Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. She is currently on leave.
More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero � all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

Feds Raid Solyndra Offices

By Megan McArdle
Sep 8 2011, 3:16 PM ET Comment

One of the things that lots of wonks--including me--have commented on is how scandal-free the Obama Administration has been so far.  To be sure, I'm not sure whether that's because they're "unusually clean", as I recently heard someone say, or because scandals take a little time to brew, so they tend to break later in an administration.


We may be about to find out.  As many of you no doubt know, a few days ago, clean energy firm Solyndra filed for bankruptcy.  Why would this be a problem for the administration? Because in September 2009, they got a low-interest $500 million loan from the government to develop their solar panels:

The $535 million loan to Solyndra Inc., issued by the U.S. Department of Treasury's Federal Financing Bank, included a quarterly interest rate of 1.025 percent, the government bank reported in July. Of 18 Energy Department loans cited in the bank's report, Solyndra's rate was lowest. Eight other Energy Department projects, each also backed by the Federal Financing Bank, came with rates three or four times higher, the report shows.

That treatment is in keeping with the history of the loan to the California solar panel maker, an arrangement inked in September 2009 with great fanfare -- and touted, not long after, during a factory visit from the president. Monthly government bank reports filed since then reveal Solyndra's rate as the lowest for any energy-related project in nearly every report; in every case its rate was well below that of most energy projects, which ranged from cutting-edge electric car makers to wind and solar ventures.

At best this looks amazingly incompetent--$535 million may not be a lot of money for the government, but it's a lot of money for a company.  Yet it took only two years for the firm to run through all that cash.  


It turns out that Solyndra has never made a profit since its founding, and by early 2010, its auditor was making unhappy noises about the company's viability.  That was the year that Obama himself visited Solyndra and said "You're demonstrating that the promise of clean energy isn't just an article of faith. .  .  .  It's happening right now. The future is here."  I expect that that clip is going to get rehearsed a lot as his opponents question his judgement.

At worst, it looks . . . worse. One of the firm's biggest investors was George Kaiser, a major "bundler" for Obama who raised tons of money for the 2008 campaign.

All that was bad enough.  Then today, the FBI staged a raid on Solyndra's offices, in partnership with the Department of Energy's inspector general.  This may simply be an attempt to answer the question we'd all like to know--how the hell did they manage to piss away all that money in just two short years?  On the other hand, it also raises the possibility of criminal fraud.

Either way, what are the possibilities?  The DOE was incompetent enough to give a sweetheart loan to a highly speculative firm that was probably already on the financial rocks when we inked the deal . . . or someone put their thumb on the scales.  As bad as it looks, I find the latter hard to believe, because a lot of civil servants would have had to know about it, and would this really have stayed secret?

The innocent explanation is better, but it's not good: it calls the administration's competency into question at a time when they're already struggling with terrible job approval numbers, and it tarnishes one of Obama's marquee initiatives.  

That's the problem with these sorts of loan programs: even if they aren't vulnerable to old fashioned corruption, they're vulnerable to the appearance of it (rich people like to donate to campaigns, and there are only two major parties, after all; chances are close to50-50 that the squeakiest loan is going to benefit a contributor.)

Moreover, they're also still vulnerable to political influence.  Venture capitalists, at least in theory, lend money to firms like Solyndra because they think that doing so will make them more money.  Government programs lend money to firms like Solyndra because they want to lend money to "green" firms.  They don't lend until the returns drop below some threshold; they lend until they run out of the money that Congress has authorized them to lend.

When banks engage in this sort of behavior, we call it a bubble, and try to figure out how to fix things so they won't do it again.  When government agencies do this, we call it a weekday.

Even if the loan turns out to have been made according to all proper procedures, the Obama administration will still confront the charge that these procedures are an idiotic waste of money.

I don't know that this is going to be the administration's first real scandal.  But it sure looks like a good candidate.




Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Does the Supreme Court Believe in Double Jeopardy Protections? Does the Supreme Court Believe in Double Jeopardy Protections?
Study of the Weekend: Keep Your Commute to Less Than 15 Miles (Or Else) The Deadly Commute
Meet the 'Fly Boys' of Memphis, the Future of American Education Meet the 'Fly Boys' of Memphis, the Future of Education
'Tis the Season to be Hateful (in Sports) It's Okay to Hate Sports Stars
How the Global Middle Class Can Save the American Middle Class How the Global Middle Class Can Save America's Middle Class

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Where in the World? Part 3: A Google Earth Puzzle

May 25, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why You Can’t Get a Taxi

And how an upstart company may change that

Europe’s Real Crisis

The Continent’s problems are as much demographic as financial. They won’t go away soon.

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…