Mexico Trucker Online Articles

Stop the Madness: A Public Thank You For Correcting a Broken Trucking Promise

Sun sets over potato fields owned by Koompin Farms in American Falls Idaho

By Cheryl Koompin – American Falls, Idaho
Amid all the partisan fights in Washington over budgets and debt ceilings, the Obama administration quietly solved a $2-billion problem earlier this month.

On July 6, the United States signed an agreement with Mexico that ends a vexing dispute over trade and trucks. It wipes out Mexican tariffs that have hurt potato farmers like me as well as many other Americans during the toughest economic times many of us have ever experienced.

We already face enough challenges on America’s farms, from worrying about the weather to figuring out how we’re going to pay for skyrocketing fuel and fertilizer costs. The last thing we need is interference from Washington—but that’s precisely what we received when Congress decided to break a treaty promise to Mexico.

The White House deserves congratulations for putting a stop to this nonsense. The controversy never should have erupted in the first place and it dragged on for far too long. Right now, however, I’m just glad it’s over—and I’m pleased to give the Obama administration the credit it deserves for negotiating a good settlement.

The root of the problem has been the refusal of Congress to abide by a provision of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Clinton-era economic compact aimed at easing the flow of goods and services across the borders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States.

NAFTA has achieved its main goal of boosting trade ties with our closest neighbors. Because of the agreement, U.S. exports are up and our costs as consumers have gone down.

At the behest of special-interest groups and their allies in Congress, however, one provision of NAFTA failed to become a reality. Long-haul Mexican truckers were supposed to receive access to U.S. highways as they delivered products to American consumers who wanted them. This aspect of the treaty made economic sense because it eliminated many of the delays and inefficiencies associated with border crossings, which translate into higher prices for ordinary Americans. It also guaranteed that Mexican truckers would meet U.S. safety standards.

Just as this part of the deal was going into effect, Big Labor launched an ugly campaign against Mexican truckers, suggesting that they drive dangerous jalopies that threaten murder and mayhem on American roads. This was pure propaganda. Mexican trucks that were certified to drive on U.S. highways were as trustworthy as American trucks. Safety data proved it.

Unfortunately, the smear job worked. Congress blocked the trucks from entering the United States, even though this meant backing out of an international treaty obligation.

So the Mexican government retaliated. They legally slapped stiff tariffs on a wide range of American products, including the frozen potato products that are at the heart of my farming operation here in Idaho. They also targeted dozens of other U.S. agricultural goods, such as cherries, pears, and Christmas trees.

My farm’s sales to Mexico plummeted. Processing plants in our region laid off workers. A couple of them shuttered.

Who benefited? The Canadians. Their business went up as much as ours went down.

I was furious—not at the Mexicans, who simply wanted a fair shake, but at our own government for flouting its commitments and essentially inviting this retaliation. Farmers like me became casualties in a trade war that we neither started nor wanted.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that American businesses lost $2 billion. This was Washington’s accomplishment in the service of a special interest.

So I’m glad this madness is finally over. Better late than never.

“We have an agreement that not only will ultimately eliminate punitive tariffs, but it also provides opportunities to increase U.S. exports to Mexico and helps to expand jobs,” said Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.

The deal also restores our country’s reputation because it finally puts us in compliance with treaty obligations we had ignored for years. If we refuse to keep promises to one of our closest trading partners, other nations will be reluctant to lower tariffs on anything made in America.

Let’s hope that the Obama administration now builds upon this success and finds new ways to help us export our goods and services.

Cheryl Koompin is a partner in Koompin farms, producing commercial and seed potatoes, feed corn, fresh peas, wheat, medicinal safflower and mustard in Power County, Idaho. Cheryl is a guest author for Truth About Trade & Technology. www.truthabouttrade.org

 
Cross posted from AGWEB

Is Racism at work in Border Trucking debate?

