In Rush to Assist Solyndra, U.S. Missed Warning Signs

[alp227]

Source: The New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s visit to the Solyndra solar panel factory in California last year was choreographed down to the last detail — the 20-by-30-foot American flags, the corporate banners hung just so, the special lighting, even coffee and doughnuts for the Secret Service detail.

“It’s here that companies like Solyndra are leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future,” the president declared in May 2010 to the assembled workers and executives. The start-up business had received a $535 million federal loan guarantee, offered in part to reassert American dominance in solar technology while generating thousands of jobs.

But behind the pomp and pageantry, Solyndra was rotting inside, hemorrhaging cash so quickly that within weeks of Mr. Obama’s visit, the company canceled plans to offer shares to the public. Barely a year later, Solyndra has become one of the administration’s most costly fumbles after the company declared bankruptcy, laid off 1,100 workers and was raided by F.B.I. agents seeking evidence of possible fraud.

Solyndra’s two top officers are to appear Friday before a House investigative committee where, their lawyers say, they will assert their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/us/politics/in-rush-to-assist-solyndra-united-states-missed-warning-signs.html?pagewanted=all

[truthisfreedom]

1. Fifth amendment rights. Hmm. Well, I sure hope they find massive fraud and some bodies end up in

jail.

[No Elephants]

2. I hope I am wrong, but I think green will be the next area of government money rip off.

And so many things that really have little to do with being green--or, at least, little new to do with being green--like garbage collecting companies and exterminators are styling themselves as environmental, or green or ecological.

[JDPriestly]

3. Look, remember Enron?

How about Bernie Madoff?

Then there was the dot.com revolution with many similar casualties.

There are always scams. That doesn't make this one right, but we need to get at the core issues -- better accounting standards -- requiring more transparency by corporations -- changing corporate rules to prevent crooks and reckless profiteers from hiding behind the corporate veil not just after wrongs have been committed, but before. There are so many things that can be done differently.

If we focus just on the scandal surrounding this one company, we will miss the big picture.

That is what we have done in the past, focused on one scandal, on the wrongs that individuals have already committed and told ourselves, "Isn't this shocking. How could they have done this?"

In our inner discussion and distracted by our feelings of superiority and pride in the fact that we are honest in our lives and would not do such things, we forget to look at the institutional and systemic rules and customs that permit these things to happen.

We have to change the rules to require more transparency and more fairness. Only then will businesses operate more honestly.

[No Elephants]

4. I'll change the rules, if you tell me how I can do that.

[JDPriestly]

9. End a lot more of the protection that the corporate form affords.

Board members, major shareholders and top management should bear more of the financial and moral responsibility for the decisions they make.

Getting at the money and assets of leaders of corporations should be made much easier when corporations harm others. The BP spill is just one example. We have too many laws that protect the activities of corporations, everything from banks to real estate holding companies.

Talk about ANONYMOUS. The corporate form seeks to make ownership anonymous. The corporate form should only be available in that very protected form for public benefit organizations such as non-profit universities, hospitals, etc. Otherwise company leaders should bear more personal responsibility for the damages they inflict on others, on our environment, and on society as a whole.

[AngryAmish]

7. The cruddiness of this company was known to those who looked

So far I see no indication they cooked the books. The company would only make money if the price of silicon stayed high (they made non-silicon based solar panels). It did not. Their product cost more to make than the Chinese panels (which are heavily subsidized).

They made a huge bet on the price of silicon. Then they got their hands on half a billion of our dollars. The bet was wrong. They burned through that and here we are.

[No Elephants]

5. Just heard on TV that, when asked for another investment in Solyndra, the

administration discussed "optics."

And also allowed private investors to get a higher priority than taxpayers in any future bankruptcy proceeding.

Sah-well.

ETA: By TV, I mean the Today Show.

[Dokkie]

6. Why all the investigations?

Even the best run companies do go bankrupt sometimes. Especially when they are facing cheap labor driven, govt financed chinese companies.

[AngryAmish]

8. Because they went bankrupt with our money and we got placed in the back of the line to be repaid

through liquidation.

This story stinks and we should prevent the press from reporting it.

[JDPriestly]

10. But wasn't the same thing true with the bank bail-outs?

And the banks' problems are by no means over yet.

[marshall]

11. We prevent it by ignoring it

As long as a story does not garner attention, the media whores will not publish anything about it.

[Dokkie]

12. And whenever any company goes bankrupt

They usually do it with other people's money. What am worried about is the whole FBI involvement and the congressional hearing setup for the bankruptcy. And if the FBI and congress is involved in every bankruptcy case, then thanks for the correction

[christx30]

13. Why would you want to

prevent the press from reporting on it? $500 million is gone. And we will probably never get that money back. Obviously the due diligence was not done on this company before a very large sum of money was invested in it. Someone seriously dropped the ball on this, and that person should probably not have a job with the Federal government.
We need more openness from the Federal government. Someone seriously messed up and didn't do his or her job.