the fact that Penske is interested in Saturn means the brand has value.

“It allows Saturn to get back to its original roots, which is to be an independent car company,” he said.

Shares of Penske Automotive rose 52 cents, or 3.6 percent, to $15.13 in midday trading on news of the sale. The stock has enjoyed a brisk rally this year, more than tripling from an annual low of $4.82 in March.

During a press briefing earlier this week, GM Chief Executive Frederick Henderson said Saab has attracted three bidders, but he declined to reveal names.  The renowned Hummer brand was sold to a Chinese heavy machinery company a couple of days ago and this transaction will conclude upon clearance from three different Chinese government agencies .

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: New York Times & Fox News)

It is not every 31-year-old who, in a first government job, finds himself dismantling General Motors and rewriting the rules of American capitalism.  

Image Courtesy: New York Times

But that, in short, is the job description for Brian Deese, a not-quite graduate of Yale Law School who had never set foot in an automotive assembly plant until he took on his nearly unseen role in remaking the American automotive industry.  

“There was a time between Nov. 4 and mid-February when I was the only full-time member of the auto task force,” Mr. Deese, a special assistant to the president for economic policy, acknowledged recently as he hurried between his desk at the White House and the Treasury building next door. “It was a little scary.”

But now, according to those who joined him in the middle of his crash course about the automakers’ downward spiral, he has emerged as one of the most influential voices in what may become President Obama’s biggest experiment yet in federal economic intervention.  So what does Mr.Deese’s resume look like? It should be impressive, considering he’s managing America’s $458,000 per dayinvoluntary investment.

Deese grew up in a Boston suburb, the son of a political science professor at Boston College. He moved to Vermont and attended Middlebury College, where he studied political science and also took time to host a campus radio show called “Bedknobs and Beatniks,” described in one write-up as “a format of music, news, discussion and banter.”

While far more prominent members of the administration are making the big decisions about Detroit, it is Mr. Deese who is often narrowing their options.

A month ago, when the administration was divided over whether to support Fiat’s bid to take over much of Chrysler, it was Mr. Deese who spoke out strongly against simply letting the company go into liquidation, according to several people who were present for the debate.

“Brian grasps both the economics and the politics about as quickly as I’ve seen anyone do this,” said Lawrence H. Summers, the head of the National Economic Council who is not known for being patient whenever he believes an analysis is sub-par — or disagrees with his own. “And there he was in the Roosevelt Room, speaking up vigorously to make the point that the costs we were going to incur giving Fiat a chance were no greater than some of the hidden costs of liquidation.”

Mr. Deese was not the only one favoring the Fiat deal, but his lengthy memorandum on how liquidation would increase Medicaid costs, unemployment insurance and municipal bankruptcies ended the debate. The administration supported the deal, and it seems likely to become a reality on Monday, if a federal judge handling the high-speed bankruptcy proceeding approves the sale of Chrysler’s best assets to the Italian carmaker.

Click here to read the entire article.