Opponents of Mexican trucks want to ban Mexican trucks such as this one that they claim are dangerous, unsafe junk.
Instead, we’re referring to the sophomoric letter to the US Trade Representatives office, by OOIDA President Jim Johnston on February 24.
Similar to the press release by OOIDA’s Norita Taylor that we commented on earlier, Johnston calls on U.S. trade rep to defend American jobs
Johnston made these claims:
(more…)
Interesting interview with Former U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Jeffrey Davidow, American Enterprise Institute’s Phil Levy, and Independent Drivers Association Owner-Operator Rod Nofziger on the future of NAFTA and trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico.
It’s interesting to watch Nofziger’s vacant stare like a fish out of water against Davidow and Levy, two heavyweights who know what they are talking about.
Nofziger’s rant starts at about 4:02 into the video and it is nothing special. Simply repeating the same scripted lies which Ambassador Davidow easily debunks, as we have here, many times.
But, it is interesting to watch.
It’s been almost 10 years since I’ve had the opportunity to deliver a load here in the San Diego area, and the changes are enormous.
The old 76 fuel stop on 905 where we used to fight for the few parking spaces in the dirt has that area fenced off and a new Pilot is across the street.
CHP has a new inspection facility half a block from the commercial crossing, where every truck coming in from Mexico is directed to.
The drop yard we use of Enrique Firmi was a surprise, inasmuch every trailer had it lights in place, glad hand gaskets, none missing, a marked change from the old days.
The area around Otay Mesa is where Hoffa and some of his union goons made their photo op in 07 protesting the impending Cross Border Pilot Program. They stood around with their protest signs, yelling and making angry gestures at the Mexican drivers, who were doing nothing other than the job they were hired to do.
They ignored the new or newer drayage trucks and focused the photo op on older cabovers that in their minds were junk, ignoring the fact that these trucks, all of them, had crossed the CHP inspection facility moments earlier.
And for those who operate in or through California, we all know what pricks the CHP commercial officers can be.
Every Truck, Every Time
That was the comments made by former Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, pertaining to trucks from Mexico. And it was a comment immediately seized upon and ridiculed by the opponents. Yet is was more misinformation and lies by the opposition.
From Texas to California, these inspections stations are right at the border, as required under Congressional directives for the Pilot program. Every truck crossing the border gets a visual inspection and document inspection. If something is apparent, they are pulled in for a random level I. It is a system that works.
As I dropped my trailer in the transfer yard, I was looking around for the dangerous unsafe junk trucks that Spencer and Hoffa insist are the norm rather than the exception. Not surprisingly, I found none, unless you count the ones retired from service, and sitting in the lots with bald flat tires, busted windshields covered with layers of dust from years of inactivity.
What I did see, at this one location, and others on the highway, were a fleet of late model, 2002 or newer, Internationals and Freightliner Centuries.
All the units were dual registered, in California and Baja California. Most had current CVSA stickers indicating they had been through a level 1 inspection recently. And oddly enough, since they are always talking about security issues south of the border, most of these units had a sign on the side of the cab, in English and Spanish (sorry all you English only freaks) that said, and I paraphrase,
This truck equipped with a GPS tracking unit. The driver does not know where it is, how it works or how to disable it”
Kinda hoaky but probably effective.
Most of the transfer yards are within spitting distance of the border crossing. In the case of Crown Express, three blocks. Crown Express is the service agent for my company, Celadon, Messilla Valley and others.
So the length of haul for these trucks is 3 blocks in the US and maybe 10 miles into the Tijuana industrial areas, although many are equi-distance on the Mexican side.
I spoke with the dispatchers in the office, all who spoke perfect English despite living in Tijuana and commuting to work in the US.
One of the questions asked was about the alleged Army or Police escorts that some have claimed are a regular occurrence escorting trucks to the border crossing on the Mexican side. They didn’t know what I was talking about and denied it happening. In addition, the highjacking of trucks, allegedly an every day occurrence, if you listen to the opposition, rarely happens.
An interesting day as tomorrow promises to be. If I have the time, I plan on further efforts to debunk the claims of the opposition, concerning border operations in this area.
