Speaking about the bankruptcy of General Motors at the White House this morning, President Obama sought to reassure Americans that he's not interested in being the CEO of a car company. After praising Chrylser for its surprisingly swift moves to restructure through bankruptcy and sale to Fiat, the President spoke carefully and soberly about the "unwelcome position" the government has found itself in as a major shareholder in the struggling auto giant. Part of the restructuring plan GM has formulated involves granting the government a 60% stake in the company in exchange for $30 billion, bringing the total government commitment to GM to nearly $50 billion. Obama called the government "reluctant shareholders" in GM, but said that another alternative - loaning the company more capital - would have been irresponsible as GM is already weighed down by enormous amounts of debt. "What we are not doing -- what I have no interest in doing -- is running GM," Obama said. "The federal government will refrain from exercising its rights as a shareholder in all but the most fundamental corporate decisions.  When a difficult decision has to be made on matters like where to open a new plant or what type of new car to make, the new GM, not the United States government, will make that decision.In short, our goal is to get GM back on its feet, take a hands-off approach, and get out quickly."

The President is engaged in a delicate balancing act here. On the one hand, Americans are suspicious of government interference in the free market. Taxpayers don't want to be de facto shareholders in failing businesses either. But on the other hand, in order for the government to realize any real return on its investments (and therefore for taxpayers to see direct benefits from it), the government needs to retain it share until GM sees profits, or at least a healthy cash flow, again. So the real question for the President is this: How do you define "get out quickly"? And what is the criteria for making that decision? What benefits can taxpayers expect the Government to reap from this massive investment? Is there an expectation for any of the capital to be recouped? Or is simply staving off complete failure enough?

Interestingly, Republicans have been almost silent on the GM plan. Although such deep government investment in a corporation is no doubt an anathema to most free market GOPers, nobody wants to be the guy saying this iconic American company should fail.