Mexican T-660 Kenworth southbound for Monterrey on Mx 85

That’s the question posed on the blog “ALL THAT’S TRUCKING” as she writes about the many nasty, racially tinged comments being thrown about as the red hot debate over Mexican cross border trucking heats up once again, and the usual actors, OOIDA, TEAMSTERS and their allies in talk radio fan the flames of their listeners prejudices.   “Is racism rearing its ugly head in the debate over the long-delayed opening of the border to long-haul Mexican trucks, as required under the North American Free Trade Agreement that was signed nearly 20 years ago? I’m not saying anyone who opposes opening the border is racist or prejudiced, but in reading and listening to some of the comments on the debate, I can’t help but think it’s a factor.” says Deborah Lockridge, Editor in Chief at truckinginfo.com She goes on to write;

Many in this country appear to believe in a stereotype of Hispanics as lazy, greasy, thieving good-for-nothings — you know, the guy in the sombrero sleeping under the cactus. But in case you haven’t looked lately, Mexican immigrants (both legal and illegal) have become a vital part of our economy. Check out “A gringo in the lettuce fields” and think about how long you could keep up with one of these “lazy” migrant workers. Back in 2004, the film “A Day Without a Mexican” tried to “make the invisible visible” by taking a satirical look at what would happen to California if its Mexican population suddenly disappeared. Lawn work? Restaurants? Nannies? Construction crews? Maids? Car washes? Nada. So I wonder: Are some in the trucking industry letting racism, either consciously or subconsciously, affect their views on the wisdom of opening the border?

You can read the rest of the article here We tend to agree with her, especially after reading some of the 2274 comments received following the call to comment on the Cross Border Proposal by FMCSA. Comments such as this one, calling into question an FMCSA officials heritage, as if it matters.

This Mexican trucker issue is an insult to every hard working American!! (noting you are Mexican or of Mexican descent?). I have put much thought toward this issue and have come up with many reasons this should not become law. That said, bottom line??? There is NOTHING of value for us LEGAL Americans to support such a bill. Don’t do it! This is just one more idiotic move of Obama! We are Americans! Not Russians/Soviets, Not Mexicans, Not Chinese. This country as we have known it is rapidly deteriorating. Thank you for your time. Geoffrey A. Blair Lease operator

Or perhaps this one, proof that stirring the pot of hysteria and prejudice has worked for groups like OOIDA and TEAMSTERS

Hello, I am a US born citizen. I am also a self-employed truck driver. Cross border trucking will be devastating to the trucking industry. It will drive wages and rates that are already low ,even lower. Last year was the safest highways on record and you want to bring in the Mexicans. They will not abide to our laws because they won’t understand them. Highway travel will become unsafe because they can’t read ENGLISH signs. They will be making wrong turns in front of us and our families. U-turns on a Interstate Highway will become the norm and very dangerous. Mexican trucks are not maintained to our standard. When there is an accident (and there will be) ; how will the victims collect for damages or even worse ? Illegal drugs will be more common. Rape and crime will be on the increase because these people do not have the same morals as an AMERICAN. PLEASE WAKE UP AND DO WHAT IS RIGHT ! KEEP THE MEXICANS IN MEXICO – MIKE BOOKS

Here’s another one submitted by “Anonymous”, rightfully so with his apparent lack of education and more.

what kind of idiots are you . taking americans jobs away and allowing non americans ones that dont pay taxes to work here what the fuck are you dong . in this day and time when so many are out of work you alow this to pass do you know how many trucking companies are going to be out of work because of this

That one is sure to get the FMCSA to sit up and take notice. Actually, when you ignore the more than 1500 boilerplate “form letters” submitted by Teamsters members and the few such as those above, submitted by obvious OOIDA members, there are a number of good comments from folks such as mom and pop pork producers and other agri-business owners who give logical valid reasons why the proposal should go forward, as it will. The number of comments received, 2271 as of today, isn’t a realistic number though as there are many duplicates by the same commenter. However, the strategy appears to be for TEAMSTERS and others to submit as many meaningless and irrelevant comments as possible as a delaying tactic. The FMCSA must read each and every one of them, even the form letters, and that takes time. However, it is only delaying the inevitable.

Teamsters President James P. Hoffa releases self serving and totally inaccurate statement on Cross Border Trucking with Mexico

Despite found guilty of bribery and trying to rig an upcoming union election, Teamster President James P. Hoffa still has time to lie to the public, Congress and his membership about Mexican trucking

Teamsters President James P. Hoffa, himself in hot water after caught using his position to offer union jobs, salaries, and pensions to bribe people for political support, released a “presser” giving his totally irrelevant and patently untrue rant in opposition to the upcoming cross border pilot program with Mexico.

