Driver Insurance Becomes Matter of Foreign Policy

Orange County Register, Business Section ^ | April 9, 2005 | AP

[LNewman]

LOS ANGELES – California Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi said Friday that he will meet with Mexican and Canadian authorities next week to discuss problems caused by drivers who cross borders with phony insurance - or no coverage at all.

"This is all about the safety on our highways," the commissioner said at a news conference. "Policies sold in one country can be worthless once you cross the border, so many truckers simply drive without insurance."

Commercial truck traffic is largely at issue. Mexican trucks have been banned from all U.S. roads outside a 20-mile border zone since 1982. The North American Free Trade Agreement allowed Mexican trucks and buses full access to U.S. roads beginning in 2000, but those changes were postponed.

President George W. Bush said in 2001 that he would allow Mexican trucks access to all U.S. highways, and the Supreme Court ruled that the administration can skip a lengthy environmental study and open U.S. roadways to the trucks as soon as it wishes.

SNIP

About 700 Mexican trucking companies have applied to operate in the United States.

SNIP

The American Insurance Association, an industry group, has been urging Congress to revise NAFTA to permit insurance to cross the border. Mexican trucks coming into the United States must carry two policies, one for Mexico and one valid in this country.

[LNewman]

There are two side-bar columns on this. One states that in January 2003, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that opening the border without evaluating environmental impacts violates federal law. And in January 2004, the US. Supreme Court ruled that an environmental review is not needed to meet NAFTA obligations.

The second is titled "Insurance Issues," and I assume was a contribution from the web site noted at the bottom of the column. Public Citizen.

[raybbr]

ping

[raybbr]

The sidebar you noted:

Insurance issues

The most common violations found in inspections of border zone-only carriers from 1998 to 2000 were insurance matters - 7.5 percent of all carriers inspected lacked coverage.

U.S. officials are required to verify operators' proof of insurance. But there is no way for border inspectors to verify that a driver's paperwork matches the Department of Transportation file, that the coverage is adequate and that it has not lapsed.

Individuals and states or localities harmed by a crash or release of hazardous material could pursue legal action directly against a U.S. carrier. But for accidents involving Mexican carriers, injured parties could only seek compensation in Mexican courts, where U.S. litigants have little success.

www.publiccitizen.org

[HiJinx]

You know, reading the title, I was assuming we were discussing the fallacy of issuing drivers' licenses to illegals so that would buy insurance and become safer drivers.

After reading the article, this is a much more involved issue being discussed.

As a side note...has anyone reading this ever been allowed to pass through a Port of Entry (POE) into either Mexico or Canada without having proof of insurance? Or is what's good for the goose not necessarily good for the gander?

[dalereed]

"But there is no way for border inspectors to verify that a driver's paperwork matches the Department of Transportation file, that the coverage is adequate and that it has not lapsed"

In California you have to carry a card issued by the insurance company with the expiration date or you get a ticket, that's everyone.

[dalereed]

"...has anyone reading this ever been allowed to pass through a Port of Entry (POE) into either Mexico or Canada without having proof of insurance?"

Probably more than 100 times into Mexico!

[HiJinx]

Really? Are you saying you don't need insurance to go to Mexico? I'm surprised...

[dalereed]

The only time that I had to have a mexican insurance policy was to obtain my aircraft cargo permit and for that I had to produce it to the Sec. of Transportation in Mexico City.

I've never bought a Mexican auto policy but I always carried Mexican insurance on the airplane.

The regular policy was real cheap but the one that I had to have to get the commercial cargo permit cost a bundle!

[HiJinx]

Oh, I see.

I would think that having insurance would be smart just as a matter of course.

And this State Department advisory also recommends Mexican Automobile Insurance...
        http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_970.html

[dalereed]

"Are you saying you don't need insurance to go to Mexico?"

You don't need it but if you ever have an accident there you can be a world of hurt until it's all sorted out.

If you only go something like 80 miles into Mexico most US policies cover you.

Keep one thing in mind, in every country except this one including Mexico you are guilty until proven innocent.

When I totaled my airplane there I along with all my passengers were under house arrest until it was sorted out and cleared of any wrong doing.

The passengers were cleared within a couple of days but I was under house arrest for 2 weeks.

I don't want to make it sound gruesome because either the commandante or one of his men would pick me up in the morning and I had free use of his telephone and fax machine and I went home with him and had dinner with his family for the whole time I was there.

In Mexico, it's not what you know, it's who you know!!!!!

[HiJinx]

That confirms what I was thinking, thanks.

I'm glad your experience wasn't as bad as it could have been.

[dalereed]

The bad part was losing a 1/4 million dollar airplane that I only had insured for $50k!

[Founding Father]

I have entered into Canada at Port Huron, Mi., without showing any proof of insurance. They were, however, very interested in weapons and whether or not the kids with us were ours.

[HiJinx]

Ouch. Company took a loss that year.

Thank God nobody was seriously injured.

[dalereed]

"Company took a loss that year"

Wish that was the case, it was my personal aircraft!

[Mamzelle]

I just don't believe this. Yes I do. But I just don't believe this...

[dennisw]

This is what happens when we do the globalist dance and try to merge a developed nation (USA) with the proximate 3rd world nations. You get all kinds of problems. Why on earth would we want to merge with such places? The business interests and multi-kulti leftists push such nonsense

[WilliamofCarmichael]

As for private autos not to worry about our (uninvited) guests. California Senate bill SB590 would virtually exempt our (uninvited) guests from the burden of needing evidence of financial responsibility to drive.

You see, if the poor dears cannot get drivers licenses because they are here ILLEGALLY and the mean old state government refuses to give them licenses then what's a body to do?

Drive anyway of course. They should not suffer the added burden of being in a whole lot of trouble for having no car insurance -- they are not citizens, ya know. Only citizens should face that burden. SB590 relieves them of that worry.

And what of the nasty local governments that impound cars of people caught driving without a license? Again, the California Senate to the rescue! SB 591 lessens the time that's required to hold impounded: vehicles if the mean old state government refuses to give the violators drivers licenses. The time it takes the officer to write a ticket should do just fine, thank you.

And to think that talk show hosts call Sen. Gil Cedillo "one bill Gil" for pushing drivers licenses for ILLEGAL immigrants 24/7. Why here's two more plus he has any number of bills rushing medial insurance to our uninvited guests.

BTW, the Democrat representative of Mexico thinks the world of President Bush and his immigration policy. His web site positively gushes with admiration of the President.

[Dust in the Wind]

"In California you have to carry a card issued by the insurance company with the expiration date or you get a ticket, that's everyone.

I believe it is the same in Kansas and Colorado.