Mexico Trucker Online Articles

Did you survive ROADCHECK 2011?

Main building of SCT Weigh station with offices for SCT, Federal Police, onsite drug, alcohol and medical testing and even a couple of jail cells

Roadcheck 2011 is one for the books for the most part. So, did everyone survive?

From Canada to Mexico, there was supposed to be scores of Federal, State and local truck inspectors working round the clock in the annual CVSA 72 hour blitz known as “Roadcheck”, or to some of us, “Vacation Time”.

I fall into the former category for the 25th year in a row. I learned my lesson early on. Stay the hell off the roads during this revenue enhancement effort. It helps that my birthday always falls in the middle of the “blitz”.

Time to go back to work, sunburned from a week under the palms, by the pool, kicked back and relaxing in Monterrey. Got to get back to work to get some rest, as most of us do.

Mexico, it’s Federal Police, SCT, State and local transit police participated this year once again. They’ve been full partners in the Commercial Vehicle Safety Administration (CVSA) program since 1991. The level of participation? It’s hard to determine at this time. They were out doing roadside checks. The SCT “Sooper Coop” south of Nuevo Laredo on MX-85 was open on Wednesday June 8. It looked to be a combination inspection blitz and driver appreciation effort, as they had the grills fired up and a good number of rigs off to the side and under the inspection sheds. Coming back yesterday evening, everything locked up tight, similar to reports coming in from across America.

It’ll be interesting to see the numbers once they’re released, considering Mexico’s law enforcement apparatus is currently involved in trying to settle down the warring cartel factions and the wannabes. Although the “Big Boys” are doing a fine job of cleaning up their own houses.

Take note the violence is between cartels or gangs and has nothing to do with the Mexican trucking industry despite what others might claim.

PHOTO GALLERY
The following photos were taken in and around and enroute to Monterrey from Nuevo Laredo this week.

Again, photos of a Mexican “Super Coop”, automated, weigh in motion technology, that doesn’t exist according to some critics of Mexican trucks, who have LOST ALL CREDIBILITY on the issue. Because how could a facility exist if regulations don’t exist to enforce the non existent regulations. Something to think about here.

It was also interesting to note that the Texas DPS was out in force at the border crossings in Laredo, checking intercity buses crossing the border. It appeared that all passed their Level I inspections.

Straight answers to Teamsters questions

And James Hoffa talks about "unsafe Mexican trucks" when he represents drivers like this?

MEXICO TRUCKER ONLINE is pleased to help educate members of the TEAMSTERS who seem to lack the wherewithal to find answers to question on their own about the upcoming Mexican Cross Border Pilot Program.

Today, they made a post titled  Truck driving champ says ‘NO’ to Mexican trucks where it appears a TEAMSTERS member and 13th place runner up in the ATA’s Truck Driver Championship (Straight Trucks) asks some questions about Mexican trucks that need answering.

YRCW driver Scott Archer posed these questions.

Will these men and women be trained as U.S. drivers? Look at the ATA 2011 Facts for Drivers book G6011. Will the Mexican truckers understand or be trained on this important material?…Will they have the following:

• CDL license?
• Fingerprint check?
• Background check?
• Medical physical card?
• Proper insurance?
• Commercial Cehicle Safety Alliance?
• Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration?
• Hours of service log?
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration?
• TWIC cards?
• National Transportation Safety Board?…

 

We really have no idea what the hell he’s talking about concerning a 2011 ATA Fact Book for Drivers. US drivers are not trained according to this publication and NO, Mexican drivers won’t be trained as US drivers. After all, they’re Mexican and training standards in Mexico are much more stringent than the non existent training standards for US drivers.

On February 17, 2011, representatives from FMCSA, CVSA and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators visited a Mexican driver license facility, medical qualification facility, and test and inspection location. During these site visits FMCSA and its partner organizations observed Mexico to have rigorous requirements for knowledge and skills testing that are similar to those in the United States. In addition, Mexico requires that all new commercial drivers undergo training prior to testing and requires additional retraining each time the license is renewed. In contrast, U.S. regulations do not currently require any specific training prior to testing for, or renewal of, a U.S. CDL.

But we’ll take Mr. Archers other concerns as he listed them.

CDL license?