THE PUBLIC OPPOSES ILLEGAL, UNSAFE MEXICAN TRUCK PROGRAM is the title of this crapola presser released today which Hoffa continues to lie to his membership and the American public.

Hoffa says;

DOT’s proposal to open the border “fails to adequately protect our members, their families and the traveling public from the potential danger of unsafe Mexican trucks and drivers, who do not meet or will not adhere to all U.S. safety standards.”

It’s already been established that Mexican trucks and their drivers are not unsafe and strictly adhere to our rules and regulations.

Based on a Travel advisory issued by the US State Department on April 22, advising Americans against unnecessary travel to Mexico, Hoffa uses this as to make the ridiculous assertion that the proposed Pilot Program with Mexico is illegal because in his opinion, it violates Section 6901 of the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Act of 2007.

What he is referring to is a section in the above titled act that does not allow funds to be spent on a cross-border trucking program unless “simultaneous and comparable authority to operate within Mexico is made available to motor carriers domiciled in the United States.”

Hoffa is grasping at straws while at the same time blowing smoke up the asses of anyone who still listens to his mindless ramblings.

Hoffa said the Mexican government is incapable of granting comparable authority under the current travel warning issued by the U.S. State Department on April 22.

It is very clear that the safety of the U.S. drivers traveling into Mexico cannot be ensured, and therefore simultaneous and comparable authority is not made available to U.S. motor carriers under the pilot program,” Hoffa said.

That is the statutes interpretation according to Hoffa and not the letter, spirit or intent of the statute as it was written and passed.

Comparable authority means that we allow Mexican carriers to operate in this country and Mexico in turn, allows US carriers to operate in Mexico, under similar rules. There is nothing in the NAFTA rules concerning cross border trucking that says Mexico nor the US has to “ensure” the safety of one another’s drivers.

Who is going to “ensure” the safety of Mexican drivers coming into this country from violence directed at them, through ignorance, prejudice and bigotry, inflamed by the rhetoric of the TEAMSTERS, OOIDA and their mouthpieces on talk radio. Some callers have claimed they will stop the Mexican by any means possible, up to and including sabotaging their trucks or burning them to the ground.

Hoffa and his union have become increasingly irrelevant and to most, a joke.

And remember we said Hoffa was caught up in a bribery scandal? It’s true. I guess corruption runs in the family.

Teamsters for a Democratic Union report that James Hoffa tried to pay off three top Teamster officials who had broken with his administration by offering them lucrative jobs and an additional pension in exchange for their backing in the upcoming International Union election.

In a 30 page report issued by an elections supervisor, revealed thatHoffa running mate Ken Hall offered Carhaul Director Fred Zuckerman a raise and entrance into the “Family Plan”, a lucrative extra pension exclusively for full-time IBT officials. In exchange, Zuckerman would have to back Hoffa and drop his bid to be on the General Executive Board. It was further revealed that Hoffa operatives approached several other International Union trustees with similar offers to buy campaign support with members’ dues. Those Trustees were offered jobs as full-time International Representatives if they would resign from the General Executive Board but continue to back Hoffa and donate to his campaign.

Instead, the officials turned down the bribes and blew the whistle on Hoffa.

Hoffa hatched the bribery scheme to try to hold together his unraveling administration, in which 6 top union officials have jumped ship in the face of Hoffa’s corruption.

The Elections Appeals Master found that Hoffa and three of his closest thugs “tried, but failed, to buy electoral support and stifle opposition in exchange for salaried union jobs.”

Of course, Hoffa, pathological liar he has proven himself to be denied any role in the scheme. The Election Supervisor did not find Hoffa credible, and credited witnesses and evidence that contradicted the cover story put forward by Hoffa and his thugs.

And what will Hoffa’s punishment be? After six months of investigation and three months of appeals, court-appointed election overseers have ordered Hoffa to acknowledge that he attempted to buy election support by offering jobs and pensions.

