tv Countdown to the Closing Bell With Liz Claman FOX Business April 1, 2014 3:00pm-4:01pm EDT
through the next hour on count down. liz: recalled vehicles, people left behind when it got into what was supposed to be a safe car. mail culpa, angry questions on capitol hill over the worst scandal ever to hit gm. ceo mary bararea faces congress on the bottom line, the reputation and how the company could possibly make a come back. gm recall prices not slowing down the automaker's rivals. the best in eight years. chrysler sales jumping 13% on the back of strong jeep and ram pickup sales, gm struggles, this success. taking the cake. dunkin donuts sink its teeth into a new online cakes strategy that will make ordering one as easy as pie. the ceo is with us exclusively. "countdown to the closing bell" starts right now.
liz: good afternoon. i can't answer that, that is the phrase gm ceo mary bara has added three time since she began her congressional testimony at 2:00 p.m. eastern time. she has held the top job for 0.19% of gm's entire existence, but she is the face of the entire company as she faces a house panel whose aim it is to find out why it took general motors eight years to recall certain vehicles including he recalls affecting everything from ara airbags two axles.
who designed a design change to ignition switches and was made oaware of potential problems and why recalls were not ordered sooner. rich edson on capitol hill live. here on set in new york, we want to mention as he put up the shot of what is happening on capitol hill, we will dip in at any moment when it appears these things are heating up but let's begin with rich edson. there are protesters outside, we show video of that. mary barra testifying right now, she keeps saying "i can't answer that." it is like she threw up this statement, that should be enough. that is not sitting well with a lot of people watching this right now. >> it isn't. when you consider the problems they have had, the death this has led to, the one thing though that mary barra has done is knock the old gm as for charges
the old company failed to change and really install new parts because of the cost of those pieces, mary barra to that says that's disturbing and that's not the way we do things in today's gm. liz: let's ask gary his thoughts. as you look at what is happening right now, tell me what your thoughts are. >> new gm is not very good at preparing their new ceo for meetings like this. when congress able to throw you curveballs on things base in her own internal investigation, that does not look very good. liz: jeff flock is at a gm dealership, cannot imagine what they are thinking at the moment. i don't know if you have been hearing this, if they are listening to it, how is it sitting with the dealers? >> they are listening, i am listening on my phone. direct question, did dan ackerson know about this and did the previous ceos know about
this? her answer to that is "no." rick wagner may have been in the dark as well. just because these guys didn't know about it does not absolve anybody of anything. liz: i agree, that is stunning the top guys in charge had no idea apparently. is that a protection move? we continue with the testifying and the testimony of general motors ceo mary barra. >> now, ms. barra, is it correct gm has recalled 2.5 million small cars in the united states due to defective ignition switches? >> yes. >> ms. barra, the correct they expanded their recall of small cars because it was possible the defective ignition switches may have been installed as replacement parts? yes or no? barra: yes.
