James Hoffa and his Teamsters have filed yet another frivolous lawsuit in an attempt to stop the US compliance with our NAFTA obligation and promises
At the 11th hour today, Teamsters, along with Public Citizen filed a lawsuit in 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco seeking to stop implementation of the Mexican Cross Border Program.
The suit was filed against the US Department of Transportation and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration alleging that the pilot program sets standards that aren’t stringent enough for Mexican trucks and drivers. For example, the program waives a law requiring trucks to display proof of meeting federal safety standards, said Jonathan Weissglass, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.
An official for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration said the Teamsters haven’t directly served the agency with a lawsuit. Once they do, the agency “will review and address the filing,” she said, adding that the pilot program will begin within 30 to 60 days. The official declined to address the substance of the suit.
U.S. officials have said the deal would hold Mexican truckers to high safety standards, and business groups have said it is important to make a deal with Mexico because the retaliatory tariffs are costing the U.S. jobs.
The arguments laid out in the complaint are faulty at best. For instance, The Teamsters allege the trucker program is faulty because it contains certain standards that are impossible for Mexico to meet. Mexico won’t be able to provide comparable access to U.S. trucks, as required, because ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel isn’t widely enough available there.
Ultra Low Sulfur diesel is widely available in the major cities and along the border, however the argument is moot as the routes US truckers are likely to take would put them well within range of their diesel capacity filled on the US side.
They also claim that Mexican truckers have less stringent vision requirements, which while true, is really a non issue. Mexico requires only recognition of the color “Red” while US vision requirements require cognizant recognition of red, yellow and green.
That’s all we know at the moment. Apparently, the comment at the conclusion of the MCSAC subcommittee by attorney Carlos Sesmas enraged the little man sufficiently to cause this frivolous lawsuit to be filed.
Public Citizen and the Teamsters went before the court in 2007 over the Mexican truck issue, joined by the Sierra Club and OOIDA. Even using false and misleading evidence (ie: Trinity Industries), the court dismissed the lawsuit.
We imagine that will be the case this time.
Mexican truckers take pride in their rides such as this Kenworth photographed in Laredo Texas. This is what opponents refer to as "dangerous", "sub standard Mexican junk"
That’s the question being posed on the Landline Now Media blog by Sandi Soendker, and it’s a valid question.
The obvious answer to the question is of course, no. However, in their absence of a credible argument opposing the cross border trucking program with Mexico, OOIDA and other opponents are knowingly and willfully preying on the ignorance and prejudices of their members and the public at large, to turn opinion against Mexican truckers.
So far once we can agree with OOIDA when Soendker writes;
If American truckers are opposed to cross-border trucking with Mexico, are they racists? If they are concerned with issues like safety, jobs, national security, fair treatment – is that racism? Concerns for other issues like immigration, customs, reduced tax revenue for roads, lack of clear enforcement – is that racism? Of course it isn’t.
The safety issue has been debunked. Mexican trucks and their drivers have been shown to be as safe, and in most cases safer, than their US and Canadian cousins.
[pullquote]
A Good Example of the drivel from Mark Reddig
The countdown has started to the opening day of cross-border trucking with Mexico.
And even as that date approaches, efforts by OOIDA to stop the program dead in its tracks continue as well.
Truckers and others are also hitting the phone lines, calling members of Congress, federal officials and more, trying to get the message across to a Congress bullied and bruised from the heavy-handed lobbying of the ATA, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (an organization that clearly doesn’t deserve the name,) and the huge multinational companies that crave the cheap labor south of the border.
For some folks, it’s all a bit much. They are tired of having to fight this battle over and over, tired of the fact that even when Congress votes 411-3 to stop this idea, that the friends of big business keep bringing it back again and again, like some kind of monster in an old horror film that – no matter how many times you shoot it – just keeps shambling forward.
But this battle is too important. And those people should not be rewarded for their attempts to thwart the will of the American People, and of Congress.
We need to flood Capitol Hill with phone calls, letters, faxes and emails.