Hoffa must pay for a mailing to all Teamster locals publicizing the attempt, and place a notice on the union’s website and magazine.

So far, Hoffa is giving the judge the finger! Anybody surprised?

TEAMSTERS & OOIDA comments will fail to stop proposed cross border pilot program with Mexico

Safe, well maintained trucks from Mexico such as this Kenworth T-660 driven by professional safe Mexican drivers would finally be permitted access under the proposed Pilot Program released today by the US DOT

The deadline for comments on FMCSA’s Proposed Cross Border Pilot Program ended Friday night at 23:59 with results being about as we suspected. 1,580 comments were submitted compared with 2,359 submitted in 2007. Very few of them provided salient objections as to why FMCSA should not proceed with the proposal.

According to FMCSA, the purpose for the notice and comment process is to provide all interested parties with the opportunity to review information published by the Agency and comment on the specific details about the demonstration project. The operative word is “SPECIFIC”. This time, as in 2007, the views of the respondents opposed to allowing Mexicans into this country, prevailed over those of us who support the proposal.

You read it right. I said MEXICANS, not Mexican trucks, which is what this proposal is all about. It’s never been about the safety of Mexican carriers or their ability to comply with our rules and regulations. They proved their fitness to do so long ago. It’s simply that there are some that cringe at the thought of allowing Mexicans, whom they see as inferior to themselves, do business in this country. Imagine that. Scared of a 100 or so safe well maintained trucks operated by well managed Mexican carriers.

This morning, General President James P. Hoffa is thanking his membership for filing more than 1000 comments opposing the program.

Great job, everybody, on submitting those comments on Mexican trucks! Teamsters and our allies filed at least a thousand comments telling the Department of Transportation to keep the border closed to dangerous Mexican trucks. - TEAMSTER NATION

Great job indeed. A semi-trained monkey could have followed instruction by going their web pages set up to guide the lemmings through the process. There, they had a choice of 7 pre-written letters. All they had to do was look at their union cards to figure out who they were, fill in the blanks and click SEND. And the views of James P. Hoffa were automatically published on regulations.gov under the members named. As I said, semi-trained monkeys, and no disrespect to the primates equating them to a TEAMSTER.

Hoffa supposedly made a comment on behalf of the “entire union” but it hasn’t appeared in the register yet. Hoffa’s comment, showing how brain addled and clueless he is, read in part;

The law requires Mexico to offer “comparable authority” for U.S. trucks to operate there. But Hoffa points out that Mexico is so dangerous the government isn’t capable of offering comparable authority. Therefore, the proposed program is illegal.

“Comparable authority” simply means, the US complies with it’s legal and lawful obligations under NAFTA to allow Mexican carriers operating authority in the US, and Mexico allows US carriers operating authority in Mexico. Nothing more, nothing less. The violence in Mexico has absolutely nothing to do with our obligations nor Mexico’s.

At the end of the day, the TEAMSTERS opposition has nothing to do with job losses to their membership. Their opposition to this program is wrecking segments of our economy as we recover from the recession. It has everything to do with Mexican law and labor unions not allowing the Teamsters to come in and organize as they did in Canada. Many of the same objections Hoffa makes against Mexico and Mexican trucks would be valid against the Canadians, but we don’t hear that from him.

The states who share a border with Mexico are all “Right to Work” states. Warehouses along the border are all non-union and will remain that way. Allowing Mexican carriers to operate in the US will in no way impact the TEAMSTERS nor their members.

OOIDA’s FALSE AND MISLEADING ATTEMPTS TO STOP MEXICAN TRUCKS

OOIDA, through lies and fear mongering used the Mexican truck issue to increase their membership from about 140,000 to 160,000 between 2007 and 2009 when the original demonstration program was defunded. Now, they’ve slipped back to around 150,000 members as truckers wised up and realized what a waste of time and money belonging to OOIDA was.

In desperation, OOIDA continues to lie and appeal to the prejudices and ignorance of some of it’s membership in their opposition to the Mexican truck issue.