>> ms. barra, is it correct the ignition switch in question was originally developed in the late 1990s and approved by general motors in february of 2002? yes or no? barra: yes. >> ms. barra, is it correct general motors owns and defines specifications for such ignition switch that requires 20 plus or minus five newton centimeters of torque to move the switch from the accessory position to the run position, yes or no? barra: yes. >> ms. barra, is that correct general motors approved correction of such ignition switch despite results during the production part approval process? or ppa p showing the switch did not meet gm's requirement, yes
or no? barra: it is not clear to me. >> now, ms. barra, is it correct general motors approved a redesign of the ignition switch used in the presently recall vehicles in april, 2006? barra: yes. >> ms. barra, and is it correct gm's torque requirement was a redesign switch remain the same as the original ignition switch, yes or no? barra: it is not clear to me, that is why we are investigating that area specifically. >> when that information becomes available, will you submitted to the committee? barra: yes, i will be at >> ms. barracommittee acknowledged the redesigned ignition switch meets gm's torque requirements? yes or no? want me to say it again? your knowledge, did the redesigned the missing switch
meet gm's torque requirement, yes or no? barra: it is part of the investigation. >> ms. barra, would you give an explanation of the factors gm takes into consideration when approving apart for production? are there circumstances where gm may approve parts for production one such parts do not make such design specifications? yes or no? barra: yes. >> if so, can you please submit materials for the record explaining when and why that might occur? barra: yes. >> ms. barra, appreciate the length to which gm under your leadership is going to recall the vehicles and ensure ther the safe to drive. gm's cooperation with the committee is necessary to understand the process by which, and the reasons decisions were
made leading up to the 2014 recall. you have so far done so, i expect you will continue to do so. thank you for your courtesy, mrs. chairman, thank you ms. barra, i yield back. >> chairman yields back and now recognizes the majority of texas for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to make this general observation, this is probably the last major investigation that this subcommittee and full committee is going to conduct where we have the services. we have had a history on this committee and this subcommittee going back at least 40 to 50 years that when we have major issues we try to approach them on behalf of the american people in a nonpartisan, very open way.
it certainly appears we will continue that tradition today. so i hope we can show the best to the american people the congress at its best gets the facts, presents the facts and does so in a way that in the future we protect the public's health and safety for the american people. with that caveat, i do have a few questions. a number of congressmen so far have made the point that these ignition switches didn't appear to meet specifications. my assumption is he did not meet specifications, is that correct? barra: we've learned that as we did the recall. >> i am an industrial engineer, i used to be registered professional engineer. i am not currently registered but i have been in the past. why in the world would a company
with the stellar reputation of general motors purchase a part that did not meet their own specifications? barra: i want to know that as much as you do. it's not the way we do business today, if not the way we want to design and engineer vehicles for our customers. >> i just don't understand that. i've never worked in an auto assembly environment, i worked in a defense plant, and aircraft plant, the manager of a printing plant. i've done very limited consulting in the oil and gas industry, but i have never been a part of an organization that said we set the specs when a part doesn't meet the specs, we go ahead and buy it anyway.
you are currently the ceo, but at one time i think before you came ceo you were the vice president for global product development purchasing and supply chain. is it your position now that general motors will not accept parts that don't meet specifications? barra: we will not accept parts that do not meet the functional to, durability requirements. as i mentioned before in the steel example, there will be times they will be a material or a part that does not meet these exact specifications, but after analysis and looking at the performance, the safety, the durability, reliability, the functionality it will be okay. that happened very often as we buy steel to make the bodies of the vehicles.
>> than you don't need to specifications. what you just answered is gobbledygook. it is your own specification, the company's specification. if a part does not meet the specification, why in the world would you not refuse it and only accept a part that meets specification? barra: there needs to be a well documented process if accept a part that does not meet the specification. >> do you have that information? on starters. barra: on the ignition switch. >> if it did not meet specifications, do you have the information on the starters that it met all the other criteria? barra: that is part of the investigation, but the fact we made a recall, it did not meet the performance. >> we have the advantage of this subcommittee, we know now what happened in the past, we know now there's a real problem, we know now that a number of young
people have lost their lives, apparently because of this defect. i understand that, but as a number of others, there's no reason to have specifications if you don't enforce them. this next question is not a trick question, but it's an important question. right now how many parts are being used in general motors products that don't meet their own companies specifications? >> i don't have that exact number, but i can tell you the parts we are using today meet the performance and reliability, the safety that they need to. if we finally have a part that is defective that does not meet the requirements, we then do it recall. >> that is not an acceptable
answer i think the american people. we're not telling you the specifications. there are some safety specifications that by law and by regulation sets, they should not be a part use many gm product or any other automobile product in the united states that does not meet the specifications. at what level was the decision made to override and use this part even though did not meet specifications? at the manufacturing level, executive level or even at some subcomponent purchasing level, do you know that? barra: it is part of our investigation to answer that question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman.