President Obama has been warning that tit-for-tat protectionism could drive the world into an even worse economic slump than it is already in. He is right. Unfortunately, Congress doesn’t seem to be listening.
The $410 billion spending bill that Mr. Obama signed into law last week cuts off financing for a pilot program that allows Mexican trucks to deliver goods across the United States. The move clearly violates the North American Free Trade Agreement, which promised — starting in 2000 — to open cargo transport throughout the United States, Mexico and Canada to carriers from all three countries. This week, Mexico retaliated, leveling tariffs against $2.4 billion worth of American imports.
Both the United States and Mexico must be careful. A full-fledged fight could threaten more than $350 billion in annual commerce between the two countries. That is clearly in nobody’s interest.
An arbitration panel ruled in 2001 that the United States was in breach of its Nafta obligations on Mexican trucks. But thanks to the Teamsters union and its allies in Congress, all but a small number of Mexican carriers are restricted to operating within a 25-mile band from the border.
The truck drivers’ argument that Mexican trucks are unsafe is spurious — a flimsy cover for protectionism. Data from the Department of Transportation show that Mexican trucks and drivers operating in the United States — along the border and in the pilot program — have a better inspection record, with fewer violations, than their American counterparts.
President Obama has so far shown a worrying ambivalence about trade. He has called for renegotiating Nafta, creating anxiety in both Ottawa and Mexico City — claiming that this can somehow be done without harming trade. While he managed to persuade Congressional Democrats to water down a “Buy American” provision in the fiscal stimulus package, he did not get them to pull it altogether.
We understand the White House did not want to threaten the passage of the spending bill by raising a ruckus over Mexican trucking, a comparatively minor issue. But it is time for Mr. Obama to put some political muscle behind his declared support for open trade.
He can start by persuading Congress to revive the truck pilot program or start a new one. And he must make clear that — sometime soon — all properly inspected Mexican trucks must be able to work throughout the country, as Nafta requires. That would not only solve this trade spat, but it would provide the world with needed reassurance that the United States will stand by its trade agreements in these difficult times.
Editorial The New York Times
On May 1, 2007, FMCSA announced the initiation of a project to demonstrate the ability of Mexico-based motor carriers to operate safely in the United States beyond the commercial zones along the U.S.-Mexico border (72 FR 23883). The demonstration project will allow up to 100 Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate throughout the United States for one year. Up to 100 U.S.-domiciled motor carriers will be granted reciprocal rights to operate in Mexico for the same period. Participating Mexican carriers and drivers must comply with all applicable U.S. Laws and regulations, including those concerned with motor carrier safety, customs, immigration, vehicle emissions, vehicle registration and taxation, and fuel taxation. The Agency explained the safety performance of the participating carriers will be tracked closely by FMCSA and its State partners, a joint U.S.-Mexico monitoring group, and an evaluation panel independent of the Department of Transportation (DOT). The FMCSA indicated the resulting data will be considered carefully before further decisions are made concerning the implementation of the NAFTA trucking provisions. The comment period for the notice ended on May 31.
On May 25, 2007, the President signed into law the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007 (the Act), (Pub. L. 110–28). Section 6901 of the Act requires that certain actions be taken by the Department of Transportation (the Department) as a condition of obligating or expending appropriated funds to grant authority to Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond United States municipalities and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border. Section 6901(a) of the Act requires that granting of such authority be tested as part of a ‘‘pilot program.’’ The pilot program must comply with section 350 of the DOT and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Pub. L. 107–87, 115 Stat. 833, at 864) and 49 U.S.C. 31315(c), concerning requirements for pilot programs.
Section 6901(a)—Fulfilling the Requirements of Section 350
Section 350 of the DOT Appropriations Act, 2002 (Pub. L. 107– 87), prohibited FMCSA from using
Federal funds to review or process applications from Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the border commercial zones until certain conditions and safety requirements were met. The requirements of section 350 have been reenacted in each subsequent DOT Appropriations Act since 2002.
The rulemaking requirements of section 350 were met by a series of rules published on March 19, 2002 (67 FR 12652, 67 FR 12702, 67 FR 12758, 67 FR 12776) and a further rule published on May 13, 2002 (67 FR 31978).