Despite the fact that it has been proven that Mexico has much more stringent requirements for obtaining a FEDERAL COMMERCIAL LICENSE and their MEDICAL REQUIREMENTS are much more stringent than ours, OOIDA continues to insist Mexico has no drug testing requirements, no medical requirements and that a valid Mexican CDL can be obtained on any street corner in any city. And some actually believe this crap, which is what OOIDA counts on.

They tell you that allowing 100 Mexican trucks, strictly monitored will put hundreds of thousands of American truckers out of work is believed and spreads like wildfire across the internet. Beyond belief!

But OOIDA has completely destroyed their credibility with their latest caper. Imagine, hiring a free lance photographer to go to the border and take pictures of the oldest, dirtiest trucks he could find so that OOIDA could use them in their cover story in the May 2011 issue of LAND LINE. They continue to want people to believe, that OP-2 authority drayage trucks are the actual trucks used throughout Mexico and will be used to haul freight throughout the US.

ULTIMATELY, THEIR EFFORTS WILL FAIL BECAUSE OF THEIR COMMENTS
Let me share with you FMCSA’s response to the comments received in 2007 against that demonstration project and published in the FEDERAL REGISTER. You’ll see why that the proposed pilot program will go ahead and why the comments from OOIDA and TEAMSTERS members will help it become reality.

As of July 31, FMCSA received 2,359 comments, or docket submissions, in response to the May 1 and June 8
notices…….
About 2,330 of the comments were submissions by individuals that were no more than a few sentences and consisted of conclusory statements indicating that Mexico-domiciled carriers are unsafe and that the demonstration project should be abandoned. These comments, most of which were submitted
electronically, did not include information concerning technical (e.g.)specific safety oversight procedures or
processes) or legal aspects of the demonstration project or economic issues, or any other information
supporting the assertions made therein. While FMCSA is not responding to these comments individually, the
Agency is neither ignoring them, but instead believes that its responses to the substantive comments it has received more than adequately addresses the brief comments submitted by these individuals

Now, as it was then, the results will be the same! With exception to the objections to FMCSA paying for EOBR’s to be installed in the Mexican participants, which we object to also, there was absolutely nothing of a technical nature included in any of the “canned” comments submitted by TEAMSTERS.

FMCSA denies TEAMSTERS request for comment period extension on Cross Border Trucking proposal

Taking a page from his 2007 playbook, to delay and further mislead the public, James P. Hoffa on asked FMCSA head Ann Ferro to extend the comment period for FMCSA-2007-0097 another 30 days, citing 30 days to comment just isn’t enough time.

Ferro denied the request, sending Hoffa into another juvenile temper tantrum.

“Thirty days isn’t enough time for the public to voice its objections to this dangerous proposal,” Hoffa said. “Tens of thousands of Teamsters want to keep the border closed, as do most Americans and Congress. We want to make it clear that DOT should listen to the people of America, not the multinational corporations that want to exploit workers by lowering safety, labor and environmental standards.”

Hoffa tried this back in 2007 when comment were being sought for that proposal (FMCSA-2007-28055) and was successful in obtaining an additional 30 days which gave his lemmings time to load the comment sections down with comments totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. In the end, he failed, as he is failing this time.

More than 1000 rank-and-file Teamsters have already submitted comments to the Federal Register, using the TEAMSTERS “click and send” boilerplate letters objecting to the proposal. They said they’re concerned because Mexican trucks and drivers don’t meet the same safety standards as U.S. trucks, and that border security would be compromised and American trucking and warehousing jobs would be lost. In reality, it has absolutely nothing to do with those issues as they’ve long been resolved or proven to be nothing more than misinformation and lies. What it boils down to, is they’re Mexicans. And that is unacceptable,

Comments end tonight at midnight. We’ll see the first trucks rolling across the border sometime in the next few months, si dios quieres.

Meanwhile, the corrupt little representative from Oregon, Peter DeFazio, long in the pockets of Teamsters and the obscure group known as OOIDA, earned his bribes, er, private political contributions in this speech showcased at LIFE ON THE ROAD.

After spending a few minutes on Congressman DeFazio’s website, it’s clear he’s an idiot. But he’s a ranking idiot on a couple of transportation committees. Just like his Bring Gas Prices Down videos, it’s clear he does a lot of yelling but doesn’t make much sense.

We couldn’t agree more.