ms. barra, we have had different perspectives during this hearing. you have been focusing our attention on the members of this committee and answering our questions. i have been staring at these photographs from the back wall, and i see young women the same age as my daughter, i see young men the same age as my two sons, my son paul owns one of your cobalt. i see a young marine and i am reminded of the photograph i have in my office upstairs of my father at the age of 18 and his dress blues at camp pendleton. and the focus of this hearing so far has been gm's commitments to safety, which i think we all agree on is a important topic for this hearing. he testified in your opening, and i think i'm quoting, our customers and their savior at the center of everything we do. responded to a question from ms. blackburn and told us you were going to run gm differently
than it has been run in the past. and i have a copy of gm's march 18 press release announcing jeff boyer as your new vice president of global vehicle safety, and in this press release he's quoted as saying nothing is more important than the safety of our customers and the vehicles they drive. today's gm is committed to this, and i'm ready to take on this assignment. 20 years ago before this hearing and iowa family harmed by another defective gm vehicle gave me this promotional screwdriver set they got from the local gm dealer. and if you look at it, on the outside it has a slogan, safety comes first at gm. so my question for you, and i think the question these families back here wants to know is what's changed at gm?
isn't it true that throughout its corporate history gm has represented the driving public safety has always been the number one priority? barra: i cannot speak to statements made in the past, all i can tell you is the way we are working now, we have changed our core values, the decision-making we are leading by example where one of the processes we have made with addition to win the technical community makes their decision about a safety recall or a recall, we will be reviewing it. to see that there is more we want to do. >> hasn't the core values of general manners always been the safety comes first? barra: i've never seen that part before. >> isn't it true that throughout the history of the company is made representations like this to the driving public as a way
of inducing them to buy your vehicles? >> today's general motors all i can tell you is today's general motors we are focused on safety. we have over 18 vehicles with a five-star crash rating. our entire buick lineup meets that requirement. >> but we're talking about these vehicles and was changed. have you had a chance to read these articles in "the new york times," florida engineer eureka moment with a deadly gm flaw? barra: i believe i read a portion of that article. >> this is from a writer, he writes in here about an engineer named mark hurd who is at a loss to explain why the engine and cobalt had suddenly shut off causing the fatal accident in 2010 in georgia. then he bought a replacement for $30 from a local gm and the mystery quickly unraveled. for the first time, someone
outside gm even by the company's own account had figured out a problem that they had known about for a decade and is now linked to 12 deaths. even though the new switch had the same identification number, mr. hood found big differences, and the article continues so begin to discover that was set in motion gm's worldwide recall of 2.7 million cobalt and other cars, one of the greatest safety crises in the company's history. do you agree with the author this is a grave safety crisis in the history of general motors? >> i've said this incident took way too long, it is not acceptable and that is why we're making radical change to the entire process adding more resources and a vice president of global vehicle safety was tremendous experienced in the highest integrity and we will continue to make process changes and people changes as we get the results of the investigation and we will take all of those
recommendations and we will make changes. >> before i yield back, mr. chairman, i would like consent to have this article added to the record if it is not already part of the record. >> is the gentleman would yield, they have changed their core values. i think it would be great if she could submit to us what the new core values for gm are so we would have those for the record. >> and i would also like to have any prior statement of core value from general motor over the last 20 years so we can see what has changed, mr. chairman. >> we will be asking the chairman for several questions to submit. >> thank the witness for spending some time with us this afternoon. you have mentioned at the start of a written testimony over a decade ago general motors embark upon a strong program, do you recall why that is?
why did gm embark upon a small program a decade ago? barra: to have a complete folio, i believe. >> the mission or the type of car that was manufactured by gm previously had not fit that model, so this was an entirely new business line that gm was undertaking? >barra: if you are speaking specifically about the cobalt, it was following a previous small car but it was an al all-w program architecture, et cetera. >> was any part of this done because of the café standards changing, was any of this done because of congressional action that occurred previously? barra: i cannot answer that question, was that in decision-making at that point. liz: a disastrous beginning to gm ceo mary barra's appearance before congress.
