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

National Call to Action – Mexican Cross Border Trucking Proposal

This is a Mexican truck! No different from a truck owned by a US company

Time for readers and other interested parties to call their assorted Senators and Congress critters and ask them to support the proposed Cross Border Pilot Program with Mexico which would bring the United States into compliance with it’s international obligations under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The legal retaliatory tariff’s Mexico but on 99 US export products has cost more than 25,000 Americans their jobs and agri business loss of more than 14% market share, most going to Canada.

To contact your Congressman and both of your Senators, call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121, tell the operator that you want to speak with your Congressman and provide the operator with your home zip code.

Tell them to SUPPORT the cross-border trucking plan and save American jobs!

There are many different reasons why a trucking program with Mexico is a good idea.  The following are just a few things that public officials need to know:

• Mexico’s  regulatory standards of their trucking industry,while not exactly mirroring ours, is sufficient to insure their trucking companies and drivers can and will comply with our rules and regulations as proven in the previous cross border demonstration program. At present, the United States is working to raise regulatory standards in the US to reflect the standards in Mexico concerning medical requirements and CDL/Medical Card integration.
• Every year, US truckers are burdened with new safety, security and environmental regulations. Those regulations come with considerable compliance costs. Mexico-domiciled trucking companies and drivers will also be burdened with these exact same costs when operating in the United States in addition to the regulatory costs of operating in their own country.
• It has been determined that Mexico’s regulations and enforcement programs are  similar to those in the United States. Mexico has been a full member of CVSA since 1991.
• To ensure the safety and security of U.S. citizens, Mexico-domiciled trucking companies and truck drivers must will required to comply with the same level of safety, security and environmental standards that already apply to U.S.-based companies and drivers.
• Without complying with our international obligations made  with Mexico, thousands more  U.S. jobs will be lost if the cross-border trucking program is delayed or not initiated at this time.

CALL NOW AND KEEP CALLING UNTIL LAWMAKERS REALIZE JUST HOW BAD AN IDEA IT REALLY IS TO KEEP IGNORING OUR PROMISES AND FAILING TO INSTITUTE THE PROPOSED CROSS BORDER PILOT PROGRAM

Opponents of Cross Border Trucking turn to recognized “hate groups” for support.

"We're as close as you can be," Mexican Economy Minister Bruno Ferrari (left, shown here with US Trade Rep Ron Kirk) said yesterday, confirming that his country is preparing to sign the formal Cross Border Trucking agreement to end the trucking dispute with the U.S. as early as this month

“We’re as close as you can be,” Mexican Economy Minister Bruno Ferrari  said yesterday, confirming that  his country is preparing to sign the formal Cross Border Trucking agreement to end the trucking dispute with the U.S. as early as this month, setting the stage for the country to remove the punitive tariffs that have cost 25,000 or more US jobs and market share.

Opponents of the program, The Teamsters and OOIDA in particular, in their desperation appear to be pulling out all stops, including turning to recognized HATE GROUPS to spread their message.

In this case, the organization in question is FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM (FAIR), a misnomer meant to confuse the public and lend them legitimacy.

FAIR, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, has employed white supremacists in key leadershpi roles, has accepted over a million dollars from a eugenics foundation AND, as if that weren’t enough, has helped to bolster racist conspiracy theories throughout the country.

FAIR is not the voice of the mainstream, it’s the voice of individuals who have helped fuel the 40% increase in the number of hate groups in the US. These aren’t citizen advocacy groups, or simply groups of concerned folk- they are hate groups plain and tall. But then, neither is the TEAMSTERS nor OOIDA.

A recent report by the Southern Poverty Law Center, outlines the story of FAIR as a hate group, and it justifies their official addition to the national list of hate groups maintained by the organization.

It’s been proven that opposition to Mexican trucks has nothing to do with safety, the ability of the Mexican carriers and their drivers to comply with and follow our rules and regulation, but is simply a veiled attempt to keep Mexicans out of this country. Jumping in bed with organizations such as FAIR, the largest and most vile anti-Hispanic organization in the US further proves this.

FAIR has an “Action Alert” posted urging all their nativist members to harass Congress to stop the program. Not much chance of that happening of course, but it there. and like this article in the CONSERVATIVE DAILY NEWS, has OOIDA executive vice president Todd Spencer’s prints all over it.  As the article states, “Where is the Outrage?” We should all be outraged that these two groups, insignificant at best, continue to cost Americans thousands of jobs while pushing their anti-Mexican agenda.

For the most part, they’ve failed. More than 1400 trade associations, the majority of Congress have gotten behind this latest effort to bring us into compliance with our international obligations.

Despite being proven otherwise, we still see people showing their gross stupidity of the issue, or maybe it’s not stupidity, but their bigotry and prejudices coming to the surface such as this letter written to the Tuscaloosa News by Dwight Stripling of Northport Alabama.

Stripling writes;

Dear Editor: Under the proposed North American Free Trade Agreement, which President (Barack) Obama is working to get passed, Mexico will be entitled to haul goods throughout the United States.

But it was discovered that many of the trucks used in the program were poorly maintained, uninspected, and overloaded. Their brakes were bad, their tires were bald and almost always dangerously over the legal weight limit, but that’s not the worst of it.

The United States has safety regulations about how many hours a trucker can drive before he has to take a mandatory break, but the Mexican drivers have no such restrictions, and most are popping pills to keep themselves awake. There is also a possibility of them transporting illegal aliens, drugs, and potential terrorists and their weapons.

When Mexico began sending its trucks across the border, most of the drivers who were stopped for inspection were carrying some kind of contraband to supplement their incomes.

Back then, they carried marijuana and illegal aliens. Today, who knows what they could be carrying in those trucks besides drugs and illegals? Terrorists? Roadside bombs? Anthrax? Think about it!

 

As you can see, Stripling hasn’t a clue what he’s writing about. He blindly follows what he’s been told.

Rusty Wade, aka Yoda, webmaster for Dale “Trucking Bozo” Sommers website, even jumped into the mix with a article he titled, “UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED AGAIN”.  Yoda claims;

A friend sent me pictures from his cell phone of trucks in Arizona that had just come across the border from Mexico at Nogales, Az.
I wondered how safe these Mexican trucks were, so I decided to check them with the FMCSA.
Things I noticed, the authorities were all valid, and there is nothing in that authority that specifies only in the border region, many of those trucks have both Mexican and Arizona tags. I have seen trucks tagged like this in every state of the union. Some do have a “z” after the DOT number some do not!
The absolute truth is these trucks are unsafe, they have repeated inspections that find the same defects.

What did Yoda think he found? Well, one company with 3 drivers, 2 tractors, 2 straight trucks and 4 trailers would seem to have racked up a total of  607 vehicle inspections, 752 driver inspections and 128 haz mat inspections in a 2 year period and they have an AWFUL CMS score if you look at it on the surface. However digging down, you see the majority of the driver violations is for a “non English speaking” driver, and all inspections of this cross border drayage company were done in Arizona.

Another company he lists, LOGISTICA DE CARGA DEL NOROESTE SA DE CV,  similar stats. A vehicle OOS rate of 22% and a driver OOS rate of 2%, comparable to that of US drivers.

And it goes on. Many of these violations of these companies could probably be “DataQed” and removed, but at the end of the day, it’s more smoke and mirrors to mask the truth and shows the lengths opponents of Mexican trucking will go to.

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 & 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).