Posted on 03/13/2007 11:49:26 PM PDT by Dallas59
Public Citizen sued the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) today on behalf of a highway safety organization to compel the agency to release information about a controversial program to allow Mexico-domiciled trucks on all U.S. highways.
The nonprofit group Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with FMCSA in October 2006 for information about activities surrounding any program to evaluate Mexico-domiciled motor carriers that would be permitted to operate beyond the Mexico-United States border zone.
No details about the methodology for evaluating this "project" or its criteria have been revealed, yet public safety is at stake, Public Citizen said.
The group is particularly concerned with how such a program would comply with congressional restrictions and safeguards established in the 2002 U.S. Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act and the statute that governs pilot projects.
In February 2007, the Bush administration announced a 12-month pilot project to allow Mexico-domiciled trucks to operate beyond the border zone. Although agencies are required to respond to FOIA requests within 20 working days, FMCSA has not provided the requested documents about the program for months. The lawsuit seeks to require the agency to produce the materials requested.
"FMCSA has been stonewalling us by not supplying the information on this program," said Jackie Gillan, vice president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety. "We've been forced to sue because the agency has been trying to keep this material out of the public domain."
Highway safety groups maintain that the administration's proposed project fails to comply with congressionally mandated safety requirements, which must precede implementation of a 2001 NAFTA order requiring the border to be open to Mexico-domiciled trucks traveling throughout the United States, and fails to comply with rules governing the conduct of pilot projects.
"In the seven years of its existence, FMCSA has proven it does not have the manpower or political will to adequately monitor and regulate the U.S. trucking industry to protect public safety," said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook.
"Under this so-called pilot project, whose details are still secret, the agency will be responsible for protecting the public from potentially dangerous Mexico-domiciled trucks. It just isn't up to the job. We need to know what it is doing."
bookmark
Subject the Mexican carriers to the same rules and regs of US truckers. Then if they fit the bill, let them drive on US highways with their junk that will never pass inspections. No 'ifs' 'ands' or 'buts'.... even play across the board, I say.
Institute a special law that also requires all out of country trucks to carry US based insurance coverage if they log more than 1000 miles a month out of the border areas.
Of course W and Wiley Fox will never do anything to insure the fair competition.
His take is that the same rules will not apply; and that Mexico-style corruption is already occurring in many areas where there is a lot of Mexican influence.
The example he gave was a delivery to a "certain" large Texas-based grocery chain - he was on-time for his delivery, as specified by the warehouse.
The shipper/receiver walked out to his truck and said "you missed your appointment (he didn't), but if you pay me $100 cash, I'll get you back in within half an hour" - after this happened twice in a row, his freight brokers told the shipping customer that they would not be accepting freight to be delivered to that company any longer. Calls to the chain's middle management, which due to affirmative action also employed people with Mexican backgrounds, resulted in no action.
Concerning tickets given by state troopers, the company will not be charged as the only thing they ask for is driver's license - it's all about raising revenue. Mexican drivers might be ticketed, but they will get a new license when the old ones have too many tickets on it.
The US has been doing exactly that since 1996.
Consequently, Mexico was awarded a $2 billion per year judgement against the US in 2001, a few weeks after Bush entered office.
The individual states have their own DOT to enforce motor carrier regulations. Each truck that passes over the scales are visually inspected by the weigh master via close circut TV. If the weigh master suspects a defect, that truck will be required to pull off to the inspection area.
When these Mexican truck companies begin to find their trucks being impounded for violations or their drivers not having their log books properly filled out, they will find the weight of the law on them.
They have been crossing the US to reach Canada since '96 without any problems.
There is a substantial amount of cross-border ownership in the trucking industry.
These are businessmen. Their business model is not based on breaking regulations.
Only you or one of the other open borders crowd would make such a statement. Mexico is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. They live by bribes and cheating and that includes the businesses.
Good for them. Having traveled extensively, I've seen third world trucks on a first hand basis and they simply do not belong on American highways.
Maybe you can show me some of the bribery related to the mex trucks in the US and Canada?
It was never fair in the past to be stricter on the Mexican trucks.
Thanks for the info....I did not realize that was the case.
The $2 bln. / yr judgment was a farce (smoke screen) to line Fox's pockets and the elite Mexican business men's pockets and US freight businesses operating in Mexico. If you want to ever do significant business in Mexico....payoffs are the norm for all foreigners.
It guarantees a comfortable level of security (protection) from the Mexican thugs.
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.