Posted on 06/02/2009 4:38:43 AM PDT by radar101
MEXICO CITY -- A Mexican trade association representing more than 4,500 trucking companies is seeking $6 billion in damages from the U.S. government because of Washington's refusal to allow Mexican trucks to carry cargo over U.S. roads.
The group, Canacar, filed a demand for arbitration under the North American Free Trade Agreement with the U.S. State Department in April, but didn't publicize the move until Monday.
"We want reciprocity," said Pedro Ojeda, a lawyer for Canacar. "The U.S. has notoriously not kept its commitments." Mr. Ojeda said the complaint is the largest such demand made under Nafta, as the 1993 pact is known.
Deborah Mesloh, a spokeswoman for U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, said Monday that, "We take our trade obligations very seriously and this is an issue we've been working on for a couple months." A State Department spokesman said the claim is "being studied."
The arbitration demand is the latest fallout from legislation signed earlier this year by President Barack Obama canceling a pilot program that had allowed Mexican trucks to carry cargo on U.S. roads. In March, the Mexican government retaliated by slapping tariffs on $2.4 billion of U.S. goods.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
We did. we ran the PILOT program and it ended.
The PILOT program wasn't part of the agreement.
Let me be a little more precise.
See the link at #62 NAFTA’s tribunals SUCK!
Great idea!
Tell ya’ what, why don’t you give us an executive summary of that Public Citizen piece, specifically focusing on the conclusions with which you agree, and which support the argument you think you’re making.
You’re asking him to think? LOL!
Imagine someone finding something titled, "Gitmo Sucks," by Human Rights Watch.
He likes Johnny Cash, he doesn’t have to read.
If you want to have a look at the actual document from the arbitration panel on Mexican trucks I can give you a link.
My reply #45 describes it.
International tribunals are a NWO method of undermining our laws and sovereignty eventually leading to a world government. Trade agreements are designed help that along.
And you thought it was all about making a buck.
I saw it when I Googled *NAFTA chapter 11* but, thanks anyway. The fact they use *tribunals* turns me off.
Ok, so you didn’t read it, either. Have you read the U.S. Supreme Court opinion allowing the Mexican trucks?
Bump for later.
http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/FTBs/FTB-013.pdf
Fact is. I don't agree with the decision. You can't throw existing environmental laws out the window for the sake of *free* trade and IMO, putting trust in international *tribunals* will lead us into a Socialist, one world government.
You never addressed those issues.
I'll go back to my comment in #65. You should focus on the reasoning with which you disagree, and post it here if you wish to avoid leaving the impression that you are being played for a sucker. And by that, specifically, I mean that you have started with your conclusions (1. environmental laws are being thrown out the window, and 2. we are placing our trust in international tribunals) and working backwards. With regard to 1., in particular, you have assumed the conclusion of a bunch of lefties as your own.
There's nothing wrong with working backwards sometimes, mind you, except that this time 1. the law was upheld by unanimous decision, and 2. the tribunal is the U.S. Supreme Court. In other words, the facts you are citing don't support your conclusions. And that's what you get for associating with commielibs like Public Citizen, the Environmental Law Foundation, and the International Brotherhood (hey, that's an interesting choice of term) of Teamsters.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=03-358.
I appreciate your trying to explain your opinions on this matter but, I have my own.
Here in Texas, we live adjacent to Mexico and have to deal with these, IMO, dangerous and sub-par vehicles on OUR roadways. (along with the drug dealers, human smuggler, illegals, etc)
For someone living in the northern reaches of our country to tell me I'm a Leftist/commie for my concerns over this subject, sounds ludicrous.
In may view, you and yours are the ones who are being Suckered.
Prepare to be disappointed, however . . . you don't have a monopoly on them.
And all I'm saying is that you have chosen to agree with the portion of what they are saying that is wrong, and that you have chosen to rationalize it by posting information that you haven't read.
Style over substance. Emotion over reason.
“why don’t you move to the northern reaches of our country”
Cause I’m a TEXAN and we don’t don’t run. You, OTOH, don’t have a clue about what happens here.
Smell ya later.
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.