You’re likely to receive a response, but it very well may not say what you’d like to hear.
Don’t let it get you down or dissuade you from continuing this fight.
I recently called all three of the folks who represent me in Congress – my representative and both of my senators.
I received, in return, form letters. That’s not a big surprise.
However, what was a big surprise to me is that the members’ letters indicated that at least one of them is accepting this drivel from DOT that they’ve fixed all the problems and we’re good to move ahead with this.
Believe me, I will call and correct that error. I hope all of you will join me.
[/pullquote]
Absent any proof, opponents continue to scare the hell out of Americans into thinking that 100 or so Mexican trucks will put tens of thousands of US truckers out of business and into the welfare line.
Ridiculous when you consider Canada has 37,000 or more trucks with free access to the US, and they have not cost us jobs. Landline Now host Mark Reddig doesn’t miss an opportunity to warn US truckers that 100 Mexican trucks will “destroy” the US trucking industry. And because of ignorance, bigotry and prejudice, people believe such an incredulous lie.
When they refer to “national security”, they want you to believe that terrorists are lining up to hitch a ride on the first Mexican trucks to cross the border while ignoring the fact that their are more than 25,000 Mexican drayage trucks who cross the border daily. They also pointedly ignore the fact that to our north, across one of the longest unsecured borders in the world, is the largest population of people from the middle east, the so called “New Canadians”, who can cross our border at will. And with a Canadian commercial license, they can do so in a big rig.
They talk of “fair treatment” which is nothing more than equal access. Many people don’t know that after we slammed the door in the face of the Mexicans in 2009, they continued to allow American carriers total access to their country. Four US carriers continue that access today.
OODA President Jim Johnston stood at a stakeholders meeting in 2009 before Secretary Ray LaHood and when asked about Canadians breaking our cabotage laws, shrugged his shoulders and said “It happens” and in the next breath insisted Mexican carriers should be barred because they “might” be inclined to break cabotage, notwithstanding the fact that if a Mexican breaks our cabotage laws, he is also violating his H2b visa and can have it cancelled and himself deported.
On the other end of the debate, we welcome pieces of crap such as this old FLD Freightliner from Canada into this country and onto our roads, without the least bit of worry about the safety and mechanical condition of the rig
They’ll have you believe that the Mexican carriers who will enroll in the program will be waiting to carry drugs and illegals into this country. 100 of the most closely monitored, strictly controlled trucks on our roads, while ignoring the report of the one of the largest cocaine busts in Nevada history, on a Canadian truck, a story which only garnered a mention on LandlineNow. Had it been a Mexican truck, all hell would have broken loose over at OOIDA.
OOIDA and other opponents have stooped as low as to turn to acknowledged hate groups such as FAIR, to spread their agenda against Mexico and their trucking industry, while keeping a safe distance from the results of their efforts. Using the hatred and bigotry of these fringe nutcases to get their message out. Disgusting!
Another Mexican Kenworth (KenMex) in Laredo Texas. How different is this from what you're driving?
So is it racist to oppose cross border trucking with Mexico? Not in the least if you have a valid reason and proof to back up your position. But to use the ignorance, prejudice and bigotry of some to promote hatred and violence against the Mexican truckers is decidedly racist.
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).
2001 Kenworth/Kenmex – American truckers can't tell the difference
I was coming out of Houston yesterday and was passed by a truck that caught my eye. The brand on the hood was KENWORTH/KENMEX. Nothing extraordinary about the truck other than it was a Mexican manufactured Kenworth. The business on the side showed it to be out of Georgia. Nothing out of the ordinary except for the KENMEX label.
Later on in the evening, pulling into the Love’s in Iowa, Louisiana, i pulled into the pump, stopped and noticed to my left the same truck that had passed me earlier. The driver, just arriving minutes before me was sitting at the wheel doing his log book.
Getting a closer look at the truck as I sat there, I noticed that despite all the chrome and chicken lights, it was an older truck, a 2001 Kenworth, but you couldn’t tell it from looking at it. And sure enough, it had a business name on the side out of the Atlanta area. But looking closer I noticed something else that would escape many people.
THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE “UNSAFE” MEXICAN TRUCKS DRIVEN BY AN UNQUALIFIED MEXICAN DRIVER!! Well, at least that is how James Hoffa or Todd Spencer would describe it.
I’m out pumping the fuel and getting the kinks out. My bony ass can’t stay in the saddle as long as it used to, when the driver of this rig comes around on the passenger side of his rig.
We exchange nods and after he gets his fuel flowing, I venture over to talk with him. He seems startled and a little wary at first, understandable, and admits he doesn’t speak good English. I counter that my Spanish sucks so in that, we find common ground and it breaks the ice so to speak. It also helps, as I discover, that he lives in the Monterrey suburb of San Nicholas de la Garza, which is next to the suburb I live in. And we come to find out we have mutual acquaintances in Cadeyreta NL where the trucks owner is based.
I asked him did he have any trouble with other drivers resenting his presence in the US. He said he hadn’t and had not had problems with the DOT or other law enforcement. With his limited English, he didn’t appear to have any problem completing the fuel transaction nor ordering and receiving his order at the Hardee’s inside the truck stop.
We chatted a few more moments, beginning what I hope to be a long friendship that we can continue in Monterrey. A really nice guy. Professional, well groomed and likeable once he got over his initial hesitation.
I followed him down the road until he, having a faster truck and an early delivery in Atlanta, disappeared on down I-10, twin exhausts blowing clean, no smoke, turn signals used when changing lanes etc. A contrast to a couple of American large cars pulling RGN running in the left lane a foot of the bumpers of a couple of 4 wheelers who wouldn’t get out of their way.
And memories of this encounter came to mind later in the evening, especially while listening to ATN and Bubba Bo as he allowed a caller, a small minded little man who considers himself a character out of Star Wars, babbled for 15 minutes showing his ignorance of Mexico, Mexican trucks, their drivers and haranguing the listeners of the conspiracy he sees behind the US fulfilling their obligations under NAFTA.
Most importantly of all though, in my opinion, is truckers on the road, in the truck stop and on the fuel islands, didn’t realize or care that this was a real Mexican truck and trucker, something they have been taught to fear and mistrust. It simply went over their heads or it simply was not an issue. This Mexican trucker was no different than any of us.
Even standing inside of Hardee’s waiting for our orders to go and speaking in fractured Spanish and English, the coonasses coming in and out didn’t give us a second glance. It simply isn’t an issue.
Back in February, Mexico Trucker received a [cref guestbook request] for an interview, an occurrence that is fairly common reflecting the success of this site. Jessica Meyers, a UC Berkeley Grad student expressed interest in talking to us about the Cross Border Program.
On March 29, 2008, we spent a pleasant day with her and her accomplished photographer, Erich Schlegel, Senior Staff photographer for the Dallas Morning News based out of Austin.
Although Mexico Trucker was not mentioned in the article published today, we take pride in knowing that this site, and myself, was minimally responsible for the excellent article she wrote concerning the Cross Border Program. And while I am not in complete agreement with some of her conclusions, the majority validates what we have been preaching here all year. The Mexican trucks are as safe as any of ours, at least the ones which will be allowed in the US.
Here’s the article in it’s entirety.
By JESSICA MEYERS / Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News
Jessica Meyers is a freelance writer based in Berkeley, Calif.
LAREDO – Javier Gonzalez is the middleman in a mandatory three-way handoff at Laredo’s World Trade Bridge. He picks up goods that have come from Mexico City and takes them across the border in a shuttle truck. He then hands them over to an U.S. truck or warehouse within a 25-mile commercial zone limit.
Trucks going into Mexico follow a similar procedure.
For 25 years, the system has worked that way, seeming to satisfy truckers and safety officials on both sides of the border.
But in 2001, seven years after the North American Free Trade Agreement took effect, the Department of Transportation and a NAFTA tribunal persuaded Congress to approve a pilot program that would allow specially registered U.S. and Mexican trucks to travel deep into each other’s countries. Twenty-nine trucking firms – 21 Mexican and eight U.S., including two from Texas – now take part in the program.
