As it appears increasingly likely that Democratic leaders will be able to force their way past conservative opposition to authorize a bailout for the U.S. auto industry, critics are increasingly focusing on why this bailout is even more problematic and risky than the Fed’s continuing efforts to rescue the financial industry.  The problem is that the issues that plague the auto industry are structural, not circumstantial, and thus a bailout is likely to be merely a down payment on a continual torret of red ink.

The Wall Street Journal summarizes a key problem — the bailout is premised on a business plan that appeals to environmental activists rather than the consumers that actually will have to start buying the cars produced by Detroit:

The fuel-efficient “green” cars GM, Ford and Chrysler profess to be thrilled to be developing at Congress’s behest will be unsellable unless gas prices are much higher than today’s.

“Very few people will want to change what has been their ‘nationality-given’ right to drive big and bigger if the price of gas is $1.50 or $2.00 or even $2.50,” Mr. Lutz explained. “Those prices will put the CAFE-mandated manufacturers at war with their customers — and no one will win in that battle.”

Translation: To become “viable,” as Congress chooses crazily to understand the term, the Big Three are setting out to squander billions on products that will have to be dumped on consumers at a loss.

Piled on top of the fact that the bailout does nothing to address the continuing competitiveness problems that derive from the fact that unionized U.S. auto workers are grossly overpaid in comparison to workers at competing companies, and it all adds up to the conclusion that the unusual spectacle of Democrats pushing a bailout for industry while being opposed by Republicans is a result of the fact that Democrats are pushing a payoff to its political bases more than a viable economic strategy.

Of course, what’s $15 billion between friends?