----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Dolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TW List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: BA-FairTrade List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; FTAA List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; MobGlob List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Org List
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:44 AM
Subject: [mobilize-globally] Opposing NAFTA expansion


Fair Trade Activists will remember that the NAFTA
fight of '92-'93 was the original mother-of-all
legislative and field fights over corpoate managed
trade policy in this country.  It was a narrow and
emotional loss for the proto-Seattle 'blue-green'
coalition.

The transnational corporate 'free trade' lobby is
still pushing to expand the flawed and failed NAFTA
model. We must continue to resist its anti-worker,
anti-environment agenda (esp now that we enjoy the
momentum, and what with the FTAA negotiations near
done).

/s/ Mike Dolan
Behold:

1)  Public Citizen press release on this week's NAFTA
ruling against safe hightways.

2)  Financial Times piece about the NAFTA border
trucking issue.

3)  Call from Chiapas. Repeal NAFTA.  Oppose the FTAA.

______________________________________________
NAFTA Truck Ruling Imperils U.S. Public Safety

NAFTA's Plummeting Image: Now Safe Highways Are a
Trade Barrier

For Immediate Release: Contact: Katie Burnham
(202) 454-5102


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Today,  a NAFTA dispute tribunal
issued an interim ruling that could jeopardize the
safety of everyone who drives on America's highways.
The panel ruled that the U.S. is violating NAFTA by
prohibiting unsafe Mexican trucks from roaming freely
throughout the U.S. Under NAFTA rules, if the U.S.
does not agree to open the border to Mexican trucks,
it faces trade sanctions.

Public Citizen urges the U.S. government to work to
obtain a reversal of this interim ruling. However, if
the final NAFTA panel ruling remains against the
public interest, the U.S. must accept the trade
sanctions and in the name of safety, keep the border
closed.

"The safety of our  highways must not be compromised,
no matter the price," said Public Citizen President
Joan Claybrook. "Keeping Mexican trucks within a
limited border area is essential for the safety of
U.S. highways. The serious safety problems with the
Mexican truck fleet have not been addressed since
President Clinton first refused to open the border.
Granting unlimited U.S. highway access to deadly
Mexican trucks was then -- and is now -- an
astoundingly bad idea." Claybrook served as the top
U.S. auto safety official in the Carter
administration.

U.S. Department of Transportation data show that
Mexican carriers licensed to operate in the U.S. are
more than three times as likely to have safety
deficiencies as U.S. carriers. Common safety problems
include faulty brakes, tires, taillights and brake
lights. The problems found with Mexican trucks are
among the top causes of serious crashes. In Mexico,
trucks are allowed to carry heavier loads. Mexican
truck drivers have no hours-of-service limitations
compared to the limits set on U.S. drivers of 10 hours
of continuous driving. While operating in the U.S.,
Mexican trucks are supposed to comply with U.S.
standards, but the U.S. does not have enough
inspectors to ensure that trucks crossing the border
follow U.S. regulations.

"This ruling is exhibit A in the case for why NAFTA
is a backwards, damaging agreement that the public
dislikes more each time it trounces public safety in
the name of an extreme corporate-managed trade
agenda," said Lori Wallach, director of Public
Citizen's Global Trade Watch.

Added Claybrook, "This ruling is particularly galling
because it allows unelected bureaucrats essentially to
overturn American laws and safety standards. It is
also appalling that the ruling was based on trade
alone; the panel refused to hear evidence about safety
and the risks that the trucks pose to the American
public." ###30###
For more information about Public Citizen, please
visit www.citizen.org

-------------------

Copyright 2000 The Financial Times Limited
Financial Times (London)

November 28, 2000, Tuesday London Edition 2

SECTION: INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY; Pg. 17

LENGTH: 856 words

HEADLINE: INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY: Nafta offers Mexico
freedom of the
road:
The US may have to open its borders to its neighbour's
trucks, regardless ofsafety concerns. Edward Alden and
Andrea Mandel- Campbell report

BYLINE: By EDWARD ALDEN and ANDREA MANDEL-CAMPBELL

BODY:
On a late winter day in 1998, US highway safety
inspectors pulled over a Mexican commercial bus bound
from Tijuana to Las Vegas.

The driver spoke no English, carried no logbook and no
medical card.
The bus, which had inexplicably stopped in the middle
of the road, had no recordof annual safety inspection,
no permits from US highway regulators and was missing
several lights and its left front shock absorber.

Such cases are not unusual, according to studies by
the US Department of Transportation. Of the 35,000
Mexican commercial trucks inspected at the US border
in 1999, 40 per cent were forced out of service for
serious violations of safety rules.

Despite those numbers, a dispute-settlement panel set
up under the North American Free Trade Agreement
(Nafta) is expected to rule soon that the
US must open its borders freely to Mexican commercial
trucks. The US made that commitment in the Nafta
negotiations but has refused since 1995 to
adhere to the agreement. If it still refuses after the
panel decision, Mexico has warned that it will impose
punitive trade sanctions.

The ruling promises to reinvigorate Nafta critics, who
have long charged that the trade pact will force the
US to weaken its domestic regulations to serve the
demands of freer commerce.

Lori Wallach, of Public Citizen, a consumer activist
group, calls the case "one of the most dramatic
examples of how so-called trade agreements
such as Nafta reach far beyond appropriate commercial
issues".

