It's been a long time since a General Motors president proclaimed, "What's good for GM is good for America." With the federal government turning its back on Detroit's requests for the kind of support offered U.S. airlines, it's clear at least that President Bush doesn't believe GM's success is essential to our country's well-being. In Michigan, however, it's another matter. There's not a sentient soul in this state who doesn't feel a nervous identification with GM and its workers, as well as those of Delphi, Visteon, Ford, DaimlerChrysler and the rest of the troubled Detroit industry.

The collapse of domestic autos' market share and profits is spreading pain throughout this state. Public financial support for everything from kindergarten through higher education and from state parks to urban redevelopment is spiraling downward. As public funds dry up, they are carrying away the high quality-of-life services that used to be a hallmark of Michigan. Here at the Michigan Environmental Council, we are particularly distressed about the decimation of the Department of Environmental Quality budget and the virtual elimination of general fund support for the Department of Natural Resources. We already know we'll be working hard to defeat the destructive tax initiatives we anticipate will be on the ballot this fall.

However, the best decisions in Lansing and by our electorate will not compensate for economic losses that come out of poor management decisions made by Michigan's largest industry. With an expanding global economy and the crushing truth of greenhouse gas-induced climate change, Michigan is simultaneously confronting radically demanding environmental and economic stresses. Success will surely require smarter management decisions by auto leaders as well as support from our federal government.

Non-Michigan-based auto companies are thriving in part because their sustained investments in attractive fuel-efficient vehicles are paying off, and in part because they are not burdened with legacy costs for retirees' health care that the old Big Three must carry. To get back in the game, Detroit autos must make vehicles that will sell in spite of shockingly high gasoline costs and in a radically carbon-constrained world economy. To survive, Detroit autos are going to have to invest in real changes, rather than in tepid reforms and expensive rear-guard battles against the inevitable higher mandated fuel efficiency standards.

Instead of putting millions of dollars into a fight against the several states that have already followed California's lead in demanding low greenhouse gas emitting vehicles, our auto companies should tackle the real problems they face. They should call a truce with these states and with the environmental groups that have been fighting for higher fuel efficiency standards known as CAFE (for Corporate Average Fuel Economy) reform.

Sen. Barak Obama of Illinois has proposed a "Hybrids for Healthcare" exchange in which the auto companies would get new CAFE standards in exchange for assistance in meeting the costs of retiree health care. While we are waiting for auto leadership to be as bold as the times demand, Michigan's delegation in Washington would do their anxious constituents a favor if they stepped up to help out in this critical fight for Michigan's future.