LOTR also concluded;

For some reason Teamsters think they still have a voice in trucking. Teamsters are so insignificant in the trucking industry, I’m surprised they get any press at all. OOIDA, who? Once the mobs on trucking radio and the CB get fired up, everyone loses their minds and stops thinking.

Like it or not, this is going to happen. Find a way to survive or just stand around and complain the choice is yours

Again, spot on!

Opposing Mexican Trucking program with lies is irresponsible

Mexican truck coming in for border inspection

Todd Spencer, Executive Vice President of OOIDA preaches that complying with our NAFTA obligations is “irresponsible and reckless”. What is more “irresponsible and reckless” is the opposition attempting to inflame the publics passions and prejudices with lies and misinformation about Mexico and it’s trucking industry.

A relatively new website, THE TRUCKERS VOICE is looking for 100 volunteers to help spread the misinformation and lies by having these volunteers;

1. Call every politician, even your mayors.
2. Email every politician, even your mayor.
3. Write (snail mail) ever politician, even your mayor.
4. Get all your friends (even your pet if he can legally write) to do the same.
5. Start a petition in your town. Sit in front of your grocery store, or bring it to your church.

Kind of cute isn’t it, but in the end, a totally worthless effort.

Heather Pontruff, the publisher of TRUCKERS VOICE seems to be fully on board with OOIDA’s ridiculous claims of Mexican truckers taking over our industry, those truckers being controlled by the cartels. She says;

The public safety is at risk with this one.

A. There is a MAJOR cartel issue in the border states. These cartels grow stronger daily, and sneakier. How are we to keep them from completely taking over if we open the borders to all Mexican trucks? In short, we can’t ensure it.

B. There is an illegal immigration issue. True, the drivers in Mexico honestly make more per mile than American truckers. The issue here is there’s no guarantee that once upon entering, these drivers would actually exit.

C. Our border patrol is overwhelmed as is. With no money going into the system, they can’t afford to hire even more agents more. This means more stuff would get past the screening areas and into the U.S.

The only cartel issue we have in the border states is the baseless claims made by politicians seeking to secure more DHS funds for their districts and departments. Recently, the head of the Border Patrol in the Tucson sector chastised Cochise Country Sheriff Larry Deaver for spreading the lies about the cartels overrunning his county.

The cross border issue has absolutely nothing to do with illegal immigration other than to be used as an excuse to bash the program. People ignore the fact that trucks from Mexico, grandfathered in when Reagan signed the Foreign Carrier Exclusion Order in 1982 have continued to operate throughout the United States for more than50 years. And in addition, the dray trucks that operate in the commercial zone do so legally. No trucks are being abandoned as drivers disappear into the heartland. Simply another mechanism to stir the fear and prejudices people have in these times against Mexicans.

Further showing she knows nothing of issue is her claim about the Border Patrol being overwhelmed and can’t handle another hundred trucks crossing the border at the rate of one or two per week.
[pullquote]The agency anticipates an average of one long-haul border crossing per week per truck with each Mexican carrier having two trucks participating in the program. It assumes an attrition rate of 25 percent after 18 months in the project and calculates 46 carriers will suffice to achieve a target of 4,100 inspections within three years – OVERDRIVE MAGAZINE[/pullquote]

The Border Patrol has nothing to do with what crosses the border. That is the area of responsibility of Customs and Border Protection, a separate unit of DHS.

According to the fact sheet released by FMCSA concerning the issue that confuses Ms. Pontruf,

FMCSA has a staff of over 250 distributed at each commercial truck crossing between the
United States and Mexico. Our State partners have an additional 350 personnel to support the
program. These personnel, currently overseeing the safety of the trucks entering the U.S. commercial
zones, are adequate to oversee long-haul operations also.

So we have adequate personnel to oversee the inspection of these additional 100 or so trucks and the infrastructure is in place to screen them as they do all the others when they pass through Customs.

But perhaps the most outrageous statement she makes, and totally baseless and without facts is this;

I remember the last time they did the cross border program with Mexico, I lived in Texas. CMV “at fault” accidents sky rocketed. Why?
A. They brought over the best trucks Mexico across the border for the pilot program. Once they opened the border to a total of 100 outfits, the trucks were scary and unsafe.
B. Unlike Canada, there is no structured method for HOS (hours of service). The truck
crossing into the U.S. border could’ve driven 4 hours straight before entering or 40, there’s
no way of knowing.