She says that a backlash against Nafta and the World
Trade Organisation is growing because people fear that
the trade rules will "dictate domestic safety, health
and other policies that dramatically affect people's
lives".

The dispute has festered since US President Bill
Clinton, under pressure from the powerful Teamsters'
union, which represents US truck drivers,
refused to open the US border to Mexican trucks.
Mexico brought the case before a Nafta panel in 1998.

Supporters of unfettered trucking, which include most
US trucking companies and the border state governors,
say the restriction is hampering the movement of goods
in one of the world's fastest-growing trade
relationships.
Trucks currently haul about 80 per cent of the two
countries' Dollars 200bn (Pounds 143bn) in bilateral
trade.

Under the current regime, Mexican trucks arriving at
the border must transfer their loads to so-called
drayage, or short-haul trucks.

These trucks cross the border, where the load is again
transferred to a US truck for delivery to its final
destination, an inefficient system that lengthens
backlogs at border checkpoints. The situation is
"anarchy", says Jose Martinez, the president of the
Free Trade Alliance, a pro-Nafta group in San Antonio,
Texas. "If we really mean free trade, then the
trucking
provisions have to be enforced," he said.

James Giermanski, the director of international
business studies at Belmont Abbey College in North
Carolina, adds that inspections of Mexican long-haul
trucks caught illegally in the US have showed fewer
safety violations than the average for US trucks.
"There has never been any evidence that
Mexican long-haul carriers are unsafe," he said. "It
is a gross exaggeration that is all the result of
politics."

US transportation officials also say there has been
substantial convergence of safety standards in the two
countries over the past five years.

But even supporters of an open border acknowledge that
regulatory differences between the two countries need
to be reconciled. Mexico permits heavier trucks on its
roads than does the US, does not require front-axle
brakes, and allows drivers to work longer hours
without time off.

Opponents say that differences such as these invite
more accidents on US highways. US insurance companies,
which stress that they support Nafta, warn that lack
of adequate inspection at the US border could result
in many unsafe Mexican trucks on US roads. In 1998
only 1.6 per cent of the 4m trucks crossing into the
US from Mexico were inspected.

The issue has probably become far too political to be
resolved by sober discussions of regulatory and
inspection requirements.

George W. Bush, who may be the next US president, has
said the US should abide by its Nafta obligations.

But a full opening of the border to Mexican trucks
will invite a backlash from Nafta opponents and their
supporters in Congress, perhaps threatening Mr Bush's
longer term ambition for a western hemisphere
free-trade pact.

If Vice-President Al Gore makes it to the White House,
he is expected to defy the panel's ruling. The
Teamsters' union fears competition -
Mexican drivers earn a fraction of US wages - and Mr
Gore would be unlikely to anger the unions that played
such a vital role in his campaign.

But Mexico is already warning that it will not stand
to see the border closed any longer. Luis de la Calle,
Mexico's deputy trade minister, calls the current
regime "pure discrimination".

If the US defies a panel ruling in Mexico's favour, he
said, "Mexico will not seek compensation, we will just
implement sanctions".

_________________________________________________
OWC CAMPAIGN NEWS - distributed by the Open World
Conference in Defense of Trade Union Independence &
Democratic Rights, c/o S.F. Labor Council, 1188
Franklin St., #203, San Francisco, CA 94109.
Phone: (415) 641-8616   Fax: (415) 440-9297.
Visit out new website at <www.owcinfo.org>.

Note:

Dear Sisters and Brothers:

We just received an important Appeal from a trade
union, community and peasant convention that took
place November 18 in San Cristobal de las Casas
(Chiapas) in Mexico. It is an invitation to workers
and activists in the United States and Canada to
participate in a Tri-National Conference of Workers,
Students, and Activists, to be held in Mexico City in
April 2001, in preparation of the International
Workers' Conference Against Deregulation and For Labor
Rights For All, which will take place at the end of
2001 in Germany. The Appeal from Chiapas spells out
the themes of the April 2001 gathering:

* Repeal NAFTA!

* Stop the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)!

* Stop Deregulation!

* Defense of PEMEX and of the national electrical
industry in Mexico!

* No to the privatization of the public services and
enterprises (health care, education, social security,
etc.)!

* Amnesty for all undocumented immigrants in the
United States!

* Solidarity and unity of working people across North
America and throughout the hemisphere!

* Full Labor Rights for All!

* For the right to self-determination for all the
oppressed peoples of the continent!

We will translate this powerful Appeal into English,
along with an extended introduction, in the next few
days.

In the interim, we are sending the original Appeal to
those of you who speak or read Spanish and who
undoubtedly will appreciate fully the importance of
this appeal. Need we only remember that the Zapatista
uprising began on January 1, 1994, the very day that
NAFTA went into effect. One of the first demands
raised by the rebellion was "No to NAFTA!"

Almost seven years later, seven years of devastation
and pillage, NAFTA must go -- so say the participants
in the Assembly of San Cristobal, thereby echoing the
countless numbers of unions and organizations across
the United States and Canada that have reached the
same conclusion.

In Solidarity,

Alan Benjamin,
for the OWC Continuations Committee




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/

-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/0/_/_/_/975575633/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




Reply via email to