in fact, at one point we had tim murphy, who was the chair of the energy and commerce committee saying to her we have an e-mail exchange between the company that made the part and general motors engineers saying "the cobalt is blowing up in owner's faces when their admission keys bump with the drivers knees." why was is not considered a safety issue? mary barra saying "i can't answer that." as we bring back the panel, she admitted she did not read much of the page work that has been cemented for this hearing. we bring back jeff flock at a chicago dealership. and lauren fix, car analyst long with professor of car communications. lauren, let me get first to you. the congressman all over
hercalling one of her statements gobbledygook. >> i have been watching intensely, i listen to her opening statement and we all knew what she was going to stay, but they were pretty intense in terms of the question. i want a yes answer, i want a no answer. it is like a murder trial, it is intense. a lot of things are getting overlooked because congress doesn't understand how manufacturing occurs. it doesn't occur just by gm producing apart, sending off a a blueprint and a part comes in and that produce it. it is certainly more involved, thousands of components in a car and a certified don't even touch the surface of some of the prophecies that play. the new standards in place. there are a lot of questions that i think they will not be able to understand when i think of the initials for the acronyms.
i work in manufacturing every day, i hear there is a lot of disconnect, her being able to answer what is really occurring. liz: i cannot believe i am saying this in one of these highly technical situatio situat kind of looks like congress has done their homework, are they being appropriately tough? >> a few of them have dug into the paperwork to have some idea of what is going on. the key of the specifications, i have to decide will we make it this much better or that much better. the part comes back is only this much better and not that much better they have to decide to be at liz: how about the part that comes back that is "blowing up and cobalt drivers faces."
>> if you a part of the meet internal specifications, does the ceo need to know about that? no. but if it starts to blow up, they should know about that. liz: she flat out said, dan ackerson, the most recent ceo and rick wagner, the previous ceo, no, they wouldn't have known about that. how damaging is that to general motors that the top guy didn't know there was at least some question repeatedly happening over a part that was causing perhaps some deaths? >> i think it is stunning that she didn't know about it. she's trying to act as if this was another general motors and another time and space. she was an executive at that company for the last several decades. liz: and an engineer. >> for her to draw a line and say we are different now. and an engineer. she had a number of jobs in the company, for her to say we don't really know, we're looking into it and hiring ken feinberg and
all that is great, very textbook management 101. but people looking for answers, congress is pressing for those answers now. i would advise her to come with some artillery today to give us something that would give us some hope that is a change to happen in the future. all we've got is their values have changed and that worries me more than anything else. liz: jeff flock, just a moment ago, he will be joining us live in a few moments. said why in the world would gm approve a part that didn't even fit his own specifications? after she answered it, said with all due respect what you answered is gobbledygook. >> this is going to be the headline people will take away. lauren makes an interesting point, as mary made the point that the difference between meeting specifications and actually being an unsafe part.
