Hello Sally Baptiste:

The http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h6630/blogs hyperlink, which contains 
commentaries about HR 6630, implies that Mexican trucks are unsafe. 

But... according to an article entitled Attempt to Limit Mexican Trucking in 
U.S. Masks Union Agenda at the http://www.freetrade.org/node/818 hyperlink:
1) Mexican truck drivers have been unfairly denied access to U.S. highways for 
more than a decade by a wall of prejudice.
2) The North American Free Trade Agreement was supposed to allow qualified
American and Mexican truckers to make deliveries across the border, but
opponents have exploited safety fears to block implementation. The
delay in meeting our commitments has cost Americans hundreds of
millions of dollars each year from higher transportation costs and
tarnished the U.S. government’s reputation as an honest and reliable
neighbor.  
3) According to Annex I of NAFTA, 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.
4) In 1998, Mexico initiated a complaint against the U.S. under NAFTA’s
dispute settlement procedures, claiming that the U.S. government had
violated its commitment to treat Mexican trucking firms in a
nondiscriminatory manner. In 2001, a NAFTA panel unanimously agreed
that the U.S. government had violated its commitments under the
agreement. The panel ruled not that the U.S. government needed to open
its market to all Mexican trucks but that it must consider qualified
applications case by case, rather than assuming all Mexican trucks and
their drivers were by definition unsafe.
5) Following the NAFTA panel ruling, Congress stipulated 22 safety
requirements that must be met before Mexican trucks could be allowed
beyond “commercial zones” near the border. In 2002, Transportation
Secretary Norman Mineta certified that the department had met all 22
requirements, but before any licenses could be issued, environmental
and labor activists opposed to NAFTA stopped implementation in court.
Their complaint that the new trucking regulations violated federal
environmental laws was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
in 2003, but the stay was struck down by the Supreme Court in a
unanimous decision in 2004.
6) With the green light to implement the NAFTA trucking provisions, the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has been working with
Mexican authorities to develop a pilot program to allow licensed
Mexican trucks to serve destinations within the United States. The
Department of Transportation has approved 55 Mexican trucks to enter
the U.S. market, and Mexican authorities have approved a similar number
of U.S. trucks to make deliveries in Mexico.
7) The final obstacle in the road to implementing the trucking provision
fully is the Democratic Congress. Bending to pressure from anti-trade
constituencies, both the House and the Senate passed an amendment to
the transportation appropriations bill this year that would cut off all
funds to implement the pilot program. Because the bill is awaiting fi
nal passage and may need to overcome a potential presidential veto, the
administration has moved ahead with the pilot program.
8) Every week of delay is a drag on U.S.-Mexican trade and an
embarrassment to the U.S. 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 them
reloaded onto short-haul vehicles and then onto domestic trucks for
final delivery.
9) 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 80 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,
according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.
10) Safety concerns are only a smokescreen to hide opponents’ real agenda.
Under NAFTA, U.S. authorities remain free to impose the same or higher
safety standards on Mexican trucks and drivers that enter the United
States than the standards imposed on American-owned trucks and drivers.
Since NAFTA passed, the U.S. government has spent $500 million to
improve border inspection stations and has added 600 new truck
inspectors in anticipation of implementing the agreement’s cross-border
trucking provisions.
11) Mexican trucks have not posed a discernible hazard on American roads in
the past. U.S. highways were open to Mexican trucks before 1982, when
the Reagan administration barred new entrants in retaliation for the
Mexican government’s refusal to allow U.S. trucks reciprocal access.
Reagan’s order allowed 800 Mexican trucks that had access to the U.S.
market to continue operating.
12) A recent survey by the Arizona Republic newspaper found that those
Mexican trucks allowed to operate in the U.S. have a superior safety
record compared with U.S.-owned trucks. Since 2003, 1.2 percent of
Mexican truck drivers operating on U.S. roads have been found to be out
of compliance, compared with 7 percent of American drivers. Of Mexican
trucks stopped for inspection, 21 percent are ordered out of service,
compared with 23 percent of U.S. vehicles that are stopped. (NOTE: SO MUCH FOR 
THE SAFETY CONCERNS OF MEXICAN TRUCKS!!!)
13) Although the Teamsters talk about safety, their real agenda is not to
promote safer roads but to protect themselves from increased
competition. The real 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 congressional
leaders, “driving while Mexican” remains an unacceptable public hazard.

14) To promote more-efficient trade and better relations with our Mexican
neighbors, President Bush should promise to veto the transportation
authorization bill until the trucking amendment is removed.
Congressional leaders should cooperate with the president to remove
this final roadblock to implementing an agreement that has not only
promoted trade across the border but also encouraged progress,
modernization and democracy within Mexico.
15) To maintain the ban against qualified, responsible and safe Mexican
truck drivers imposes an expensive tax on the American economy, flouts
the law and insults our neighbors.

Removing the DOT's cross-border trucking program will only ADD $200 million to 
$400 million in transportation costs and force ALL Americans to pay more for 
their goods.

The passage of HR 6630 is bad for America because of the reasons cited above.

Sincerely,

Franklin Perez (No Party Affiliation)
Florida State House Candidate (District 33) - Year 2008
Libertarian and Independent! Not Beholden to Party Politics!
http://www.geocities.com/fperez1776
(407) 694-7805

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: We Did It!  HR 6630 Passed - 395 Votes!
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:47:57 +0000








  


We Did it!!  
 
The voices of Truckers and citizens were heard and HR 6630 was passed - see 
details below.
 
We must start calling all elected officials and oppose the NAFTA Super Highway 
and the sale of public infrastructure. WE CAN DO IT!
 
Stay Tuned and Stay Involved!
 
Sally Baptiste
NPA American Voter
www.TollsCreateGridlock.org 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
-------------- Forwarded Message: -------------- 
From: Angel Burnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: OOIDA National Call to Action Alert 
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:26:59 +0000 


CONGRATULATIONS!!!
We had a resounding victory in the House last night!  Despite heavy threats 
from the White House and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, HR6630 passed with 395 
lawmakers voting for it and only 18 voting against.  
 
HR6630 will require the immediate termination of the DOT's crossborder trucking 
pilot program with Mexico and revoke the DOT's ability to grant 
Mexico-domiciled carriers authority to operate beyond commercial zones without 
Congressional approval. 
 
During the debate regarding HR6630 on the House floor last night prior to the 
vote, half of the lawmakers who spoke mentioned that they have been hearing 
from truckers back home.  That's yet another sign that your efforts, your phone 
calls really did make a big difference 
 
You can find how your lawmaker voted on HR6630 here.  A 'yea' vote is 
essentially a vote against the crossborder pilot program with Mexico and a 
'nay' vote equates to support for that pilot program to continue.
If your lawmaker voted they way you wanted them to, please contact their office 
to say "Thank you".
To contact your lawmaker in the House of Representatives, call the U.S. Capitol 
switchboard at (202) 224-3121, provide the operator with your home zip code and 
they will connect you with his or her office.
If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call the Association at 
1-800-444-5791.
TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE OUR VOICES HEARD.
TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE CAPITOL HILL TAKE NOTICE.
TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE LIFE BETTER FOR TRUCKERS THROUGHOUT AMERICA

 
To no longer receive email from us click here. 

 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


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

ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to