Yes, all Mexican drivers will have a Licencia Federal de Conductor, with an international endorsement, which states the holder has provided the SCT with documentation  of completion of an English language course. Since a 1991 Mutual Understanding Agreement (MUA) between the SCT and the USDOT, Mexican LF were found to be significantly equal to a US CDL.

Mexican Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDL). The United States’ acceptance of a Mexican LF dates back to November 21, 1991, when the Federal Highway Administrator determined that the Mexican CDLs are equivalent to the standards of the U.S. regulations and entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Mexico.

Fingerprint Check – Background Check?

Had Mr. Scott read the proposal, he wouldn ‘t have asked these lame questions. The Pilot Program proposal states that all drivers who are accepted into the program will be vetted by DHS (Homeland Security) which includes fingerprinting and background checks using numerous databases in the US and Mexico. In addition, Mexican drivers, unlike Canadians, must have a US entry Visa to even cross the border. These are provided by the State Department after  thorough vetting.

Security Screening. FMCSA would submit information on the applicant motor carriers and their drivers designated for long-haul operations in the pilot program to DHS for security screening. Motor carriers and/or drivers that fail DHS’s security screening would not be eligible for participation in the pilot program. Reasons a motor carrier or driver may not pass DHS security screening may include: providing false or incomplete information; conviction of any criminal offense or pending criminal charges or outstanding warrants; violation of any customs, immigration or agriculture regulations or laws; the carrier or driver is the subject of an ongoing investigation by any Federal, State or local law enforcement agency; the motor carrier or driver is inadmissible to the United States under immigration regulations, including applicants with approved waivers of inadmissibility or parole documentation; DHS is not satisfied concerning the motor carrier’s or driver’s low-risk status; DHS cannot determine an applicant’s criminal, residence or employment history; or the motor carrier or driver is subject to National Security Entry Exit Registration System or other special registration programs.

Medical Physical Card?

Of course they will as the medical certification is part of the licensing process in Mexico and is part of the Licencia Federal. As stated in the FMCSA Pilot Program Proposal:

The Secretary of Transportation will also consider that physical examinations conducted by Mexican doctors and drug testing specimens collected by Mexican medical collection facilities are equivalent to the process for examinations conducted, and test specimens collected, in the United States.

In Mexico, in order to obtain the LF a driver must meet the requirements established by the Ley de Caminos, Puentes y Autotransporte Federal (LCPAF or Roads, Bridges and Federal Motor Carrier Transportation Act) Article 36, and Reglamento de Autotransporte Federal y Servicios Auxiliares (RAFSA, or Federal Motor Carrier Transportation Act) Article 89, which states that a Mexican driver must pass the medical examination required by Mexico’s Transport and Communications Ministry (SCT), Directorship General of Protection and Prevention Medicine in Transportation (DGPMPT). This is the same medical exam performed on applicants in all modes of transportation (airline pilots, merchant mariners, and locomotive operators).

The medical examination may be completed by government doctors or certified private physicians.FMCSA examined the Mexican medical fitness for duty requirements and has found that the Mexican physical qualification regulations are more prescriptive, detailed, and stricter than those in the United States. For example, Mexican regulations address body mass index, cancers and tumors, skin and appendages, psychiatric and psychological disorders, and have specific standards for evaluation of the ear, nose and throat and the genitourinary system.

These are all areas for which the United States has no regulatory standards. The only notable difference involves vision. Mexico only requires red color vision while the United States requires a color vision test for at least red, green, and yellow. FMCSA believes that, taken as a whole, Mexico’s medical regulations are comparable to those in the United States, and provide a level of safety at least equivalent to the U.S. regulations. FMCSA also notes that Mexico’s medical examinations are performed almost exclusively by physicians at Mexican government facilities, and when performed by private doctors, those doctors are specifically approved by the SCT.

Proper Insurance?

The Pilot Program Proposal CLEARLY STATES that all OP-1MX applicants will have insurance or a surety bond posted with a US insurance or Surety company, the same as was required during the 2007 demonstration program and the same as is required for OP2-MX carriers (drayage) and “Certificate Carriers” operating in the US today.

