Thank you, Congressman, for continuing the fight against this not-so-secret policy of a borderless America...
Posted on 03/29/2007 8:39:14 AM PDT by Calpernia
The Department of Transportation pilot test designed to allow 100 Mexican trucking companies to run their long-haul rigs anywhere in the U.S. has encountered opposition, both in Congress and in Mexico.
Meanwhile, plans to implement the test are progressing at the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, as announced by the Department of Transportation in February.
Scott Gerber, spokesman for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., confirmed to WND the senator's amendment approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee March 22 to block the test remains in the Emergency Spending Bill on the floor of the Senate.
The amendment, co-sponsored by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., would prohibit the use of funds to allow Mexican trucks beyond the 20-to-25-mile commercial zone on the U.S.-Mexican border until U.S. trucks are given comparable access to Mexico.
"It is simply unfair to American truckers to restrict their access to Mexico while Mexican drivers are given unrestricted access to U.S. highways on a faster timetable," Feinstein said in a statement. "This amendment will prevent this from happening."
In the House of Representatives, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., has scheduled a press conference for tomorrow to announce the introduction of a NAFTA Trucking Safety Act. The bill is designed to clarify and strengthen current regulations imposed on Mexican motor carriers entering the U.S. beyond commercial zones along the international border.
"This legislation will ensure Mexican truckers are held to the same standards as their American counterparts," Joe Kasper, spokesman for Hunter, told WND. "If Mexican motor carriers cannot meet the same safety and security requirements as American truckers, then they should not be allowed to access our nation's roadways and communities."
In Mexico, a trade association representing Mexican motor carriers has asked the Mexican Senate to cancel the pilot test.
Tirso Martinez Angheben, president of CANCAR, the Camara Nacional Del Autotransporte de Carga, told the Communication and Transportation Committee of the Mexican Senate this week the NAFTA competitive environment was unfair to the Mexican trucking industry.
According to Angheben, U.S.-based trucking companies have invested in infrastructure within Mexico, allowing U.S. truckers to establish a "commercial presence in our country," while prohibitions on Mexican truckers investing in the U.S. create "a commercial disadvantage of great importance."
In a statement running on the group's website, Angheben objected that DOT regulations for Mexican trucks operating in the U.S. "include uneven regulation for Mexican carriers that will not guarantee a fair competitive market in U.S. territory."
In 2001, CANCAR asked the Mexican Senate to cancel the trucking provisions of NAFTA.
"The majority of people in the United States don't want Mexican trucks to go there, and we told our president that we don't want to go, either," CANCAR president Manuel Gomez told the Mexican Senate in 2001. "Nor are we interested in having U.S. trucks come to Mexico."
CANCAR expressed concern the pilot program would "generate strong pressure on salaries paid to Mexican drivers, which in turn will increase the cost of domestic freight in Mexico."
CANCAR is also worried that the Mexican government "lacks the capacity and infrastructure to supervise U.S. carriers entering Mexico and to prevent foreign companies from providing domestic transportation only reserved for Mexican nationals."
Ian Grossman, spokesman for the FMCSA, told WND his group plans to move forward with the DOT pilot test as announced.
"The cross-border trucking demonstration program will bring real benefits and real dollars to the American economy, while maintaining all U.S. safety and security standards," Grossman said. "The department is committed to moving forward with this program and will continue to work with members of Congress to address their concerns."
ping
Teamsters should be screaming bloody murder. But no. See Unions riding wave of Democrats at:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1807871/posts
Every American killed by a Mexican truck is a homicide committed by our leaders..
Every comment like yours is like a thread homicide.
Another nail in the coffin of the Unions. The Unions are supposed to be supporting US workers.
When NAFTA regulations we wrote
We didn’t plan on getting into boat
We forgot Teamstar Truckers
Are real mother *
And boy can they turn out the vote
Thank you, Congressman, for continuing the fight against this not-so-secret policy of a borderless America...
The teamsters are opposed. It's the first thing Google brought up when I searched "Teamsters union and Mexican trucks". Also the Teamsters aren't as powerful in the trucking industry as many seem to believe. Union drivers only make up about 15%.
This is one of the few times I'll line up with the leftists and unions. This looks like a (road) accident waiting to happen with little recourse for those who are killed and injured.
Supposedly the Mexican drivers/companies are going to be insured but I've seen a lot of automotive illegals in Texas and Arizona with bad equipment and no liability.
Too bad. In the end they will be among the losers.
How many times have I pointed out to you that these Mexican trucks must have insurance by a federally-approved carrier? More than a dozen?
Man, just two days. I don't even link to the regulations anymore. Maybe I will just one more time, if only to embarass you.
Are you guaranteeing that these regulations will be enforced as well as our immigration laws? LOL
Sure if you can prove who owns the truck, if you can prove who was driving the truck, and if you can prove it wasn't stolen. Of course any Mexican truck that is in a bad accident will have been reported stolen the day before in Mexico, however the paper work was delayed, etc, etc.
A policy of insurance or surety bond does not satisfy the financial responsibility requirements of this subpart unless the insurer or surety furnishing the policy or bond is— (a) Legally authorized to issue such policies or bonds in each State in which the motor carrier operates; or (b) Legally authorized to issue such policies or bonds in the State in which the motor carrier has its principal place of business or domicile, and is willing to designate a person upon whom process, issued by or under the authority of any court having jurisdiction of the subject matter, may be served in any proceeding at law or equity brought in any State in which the motor carrier operates; or (c) Legally authorized to issue such policies or bonds in any State of the United States and eligible as an excess or surplus lines insurer in any State in which business is written, and is willing to designate a person upon whom process, issued by or under the authority of any court having jurisdiction of the subject matter, may be served in any proceeding at law or equity brought in any State in which the motor carrier operates. State authority and designation of agent.
Just as easy for me to assume that they will, as for you to assume they will not.
Using conservative estimates I can think of 12 million reasons to doubt the laws will be enforced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.