Posted on 01/04/2008 2:48:57 PM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is going ahead with a controversial pilot program giving Mexican trucks greater access to U.S. highways despite a new law by Congress against it.
The decision to proceed with the four-month-old program, which allows participating Mexican trucking companies to send loads throughout the United States, comes despite language in the recently signed catchall spending bill aimed at blocking it.
But the Department of Transportation is taking advantage of a loophole in the new law, which prohibits the government from spending any money to "establish" the program. The government says the new rules don't apply to the current program since it was started in September.
"The U.S. Department of Transportation will not establish any new demonstration programs with Mexico," said Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration spokeswoman Melissa Mazzella DeLaney. "The current cross-border trucking demonstration project — established in September — will continue to operate in a manner that puts safety first."
Congressional opponents of the programs insist that it's clear what lawmakers were trying to do last year when both House and Senate voted against allowing the program to go forward.
The provision, as signed by President Bush last month, says: "None of the funds made available under this act may be used to establish a cross-border motor carrier demonstration program to allow Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones along the international border between the United States and Mexico."
"They know what the law says," retorted Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who won a 74-24 vote to block the program. "And they're not above the law." Dorgan warned they better follow the law.
The hotly contested program, opposed by labor, independent truck owners and environmental groups, permits up to 500 trucks from 100 Mexican motor carriers full access to U.S. roads.
Opponents have been fighting the measure — part of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement — since it was first proposed, saying the program will erode highway safety and eliminate U.S. jobs. And they say that there are insufficient safeguards exist to make sure that Mexican trucks are as safe as U.S. carriers.
"When you open up U.S. highways to long-haul Mexican trucks without equivalent safety standards, it poses risks for American drivers," Dorgan said.
Supporters of the plan say letting more Mexican trucks on U.S. highways will save American consumers hundreds of millions of dollars. And they say U.S. trucking companies will benefit since reciprocal changes in Mexico's rules permit U.S. trucks new access to that country.
Since 1982, Mexican trucks have had to stop within a buffer border zone and transfer their loads to U.S. trucks.
Still, there's widespread opposition to the program within Congress. The House voted without a roll call in July to block the program and the Senate's 3-to-1 margin in September to block it came despite administration assurances that safeguards are in place to "ensure a safe and secure program."
The Teamsters Union, Sierra Club and Public Citizen joined together in a lawsuit filed in August seeking to block the program.
A hearing is scheduled for Feb. 12 before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Teamsters spokeswoman Leslie Miller said.
I watched Obama”s acceptance speach last night and for the and heard nothing of substance, just “change”.
PING
I had forgotten and dont remember which day.
Right. Not only fed up, but fractured, few are united for anything. Unfortunately it seems half the people in the country have their heads up their up their a***s. Throw in tens of millions of people that don't even belong here, are not Americans, and could care less about becoming Americans and it's a recipe for chaos, dissension, anger, and lawlessness.
I hardly recognize the GOP and have much contempt for them negotiating conservative principles at low bidder and wholesale discount prices.
What this government is becoming, scares me to death.
I wonder how long it’s going to take for the people of this country to wake up to the realization this Administration...with lots of enabling by Congress....thumbs their collective noses at rule of law and our Constitution on an almost daily basis...since when is ANYONE above the law in this country??? well I guess we know.
Are you familiar with EPI? Or did you just post something you found in a Google search? The reason I ask is because I’ve always been surprised by the number of people here that do not realize it is (for all practical purposes) the economics think-tank of the DNC.
“The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent”
I did a yahoo search, read it, thought at the time it sounded waaaaaayyyy Leftist, but posted it anyway as some of it rang a tad of truth as does the Union arguments against the Mexican Trucking program. Many here at FR have posted their own dismay at having to agree with the Union on this topic.
Include me in the dismayed, but more reading about NAFTA causes me to wonder WHY the 1993 agreement signed by Clinton in 1994 cannot be undone. Why does GW have to persue this agreement that isn’t truly a sanctioned treaty, but another coerced by Clinton situation?
If you think about it in terms of contract law, you need to look at NAFTA's recission clause, that I imagine it has. One cannot go back to a contract after it is signed to pick and choose the provisions one wishes to uphold. One needs to tear-up the contract.
Everything Congress and the President does seems to have one goal: don’t let the economy slow down...for any reason. Keep bringing people in. Keep expanding.
This creates the illusion of a good economy, but allows more income to temporarily deal with the increasing costs of government programs.
All the time this slides back the day of financial reckoning; while increasing the liabilities. Hey, if you have to go bankrupt you might as well do it for billions of dollars instead of a few pennies.
Am I making sense here? It’s the only reason I can think of.
It’s for our ‘own good’ and never question the powers that be, or the corporations that hold them accountable /sarc
NAFTA is not a treaty, it is an agreement. Treaties require 2/3 in senate. Agreements only need a simple majority.
He has never worked a day in his life.
Next on the globalist agenda is the NAFTA super highway. The NAFTA super highway will let Chicom shippers avoid high wage dock worker/trucker in US ports, instead the Chicoms will ship goods to Mexico and Mexican (low wage) labor will move the stuff. Bush never passes up an opportunity to screw American labor.
Even Schwarzenegger and the California legislature hopped on the "let's screw the worker" bandwagon. You need to focus on the direct causes, not your alleged proximate ones.
hard to believe otherwise and undermines everything Bush claims to be doing to protect USA
thanks for your post and your patriotism!!
Amen and dont forget Ramos and Compean in your prayers!!
dont be!!
It would be a good question to ask all the candidates in these next two debates. Both Pub and Dem. After all, with the fence now dead, why not put the onus of these people to say what they would do if elected?
How old are you? NAFTA is effectively Reagan's idea. And yes he was the first to try to get it done. He campaigned on a free trade agreement with Mexico during his first successful run.
BTW, Reagan SIGNED AND GRANTED AMNESTY TO MILLIONS WHILE HE WAS IN OFFICE. Going to tell me that isn't true either?
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.