CMV accidents might have skyrocketed, but they did not involve trucks from Mexico nor have anything to do with Mexican trucks.

According to FMCSA STATISTICS accident rates involving Mexican domiciles carriers actually went DOWN in 2007, the year the previous cross border program was initiated.

• 2006 – 92
• 2007 – 76
• 2008 – 67
• 2008 – 58
• 2010 – 17

Yes, Mexico has differing regulations than does the US and Canada’s regulations differ from ours, such as more liberal hours of service laws. Mexico’s regulatory environment sets out the rules the drivers and companies are expected to follow and puts the onus on the company and drivers. Traffic accidents in Mexico are criminal, not civil as they are in the US. Fatalities or accidents involving extreme property damage, causes the driver to lose his license and freedom. Yes, they put them in jail and there are no second chances. Perhaps something we should be looking at here.

But articles such as this one, and the ones OOIDA is publishing around the internet are the height of irresponsibility, something we’ve come to expect from Spencer and his gang. But there is no reason people like Ms Pontruf and THE TRUCKERS VOICE should lower themselves to that level.

Guest Editorial – Mexico trucking issue hits home for U.S. agriculture

By Nelson Balido
President
Border Trade Alliance

Nelson Balido – President – Border Trade Alliance

The Border Trade Alliance earlier this month expressed its optimism that a framework announced by President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderón for setting the trucking issue was a real step in the right direction.

If all this sounds familiar, it’s because the dispute over trucking dates back to the Clinton administration, when bogus claims over truck safety and environmental damage first won out over the need to comply with the North American Free Trade Agreement signed with our friends and neighbors, Canada and Mexico.

We’ve been close to settling this issue before, and yet here we are again.

Perhaps no other debate in NAFTA has featured the same level of high-pitched hyperbole as the trucking debate. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), one of the most vocal anti-Mexico trade voices in Congress, once famously called Mexican trucks “rumbling death traps” and painted a picture of Mexican truck drivers as sleep-deprived, drug-addled, 18-wheel drag racers.

But instead of claiming to worry about American jobs while he repeats talking points for Big Labor, the congressman might want to worry instead about the $36 million in retaliatory tariffs his protectionist position has cost Oregon agricultural products like Christmas trees, pears, frozen potatoes, cherries, wine and onions.

Because of the U.S.’ continued failure to live up to its responsibilities under NAFTA, Mexico finally resorted to slapping retaliatory tariffs totaling in the billions of dollars on a host of U.S. goods headed south.

Perhaps nowhere is the economic damage to the U.S. starker than in the agricultural sector, where what is commonly believed to be a U.S.-Mexico border issue has suddenly landed in America’s farms and ranches.

Our friends at Texas A&M’s Center for North American Studies recently completed an analysis of the Mexican tariffs’ effect on U.S. agriculture. They found that nationally nearly $153 billion in U.S. agricultural production has been impacted. They further found that four of the five states most impacted by Mexican tariffs are nowhere near the Mexican border: Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina and Wisconsin.

The trade community is holding out hope that the Obama and Calderón administrations can finally put this debate to an end, but there are powerful labor interests that will surely be reminding the White House of their ability to affect elections.

The importance of U.S.-Mexico bilateral trade has been made clear now to states not usually associated with the intricacies of cross-border trade. The Mexico border is suddenly closer to places like Davenport, Iowa and Madison, Wisconsin. This is just one more reminder of why issues like improved port infrastructure, increased human resources and better technology should be just as important to representatives and senators from the interior of the U.S. as they are to border state delegations.

The pro-trade argument can’t just be won on the border; it has to be won in the heartland, too.

Source Article: Border Trade Alliance

EOBR’s and Mexican Trucks

Example of an EOBR to be required on Mexican trucks operating in the US

One of the requirements in the Concept Document for the new Mexican truck program released that is causing a stir and that quite frankly, I vehemently disagree with is the requirement that all Mexican trucks be equipped with Electronic Onboard Recorders or EOBR’s, which in the US is a contentious issue in it’s own right.

