House pushes for data about GM defect
WASHINGTON — Congress' investigation of a deadly defect in some General Motors cars widened on Tuesday, and a House committee ordered the automaker and a federal regulator to provide details on steps they took to get unsafe cars off the road.
In another development, federal prosecutors in New York are examining whether GM is criminally liable for failing to properly disclose the defect, according to a source familiar with that investigation.
The malfunction, which first came to light a decade ago and involves more than 1.6 million GM vehicles, has been linked to 13 deaths and prompted a recent recall by the automaker. The defect, a problem with the ignition switch in some GM cars, could cause cars to stall, airbags to fail and other problems while moving at high speeds.
The supplier of the ignition switch, Delphi Automotive Plc, said on Tuesday that the part had not been provided to any other automaker.
The congressional inquiry expanded to the Senate as Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller moved to launch hearings.
In the House, the Energy and Commerce Committee sent letters to GM CEO Mary Barra and National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration Acting Administrator David Friedman seeking information on their responses to consumers' complaints about the problem. They set a deadline of March 25 for the information.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Calif. oil slick expected to dissipate
- Defense memo reveals plan to protect transgender troops
- Cruz switches targets, takes exception with IRS practices
- Cincy officer indicted on murder charge in fatal shooting of motorist
- Mich. high court strikes down mandatory fees for state employees in unions
- New TSA administrator vows training to address security gaps
- Ohio cop indicted on murder charge in traffic-stop shooting
- Obama hopes he has enough votes to sustain a potential veto of Iran nuke deal; pro-Israel groups aim to stop it
- House approves bill targeting VA staffers
- 911 dispatcher hung up on caller before wounded teen’s death in June
- Hope dims for Fla. teens lost at sea