Liability Insurance. Mexico-domiciled motor carriers participating in the pilot program must maintain a certificate of insurance or surety bond on file with FMCSA, as prescribed in 49 CFR 387.313, throughout the pilot program. The insurance or surety bond must be underwritten by a U.S. insurance or surety bond company.

Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance?

Mexico has been a full and equal participating member of CVSA for years. Furthermore, the Pilot Program Proposal states carriers must display a current CVSA decal for three years from the date operating authority is granted. These decals are must be renewed by a level I inspection every 90 days.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration?

We have no idea what Mr. Archer refers to here, other than FMCSA will have full oversight of the Mexican carriers as they do now and have in the past. Mexico’s equivalent SCT has oversight in Mexico.

Hours of Service Log?

EOBR’s, if approved, will track drivers hours of service, on both sides of the border, although like the Canadians, HOS rules are different in Mexico and should not have any bearing on a Mexican drivers performance in this country. They will comply with our HOS regulations when operating in this country, as they do now and have in the past.National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration?  TWIC cards? National Transportation Safety Board?

TWIC Cards? not mentioned in the proposal, however, it is doubtful the Mexican driver would need one. His background checks for immigration visa and the pilot program should be sufficient. However, should a Mexican driver need access to a port facility, they would fall under the same rules as those of us who do not have a TWIC. To wit: a paid escort inside the port facility. As for the NTSA and NTSB? We have no idea what Mr. Archer is referring to as it has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Truth be known, Mr Archer probably hasn’t a clue. After all, he’s a TEAMSTER and only came in 13th in the Truck Driving Championships, in the Straight Truck Division

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!

CATO Institute – The Pilot Program on NAFTA Long-Haul Trucking Provisions

Comments for the Federal Register
FMCSA–2011–0097
by Daniel Griswold
These comments were submitted on May 4, 2011.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed restoration of long-haul cross-border trucking with Mexico in compliance with our commitments under the North American Free Trade Agreement.

My name is Daniel Griswold. I’m director of the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington. Cato is a non-profit, non-partisan educational institution supported by voluntary donations from individuals and foundations who share our core values of individual liberty, free markets, limited government, and peace.

The suspension of the cross-border pilot trucking program by Congress in 2009 has been a breach of our international commitments, an embarrassment to our nation, and a barrier to two-way U.S. trade with the people of Mexico. The time is long overdue to correct this injustice and economic distortion by fully implementing the trucking provisions of NAFTA.

Under the 1994 agreement, the United States and Mexico were to allow trucks from each country to deliver goods to destinations inside the other country, provided the trucks and their drivers met all safety regulations mandated by the host government. According to Annex I of the agreement, licensed and qualified Mexican trucks were to be allowed to make deliveries in U.S. border states by 1995, a year after the agreement went into effect, and throughout the U.S. by 2000. U.S. trucking firms were to be granted the same access to Mexico. But under pressure from the Teamsters union, President Clinton unilaterally suspended implementation of the provisions in 1995, citing safety concerns.

President George W. Bush, to his credit, tried to fulfill the U.S. obligation under NAFTA. His administration launched a pilot program in 2007, which allowed a limited number of Mexican trucking companies to deliver goods to U.S. destinations beyond the 25-mile commercial zone along the U.S.-Mexican border. Citing unsubstantiated safety concerns, and in the face of ongoing union pressure, a bipartisan majority in Congress voted to cut off funding for the program in 2009.

The Obama administration has sought to reinstate the program under the “concept document” released in January 2011. The document and the attending regulations would go a significant way toward implementing the original NAFTA obligations and should be adopted as soon as possible.

Suspension of the pilot program in 2009 was based on protectionism and prejudice, not legitimate safety concerns. Although Teamsters union leaders talk about safety, their real agenda is not to promote safer roads but to protect themselves from increased competition. The broader agenda of their congressional allies is to thwart full implementation of a successful trade agreement with Mexico, our third-largest trading partner. The real objection they have to Mexican trucks making deliveries to U.S. cities is not that they are unsafe but that those trucks are driven by Mexicans. In the eyes of too many members of Congress, “driving while Mexican” remains an unacceptable public hazard.