It was a gesture toward fulfilling NAFTA’s open-border requirement.
The program has been under fire in Washington from organized labor and environmentalists ever since.
A decision is expected any day on a lawsuit filed last August in federal court in San Francisco to block the program on the grounds that Mexican trucks failed to meet adequate safety requirements. The Teamsters Union, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, Public Citizen and the Sierra Club formed an odd alliance to fight the Bush administration.
And in December, congressional opponents of expanded Mexican trucking in the U.S. persuaded colleagues to cut off funding for the pilot. Although the Transportation Department and the White House got it restored, Sen. Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat who heads the Subcommittee on Interstate Commerce, is threatening to cut it off again.
NAFTA is a sticky word in Washington these days.
President Bush, Mexican President Felipe Calderón and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper all defended the trade agreement at a recent summit in New Orleans. But Democratic contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton say they will rework it. And much to the Bush administration’s chagrin, Congress just blocked a vote on a Colombian free-trade agreement.
Here at the border, trucking is not about politics. It’s about practicality.
One Mexican trucking company owner sees no benefit to sending drivers deep into the U.S. Similarly, many American U.S. truckers appear content depositing their goods at Laredo’s warehouses.
“I would have to have my drivers go from Monterrey to Dallas and come back empty with nothing to reload,” said Transportes Aguila de Oro owner Genaro Gonzalez Amaro, who chose not to participate in the demonstration program.
“I would have to have my drivers educated in English, get truck permits for the U.S., extra insurance – too many obstacles. It’s not feasible,” he said, shrugging. “This cross-border program is just politics, a pact they made without consulting anybody.”
Selling the program
In Washington, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration officials are struggling to prove the merits of an expanded cross-border program. Trucks crossing the border are inspected more frequently and thoroughly than trucks on U.S. roads, they say.
On this particular sunny Friday, inspectors pull Javier Gonzalez aside and tell him in Spanish that he’s violating rules.
Inspectors notice a homemade metal connector wrapped around an air hose. That tie could burst open and cause the vehicle to lose its brakes, they tell the 23-year-old driver.
They usher Mr. Gonzalez, who was carrying recyclable plastics across the border, to the center of the bridge’s inspection compound. There, they cite him for not speaking English and tell him to call his boss in Mexico City as well as a repairman.
Such incidents are proof of the quality of inspections, even with Mexican drivers like Mr. Gonzalez dropping off goods just across the U.S. border, say officials with the motor carrier administration.
“These Mexican carriers are the most scrutinized and inspected,” said John Hill, head of the motor carrier administration. “I have U.S. trucks I don’t have as good data on.”
But program opponents – notably a consortium of insurance companies and consumer safety groups known as Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety – cite the case of Trinity Industries of Mexico. The Piedras Negras-based company, which had the greatest number of Mexican trucks participating in the program until it dropped out in February, had amassed scores of violations.
Santos Pecina, the motor carrier administration’s Texas division field supervisor, says these violations were minor and tabulated only because the trucks had to undergo such extensive border inspections.
Read the entire article at Dallas Morning News
More an more, the truth about Mexican trucks is coming to light, and it is certainly not what OOIDA, The Teamsters and others have tried to convince you about. Oh, and the driver, Javier Gonzalez, who was inspected while the reporters were present? A shuttle or drayage truck. Not a line haul rig.
The opponents and most vocal critics of the Mexican Pilot Program continue to insist their opposition is only about safety and concern over the economic impact a few Mexican trucks will have on their ability to earn a decent living. Their words and actions would suggest otherwise.
Thursday, October 4, a small group of Mexican truckers gathered at the Matamoros-Brownsville International bridge to protest Mexico’s participation in the Demonstration Program
Parked along the curbs near the entrance to the Veterans International Bridge, the drivers demanded equal treatment for Mexican and American truckers.
Read more
Loading ...
Readers Reponses