In November 2002, Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta certified, as required by section 350(c)(2), that authorizing Mexican carrier operations beyond the border commercial zones does not pose an unacceptable safety risk to the American public. Later that month, the President modified the longstanding moratorium to permit Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to provide cross-border cargo
transportation beyond the border commercial zones. The Secretary’s certification was made in response to the June 25, 2002, report of DOT’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) on the implementation of safety requirements at the U.S.-Mexico border. In a January 2005 follow-up report, the OIG concluded that FMCSA had sufficient staff, facilities, equipment, and procedures in place to substantially meet all eight requirements under section 350 the OIG was required to review. In consideration of the above OIG reports which are available in docket FMCSA–2007–28055, and FMCSA’s May 1, 2007, announcement that participating carriers will be required to comply with all rules issued in response to section 350 (in addition to full compliance with all safety regulations applicable to U.S.-domiciled motor carriers), the Agency believes the provision in the 2007 supplemental appropriations act mandating that the demonstration project satisfy the requirements of section 350 has already been satisfied. The Agency requests public comment on this issue.
Section 6901(a)—Fulfilling the Requirements of 49 U.S.C. 31315
Section 4007 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA– 21) amended 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315 concerning the Secretary of Transportation’s authority to grant waivers from the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for those seeking regulatory relief from those requirements. With the enactment of TEA–21, FMCSA may grant a waiver or exemption that relieves a person from compliance in whole or in part with a regulation if the Agency determines that the waiver is in the public interest, and
the waiver or exemption would be likely to achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by complying with the applicable regulation. Section 4007 of TEA–21 also permits FMCSA to conduct pilot programs to evaluate alternatives to regulations relating to motor carrier,
commercial motor vehicle (CMV), and driver safety..
In a pilot program, the FMCSA collects specific data for evaluating alternatives to the regulations or
innovative approaches to safety while ensuring that the safety performance goals of the regulations are satisfied. A pilot program may not last more than 3 years. The number of participants in a pilot program must be large enough to ensure statistically valid findings. Pilot programs must include an oversight
plan to ensure that participants comply with the terms and conditions of participation, and procedures to protect the health and safety of study participants and the general public. As part of a pilot program, temporary regulatory relief from one or more FMCSR may be given to a person or class of persons subject to the regulations, or a person or class of persons who intend to engage in an activity that would be subject to the regulations. During the pilot program, these participants would be given an exemption from one or more sections or parts of the regulations.
The FMCSA believes the requirement that the demonstration project satisfy the pilot program statutory provision is satisfied through the May 1, 2007, notice, and the additional details contained in this notice. The Agency notes that during the demonstration project participating Mexico-domiciled motor carriers would not be provided with relief from any of the rules implementing section 350, or any of the
safety regulations.
Section 6901(b)(2)(B) of the Act provides that FMCSA must request public comment on five specific aspects of the demonstration project. For the convenience of the reader, these items are listed below.
A complete copy of section 6901 is included in the docket FMCSA–2007–28055.
(1) Comprehensive data and information on the pre-authorization safety audits (PASAs) conducted before and after the date of enactment of this Act of motor carriers domiciled in Mexico that are granted authority to operate beyond the United States municipalities and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border;
(2) Specific measures to be required to protect the health and safety of the public, including enforcement measures and penalties for noncompliance;
(3) Specific measures to be required to ensure compliance with section 391.11(b)(2) of title 49, CFR, concerning FMCSA’s English language proficiency requirement, and section 365.501(b) of title 49, CFR, concerning FMCSA’s prohibition against Mexico-domiciled drivers engaging in the transportation of domestic freight within the U.S.;
(4) Specific standards to be used to evaluate the pilot program and compare any change in the level of motor carrier safety as a result of the pilot program;
and
(5) A list of Federal motor carrier safety laws and regulations, including the commercial driver’s license (CDL) requirements, for which the Secretary of Transportation will accept compliance with a corresponding Mexican law or regulation as the equivalent to compliance with the United States law or regulation, including for each law or regulation an analysis as to how the corresponding United States and Mexican laws and regulations differ.
mexicotrucker.com worth $26400.000
See details information
.JPG "P1000631 (Small).JPG")
Loading ...