the headline that people will take away coming to these dealerships behind me is gm uses parts that don't meet their own specification in their car. not just in the cars that crash or cause problems, but unable to say gm doesn't to this day continue to use parts that don't meet the specifications. that will be the headline people will take away from this. i would just say looking at this, folks in congress and staff have read all of the documents gm has submitted. she said she didn't. this leaves the impression they know more about her company now and this situation than she does. that's not a very good impression to leave. liz: that may go back to the professor. jeff also jumped on this one too the second she said it. she was specifically asked what dan anderson and jim wagner, these are the guys who were actually running it, not her, at the time more importantly perhaps rick wagner at the time
all of this situation that was wrapping up, she said they would not have known about that. i find that stunning. not that you can compare iphones to cars, but steve jobs would have wanted to know if the smallest thing were wrong with his stuff. i understand your point, but first to the professor. is it just too complicated when it comes to making a car for the top guys to know about these problems? >> if the company has become that combo kidded that the ceo doesn't know what is going on, we have a major problem. the other thing going on here is her comment about going from a coscostco to the customer cultu. which implies they were cutting corners in some ways. she revealed herself. to say the values not aligned with what we're talking about today are all things that will be parsed over for the next several weeks. general motors is in some pretty deep mess as a part of her
testimony. liz: lauren, we had a representative went out the picture that the back of the room where the event is happening and of course outside there are families of victims who are protesting. they can't be thinking this is going very well. had to die. we're talking about a $2 part. and overall the saddest part is no matter what the conclusion is, no matter what team of people messed up, there are depths. youen can't bring these -- there are deaths. you can't bring these people back, and the truth from this is the only thing they can do is from a pr perspective is she has to be as transparent as possible. she can't be, as the congressman is saying, gobbledygook. her team is supposed to be prepping her so that she knows everything in that binder which she apparently had in advance, and it's her information. and on the back side they need
to have a victims' fund, and it may be a couple billion dollars set aside because there's going to be more than one class action suit that's already in place. liz: yeah, i would think so. gary, yes or no, when one of the congress members asked who would have decided whether a recall should happen she said, i don't know, did that stun you? >> to a certain extent, yes. once it gets to the recall point, it's a pretty simple answer especially when you're talking about accidents and people died. liz: thanks to our panel, lauren's going to stay with us. more on this developing nudes right now. they are taking a break in the testimony as are we. closing bell is ringing in 30 minutes. we do have a strong market at the moment, we can't ignore that. and, of course, the big focus is general molters' ceo mary barra as she continues to take extremely pointed and tough questions on capitol hill, we've got the congressman, joe barton, who just told mary barra her answers, so far, were, quote, gobbledegook.
...return on investment wall isn't a street... isn't the only return i'm looking forward to... for some, every dollar is earned with sweat, sacrifice, courage. which is why usaa is honored to help our members with everything from investing for retirement to saving for college. our commitment to current and former military members and their families is without equal.
liz: a historic day for general motos and not in a good way. gm ceo mary barra struggling to answer key questions about the automaker's recalls in a hearing on capitol hill. congressman joe barton just finished his questioning of barra, he joins us us now from capitol hill. i'm pretty sure that your sound bites may very well make the top of the evening news. you, as a former engineer, representative, flat out said to mary barra whatever your answer on that, i think, was gobbledegook. were you truly confounded by the fact that she didn't have the answer to your question?
>> well, i'm not trying to be hard on her. i have a general motors assembly plant in my district in arlington, texas, but i also, as everybody else on that subcommittee does, have an obligation to the american people to get the facts on the table, and the facts are not very pretty right now for general motors. they were used in a part that didn't meet their specifications. they knew about it at some level of the company for some time, and they continued to use it, and while i don't know, i did ask a question how many other parking lots below specification are they currently using, she didn't, she either didn't have that information or was not willing to share it with me. liz: in fact, you retorted to her that's not an acceptable answer. the american public and certainly the families of the victims would definitely agree with you, i'm quite sure. she started off strong, i think, is the consensus here where she had her statement. she said, look, we've hired ken feinberg who, of course, dealt with a lot of the settlements of