Part of the controversy is the idea that FMCSA would pay for these devices to be installed in the Mexican trucks so they would have real time access to the data and would in fact “own” all data collected. Sounds good on the surface as that would prove once and for all that Mexican drivers do not drive 19 hours a day 7 days a week as opponents such as OOIDA and the Teamsters claim.

Under NAFTA, the United States was supposed to treat Canada and Mexico equally,, requiring the same of both countries. Canada, with their more liberal hours of service rules, and their frequent acknowledged violation of our cabotage laws is not being required to have the EOBR’s.

Brian Straight,managing editor of Fleet Owner gets right to the point of this requirement that has so many people up in arms. Not over the requirement that the Mexican carriers, where 85% of the fleets already have Qualcomm communication systems, have EOBR’s, but that money from the Highway Trust fund be used to pay for them.

Brian writes:

I wonder if this provision was put in by the Administration to show Mexico that we were doing everything we could to comply with the requirements of NAFTA, while at the same time creating an out for the public and Congress……..

This revelation seems a lot like a poison pill designed to torpedo the program before it can be resurrected. According to reports, the reason the U.S. wants to pay for the EOBRs is so that the government “owns” the data the devices collect. Until someone can provide a valid reason as to why the government needs to own this data, I question why this is important……….
[pullquote]A spokesperson for the Texas Dept. of Public Safety told the Texas Tribune in January that the resumption of the program would not increase drug trafficking or any other illegal activity coming across the border.[/pullquote]
And if the government feels this data is that vital, might it then want to “own” the data recorded by these devices once they are installed on all U.S.-based trucks? Maybe we’ll be told it’s a national security issue – it will prevent drug trafficking, human smuggling, illegals from entering the country. Doubtful. The proposed trucking program would require EOBRs for Mexican trucks inside the U.S. The government owning the data is not going to prevent any of these things from taking place. Maybe the government just wants to know where these trucks are at all times. Talk about trust issues……….

And it seems to be working. Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon) firmly in the pocket of the labor unions released this statement:

“As I have said before, three issues must be addressed in the cross-border trucking program: safety, security and job loss,” DeFazio said. “I appreciate the Administration’s attempt to address the very serious safety and security concerns surrounding Mexican trucks, and I am glad we are beginning to address the extortionate Mexican tariffs unfairly slapped on American goods. However, taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for the Mexican trucking industry to comply with American safety standards. It is outrageous that we would spend tax dollars to pay for equipment on Mexican trucks; equipment which either the Mexican government or the Mexican carriers themselves should be required to pay. I also question the authority to grant Mexican carriers permanent authority to operate on American roads and highways before a pilot program is complete and the results evaluated.”

Well Petey boy! The tariff’s are legal and in no way extortionate, put there because of your kowtowing to Union interests and opposing our legal commitment to NAFTA. Congress does not have to approve the deal since both countries have come to an agreement over how best to resolve the standoff.

But most of us share your concern about taxpayer money being used to fund this requirement, which is nowhere to be found in the original NAFTA agreement nor the arbitration board agreement of the 90′s.

Ironically, Teamsters and OOIDA pushed for this requirement in stakeholder meetings with Secretary Ray LaHood last year, and now that it is close to becoming a reality, they are in opposition to their own proposal.

In the meantime, US Trade Representative Ron Kirk has stated a final agreement should be “weeks, if not days, away”.

And an editorial in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram puts the whole thing in a better perspective:

The United States has been in violation of NAFTA long enough. It is time for Congress to remove any roadblocks and approve the deal agreed on by the two heads of state.
Such a move would add a significant boost to the U.S. economy while eliminating much of the growing frustration and unnecessary hardship caused by this provincial prohibition.
[pullquote]As for the American unions that continue to protest, what are they afraid of? Surely they aren’t saying they can’t compete with their fellow truckers from Mexico.[/pullquote]

Our compliance with NAFTA would in no way impact union LTL drivers nor warehouse workers as the border states are right to work states and the majority of companies are non union, although one imagines Hoffa would pee his panties to change that.