In contrast to those stereotypes, experience from the pilot program has demonstrated that Mexican trucks and their drivers are fully capable of complying with all U.S. safety requirements. An August 2009 report from the Department of Transportation’s Inspector General found that only 1.2 percent of Mexican drivers that were inspected were placed out of service for violations, compared to nearly 7 percent of U.S. drivers who were inspected. The “out of service” rate for Mexican trucks was slightly lower than the rate for U.S. trucks, even though Mexican trucks were inspected six times more often than the U.S. trucks.

The Congressional Research Service confirmed the superior safety record of Mexican trucks and drivers in a February 2010 report to Congress:

The safety of Mexican trucks [in the demonstration program] is now comparable with U.S. trucks. ‘Out-of-service’ violations are those that are serious enough to keep the truck from continuing its journey until the violation is resolved. … However, recent data provided by the FMCSA [Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration] … indicate that other Mexican trucks [those operating just in the 25-mile "commercial zone" across the border] are as safe as U.S. trucks and that the drivers are generally safer than U.S. drivers.

The failure of Congress to allow implementation of the NAFTA trucking provisions has proven costly to the United States in three important ways.

First, U.S. failure to comply has deprived our economy of the efficiencies of moving goods across our mutual border at lower cost. With the ban in place, trucks approaching the border are required to unload their cargo into warehouses in so-called commercial zones within 25 miles of the border, only to have that cargo reloaded onto short-haul vehicles and then onto domestic trucks for final delivery. This inefficient system causes delays, increased pollution and added costs at busy border crossings such as Calexico East; San Ysidro; Nogales, Ariz.; and Laredo, Texas. Because more than 70 percent of U.S. trade with Mexico travels by truck, the ban on cross-border trucking imposes an additional $200 million to $400 million in transportation costs each year, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Second, failure to comply has exposed U.S. exporters to perfectly legal sanctions imposed by the Mexican government. Under the provisions of NAFTA, and after waiting patiently for more than a decade, the Mexican government imposed sanctions in 2009 on more than $2.4 billion in U.S. exports affect 100 products, from Washington apples to Iowa pork. The sanctions would be lifted in two stages as the U.S. government implements the proposed program to comply with Annex I.

Third, failure to comply has compromised the U.S. government’s reputation as a good citizen of the global trading system. Simply put, the U.S. government has failed to keep its word to our Mexican neighbors. Our government has been in flagrant violation of a major trade agreement for more than 15 years. This breach of trust has undermined the U.S. government’s standing to challenge other governments, from Mexico to China to the European Union, who may also be in violation of various trade agreements. The Obama administration’s promise to more vigorously “enforce” our rights in the World Trade Organization and other agreements will lack credibility as long as the U.S. government fails to comply with such clear commitments as the trucking provisions of NAFTA.

For all these reasons, the U.S. government should act as quickly and as thoroughly as possible to implement the proposed regulations to bring our nation into compliance with our mutually beneficial agreement with our Mexican neighbors on cross-border trucking.

 


Griswold, Daniel. “The Pilot Program on NAFTA Long-Haul Trucking Provisions.” May 4, 2011. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=13075 (accessed May 5, 2011).

Bi-partisian gang of lawmakers to “DEMAND” end to Mexican cross border proposal

Safe, fully inspected Mexican trucks such as this one would be allowed access to US under the proposed Pilot Program with Mexico

It never ends. Citing bogus concerns over safety, security and cost, a bipartisan gang Congressmen, bought and paid for with Teamster funds is demanding that the federal Department of Transportation cancel plans to re-introduce a cross-border trucking program with Mexico.

Taking the lead with a letter on 4/4/2011, Rep. Duncan Hunter (D-CA) along with Rep. Daniel Lipinski, (D-Ill), Rep. Rep. Bob Filner, (D-Ca) and 19 other Democrats along with 12 Tea Party Republicans, has a letter that is to be delivered to La Hood and made public on Wednesday afternoon, DEMANDING LaHood dump the plans for a renewed cross border program with Mexico.

The cross border program would bring the US in compliance with our obligations under the NAFTA agreement and permit Mexico to lift the $2.4 billion in legal retaliatory tariffs instituted after 17 years of the United States refusing to comply with their promises.