bp. he is a very, very strong and legitimate and respected person. but then, of course, when you all in congress got down into the weeds, in fact, you did hav, tim murphy, who was running this whole thing, flat out said what, why wasn't this considered a safety issue? and she said, i can't answer that. she said many times i want to know as much as you do. that almost seems like ad answer. -- ad answer. do you think your members will get angrier and more concerned? >> again, it's not the congress' job to get angry. it is the congress' job to get the facts so the american people can make the right decisions. i think she wants to do the right thing. you know, i don't think she's trying to hide anything. but this part that they were using was not just a little bit off, it was way off. it was about only a third as strong as it needed to be, apparently. i've got my keys here. if i use my keys in that car,
it's quite probable that the weight, the force of this key chain would have caused the ignition to go into the off position while the car was being used. and that's just simply not acceptable. so, you know, we need to give gm a wake-up. i think this lady wants to do the right thing, be and she may be being advised that she shouldn't tell us everything she knows. i don't know that. liz: okay. let me cut her a break for a second and say she was not the person in charge when this whole drama, nightmare began, it was rick wagner and subsequently dan akerson. she said, flat out, very clearly, oh, they wouldn't have known. will you and the this committee call ann dan akerson and/or rick wagner to discuss the? >> well, i'm not the chairman. liz: but should that be the next step, congressman? >> sure. and i can assure you that
chairman upton and ranking member degette and full committee ranking member waxman and chairman emeritus on the other side john dingell will get to the bottom of it. we'll -- we've got good investigative staff, and we want to know the facts, and we want to do whatever's necessary to prevent this kind of a problem from ever happening again. liz: we'll get to the bottom of this, as representative joe barton of texas. we thank you so much, i know it's a busy day. you jumped out of the testimony to come join us, we appreciate it, sir. >> yes, sir. we're going back to hear the head of nhtsa here as soon as the ceo of gm finishes, so the hearing will go on for another two hours or so. liz got it. and fox business is covering it as well. in fact, let us turn back to the hearing on capitol hill. >> at the same time, we're hearing, well, we don't know until the investigation is complete. so there's a conflict that i think is brought to bear here in terms of an an exchange that has
been detailed in the last few weeks under the watch of the new general motors, today's gm. and at the same time, when i was listening to representative from illinois ask about the corporate chart and the changes, no changes have been made. we're waiting for that pending the investigation. but at the same time, we've characterized or relabeled it as today's general motors. so while we're all products of the environment that produces us, the cultural impact of gm seems to still be in play with a number of people who have perhaps shifted positions but all part of that organization. so comfort me by telling me that there's a new thinking, there's a new culture that has beset gm while always players are there
in the corporate chart. tell me how the company has restructured and reorganized so as to bring comfort to the consumer. >> first, there are many new people in the company as well as people who have experience across the company. there is a new structure, for instance, in global product development. we've streamlined, eliminated bureaucracy. we took out an entire layer of management in the product development. we've completely redone the quality processes over the last -- it started in the 2011-2012 time frame. we've changed our test procedure, we've added additional validation, so there's been a complete remake of the way we drive quality. we test to failure instead of testing to a standard. that's just one example. and we've looked across the entire organization. we've rebuilt our supplier quality organization adding over
a hundred resources just in this country alone. so there's systematically gone across the company, and we're making changes. even in the chronologyies which i think you held up, those are the most details chronologies that we have ever provided sharing, again in a summary fashion, with the information we have now. but then we are conducting an investigation with mr. valukas. we've also ruled out new values with the customer is our compass, relationships matter and individual excellence. we've trained thousands of people, and most importantly, it's leadership at the top, it's the leadership of how we behave, of how we demonstrate when we make decisions and that we make decisions that focus be on the customer, focus on safety, focus on quality. and i can tell you from my leadership team and the next layer, we continue to drive that every day. we recognize culture change doesn't happen in a year or two, but we are well on that journey, and we will -- are dedicated to it, and we very clearly want to
have the safest vehicles on the road. >> and will you make that list public from the report that you're anticipating? >> i'm sorry? >> will you make the list that will be coming forth public? will you share that? >> the list of -- i'm sorry. >> the full report coming from mr. valukas. >> he will give us findings, and we will make the appropriate findings available to to this body, to our customers and to our employees. >> the appropriate findings. what about the full report? >> i'm not -- i don't know if he'll give a report or if he'll share -- >> if he does, will you share the full report? >> we will share the appropriate information. >> not the full report? >> again, i don't know if there'll be a full report, but we will share -- >> if there will be a full report, will you share it? >> i commit that we will be very transparent, and we will share what's appropriate. >> so in other words, or there's no commitment to share the full report. >> i'm saying i will share what is appropriate.
>> i hear the answer. mr. chair, i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. recognize the gentleman from louisiana, mr. scalise, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, appreciate you having this hearing. ms. barra, thank you for being here, and met me first say my prayers are with all the families of those who lost their lives and others who have been impacted by this. i want to thank you all for being here in this room as well. obviously, the questions we have are even more pertinent to the families that are here, and that's why it's important so that we ask the questions and get answers. if we're going to work to make sure we can prevent this from happening again, we've got to get into the real details of what went on during those period of years -- unfortunately, years -- where it seemed somewhere inside of general motors there was a knowledge that this was a problem before it got to the level of recall. and want to first take you,
ms. barra, to the tab you've got there, number 38. tab 38 is the sign-off. this is called a general motors commodity validation sign-off. this is the actual sheet that the engineer signed off on that approved the design change in the faulty ignition switch with. have you seen that document before? >> this is the first time i've seen this document that's labeled -- >> now, what we're talking about here, how long have you been aware of the problem with these faulty ignition switches? >> i was aware there was a faulty ignition switch on january 31st. >> of this year? >> of this year. liz: okay. that's interesting. remember, folks, mary barra in her previous job was head of global part development and supply chain, and she's an engineer, and she's been at general motors a long time, and
the first she heard of this ignition switch is, of course, what you just herald, january 31st. as this congressional testimony continues, we're calling, you know, regarding the recall of general motors vehicles where people died because there was a faulty part, we will continue to cover this. we're going to take a quick break. when we come back, fox business has received comment from someone representing rick wagner, the man who was in charge, of course, of general motors back when this whole problem began. stay tuned, we will be right back. i ys say be thman with the plan
but with less ergy, moodiness, i had to do something. i saw mdoctor. a blood test showed it was low testosterone, not age. we talked about axiron the onlynderarm low t treaent that can restore t vels to normal in about two weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women, especlly those who are or who may become pregnant, and children should avoidt where axirons applied as unexpected signs
of puberty in children or changes in body hair or incased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctorbout all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased sk of prostate cancer, worsening prostate symptoms, decreased sperm count, ankle, feet or body swelling, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing while sleeping and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, common side effects include skin redness headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. ask your doctor about axiron.
documents. granted, there are many, some 200,000 documents have been submitted, but most of them are from the company. she has also admitted that importantly enough she said that the ceos previous to her tenure, which just recently began -- dan akerson and then rick wagner going back further -- quote, would not have known about this. we have been trying to reach rick wagner ever since this story broke back in late january, early february. we have received comment from a man named steve harris. we can put it up on the screen. stave harris says: i was rick wagner's communications -- again, this is to fox business -- i was rick wagner's communications person at gm before retiring in 2009, i still help him out with media requests. air checked with rick, and he appreciates your interest in interviewing him, but he asked me to decline your request. just for your information, you are the third producer to contact rick in the last couple of weeks. he declined the other interview requests as well, or sr.ly we
couldn't be of -- sorry we couldn't be of help, steve harris. we thank steve for replying us. in fact, we would have been satisfied with just a comment, but, you know, we didn't get that or an interview, but we did want to be fair and let you know that somebody on behalf of rick wagner has at least replied, but you just heard representative joe barton of texas say, absolutely, we should be bringing rick wagner and dan akerson before this committee to answer more questions because gm ceo mary barra wasn't at the top at the time that this all began. however, she was at the company. we bring back jeff flock who is live at a general motors dealership in chicago and lauren fits, the car coach automotive analyst, both here with me. jeff, i'm curious, have you talked to the head of this dealer, and how angry are they or how concerned are they? are they watching this closely on tv or listening on the radio? >> reporter: well, i've talked to a couple of dealers. one says, oh, she's doing fun, others -- she's doing fine, others are concerned about the
message that's getting sent here and the culture at gm which, apparently, insulated -- if you look to ms. barra's left, you see mark royce there, he's the new head of product development for gm. he's been with the company for a long time. his father was president of gm. he said that recall decisions were purposely isolated from the top management. not just the ceo, but all of the top leadership. a lot of people shocked to hear this sort of thing, that it never even gets to them. if you put rick wagner before congress, i suspect what you're going to hear is i didn't know a thing about it. that's, i suspect, what you'll hear from him because it's purposely, they were purposely isolated from these decisions. and that was the other headline from mary barra today, is that from already preliminary finding was that some areas of the company would know something that would not get to another area of the company. it's not very satisfying, but that's the answer we're getting.