Before 198, trucks from Mexico and Canada were permitted into the U.S. with proper licensing, although they did not extend the same courtesy to U.S. truckers. In the wake of a moratorium, Canada quickly resolved its differences. Mexico did not. However, more than 800 Mexican carriers were “grandfathered” in under the 1982 executive order prohibiting foreign carriers in the US.

In a draft copy of the letter sent to Mexico Trucker Online, the usual bogus concerns about safety on U.S. roads, the ability to properly inspect all trucks at the border and the prospect of drug cartels using the cross-border program as a shipping outlet for drugs are raised. The government’s funding of electronic tracking systems for Mexican trucks, which we oppose but which has been modified is also mentioned.

Some of the highlights of the letter include:

The cross-border trucking program clearly puts foreign interests above our own. It’s bad for the American economy. It’s bad for American truckers and the entire commercial trucking industry.” – Duncan Hunter

In our opinion, what is bad for the economy and bad for the image of the United States, is our continued non compliance with our international obligations which have cost the US more than 30,000 jobs and 15% or more of market share in our agri business sector, lost to Canada, that will take decades to recover, if ever.

The letter goes on to say;

“While we understand the need to work to remove the unfair tariffs that Mexico has imposed on U.S. agriculture products as a result, to so should not come at the expense of the safety of our highways”

And again, nothing unfair about the perfectly legal tariff’s Mexico finally instituted and will certainly raise, if we fail to act upon our obligations this time. Historically, Mexican trucks and their drivers have proven to be safer and more compliant with US safety laws and regulations than have our own people.

Rep. Daniel Lipinski, D-Ill, chimes in, proving he knows nothing of what he has been paid to oppose by stating;

“Past inspection failures and gaps in security at the border show that opening our roads to Mexican truck traffic could result in the entry of unsafe vehicles and drivers that pose a threat to the safety of the public.”

It is glaringly apparent none of them have seen the results of the past demonstration program, the FMCSA/CVSA inspection reports of the OP-2 carriers operating in the border zone nor realize just exactly how each and every vehicle legally entering this country is subjected to an inspection of varying degrees. And with a limited number that would operate under the proposed pilot program, EVERY SINGLE ONE would and could be thoroughly inspected as set out in the proposed new pilot program.

Lipinski goes on to opine;

“The fact that the agreement would also require taxpayers to subsidize required equipment for Mexican truckers that American truck operators would have to pay for themselves is yet another reason that it should be rejected”

Which is something we happen to agree with. We reject the notion of requiring EOBR’s in any truck, without regard to nationality or domicile. However, Lipinski and the rest fail to realize that Mexican OP-2 carriers and others, pay their proportionate share of highway taxes through fuel purchases and IFTA payments. However, DOT has revised the proposal to allow GPS systems to be used for tracking purposes to ensure compliance with US cabotage and hours of service regulations. 85% of Mexican carriers are equipped with Qualcomm communications suites which would comply with this requirement.

Interestingly enough, this requirement and all the others in the proposed pilot program documents, were demanded by those now opposing implementation of the program. Go figure. It ain’t about safety people!

And finally, they get to the latest excuse, which is baseless, about the big boogie men of the cartels using the trucks to smuggle drugs.

The letter claims;

“Setting up a program that allows Mexican long haul trucks to cross the border and move freely through the U.S. could increase this method of smuggling by the drug cartels and serve as a resource for their criminal activity”

Adds Lipinski,

“Inviting trucks from Mexico to freely transport goods throughout the U.S. provides drug traffickers with another potential avenue to exploit at a time when crime and violence in Mexico are on the rise.”

They ignore or in their ignorance, don’t realize that dues to the post 9/11 security at the border, commercial trucks and others sometimes wait for hours in line to make their way across the border. Waiting in that line, permits CBP and Customs inspectors to “walk the dogs”, observe drivers reactions or act on gut instinct to single out trucks for a secondary inspection or more.

Sure, drugs are crossed on occasion in semi’s, and generally are caught. Those that aren’t have usually been loaded on the US side, with drivers taking advantage of the idea of making a quick buck.

Mexican trucks or not. Pilot program or not. Drugs will continue to flow into this country as long as the demand is there.

We’ll have the text of this letter, bought and paid for by the TEAMSTERS and other opponents when it is released officially tomorrow, probably in a circle jerk of glad handing on Capitol Hill.