liz: lauren, that goes back to your point that there are many, many parts that make up a car, and general motors is a huge, sprawling, great american iconic name, but she's the one in charge right now. what does she need to do, and do you feel that this has not gone very well? i mean, it started off kind of strong and then fell apart from there. >> i think she came out very confident, and i'm sure she was prepared by her attorneys and her whole team, and mark royce probably has also helped her and everybody that she's worked with over the years in quality control and planning and supply chain, i'm sure everyone wants her to do well. but as she was unable to answer questions on information that they kind of already knew what they were going to ask her, she kind of had the book in front of her even in the first few tabs that they were discussing and referencing. i worry that if she doesn't answer the question clearly, i don't know, i don't know, i don't know, it's almost pleading the fifth and that that's not going to help gm as a brand, that's not going to help her. but i also agree with jeff, if
you put rick wagner on, he's going to say, i don't know, i was just a ceo. but then again, you know, he did leave with a $10 million check, and they left everything on us, the taxpayers, and my concern is because they've insulated key players that could have made decisions and say let's do a recall, let's be from active like mary is doing now with current production cars, you know, what's going to all of these potential lawsuits going to go back on us as the taxpayer? are we going to be the ones that are going to have to foot the bill for this? we've got way too many fingers in the soup pot, nhtsa, delphi, gm at fault because of their quality department, and you start to wonder who's going to pay this bill? and i have a sinking, really bad feeling it's going to be us, the taxpayer. liz: excellent point. we thank lauren and, of course, jeff flock. we want to let you know, she just referenced nhtsa, national highway transportation safety, the head of nhtsa will be testifying in just a moment. we're continuing the follow this very closely, closing bell
ringing in less than five minutes with a big rally underway, second day in a row here. but once again can, nothing short of startling as far as this testimony has been concerned. next up, as i mentioned, the head of the national highway traffic safety administration. they were supposed to be watching all of this. every time there's a recall or a problem, they are notified. what will we learn from that? and a news conference where mary barra has said she will go before tv cameras once she is done today. we'll carry it live. david asman, my partner, coming up with me next. ♪ ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ ♪ [ tires screech ] chewley's finds itself in a sticky situation today after recalling its new gum. [ male announcer ] stick it to the market before you get stuck. get the most extensive charting wherever you are with the mobile trader app from td ameritrade. david: well the effect of all this, there does appear to be a little bit of an effect on gm's stock which has just gone negative. by the way, ford is zooming
ahead. let's go right to nicole petallides at the new york stock exchange and let's start with ford. [closing bell ringing] gm has gone negative and ford is up almost 5%. >> ford had the bets margin in eight years lead by the f-series. liz: toyota is also higher, we should mention. let's look, here we have the bells ringing on wall street on another rally day. david: another rally day and a record for the s&p. the dow jones is actually not very far from a record. the record high intraday for the dow jones actually end of day was 16,576. as you can see we're only a couple dozen points away from that. so extraordinarily good day for the markets in general. as you said, liz, this is the second day in a row. liz: yes, indeed and the 7th record for the year so far for the s&p 500. as we join the markets finishing up today we break down today's biggest moves. we have john towey, usaa investments vice president of equity