Mexican truckers

[ScreamingEagle]

Mexican Truckers Coming to America
03 Sep 2007


A long-delayed plan to allow Mexican trucks to roam the United States is going into effect this week. The last hurdle was cleared when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected an appeal from the Teamsters Union and Sierra Club.

The Teamsters and Independent Trucking Association both oppose the program set up by the North Amereican Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which will allow 100 preapproved Mexican companies to begin sending their rigs and drivers stateside. The government's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration says the courts decision is welcome news for U.S. truck drivers who they claim are anxious to work south of the border.

Those opposing the program say U.S. transportation officials have failed to comply with congressional requirements aimed at making sure Mexican drivers and trucks will be safe on U.S. roads and highways.

Some even say the program will allow low-paid Mexican truckers to take jobs from American drivers. There are also fears Mexican drivers will be used to smuggle drugs or terrorists across the border.

The program will begin September 6th.

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/...n=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

 

[trobinett]

Hey, I don't know about you guy's, but I'd say the "wild west" is back on the board.

Can't hardly wait to see what the Mexicans think about our 400 lb truck drivers, how bout you?

It just amazes me as to the terrible shape OUR truck drivers are in these days. Their all FAT AS PIGS, no disrespect..............

I got NO PROBLEM with Mexican drivers on our roads, I'd say they are a comp let assets.

Now, if we can just go to Mexico without being robbed, murdered, the world would be good, or at the least EVEN..................

 

[Gunny]

Mexican Truckers Coming to America
03 Sep 2007


A long-delayed plan to allow Mexican trucks to roam the United States is going into effect this week. The last hurdle was cleared when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected an appeal from the Teamsters Union and Sierra Club.

The Teamsters and Independent Trucking Association both oppose the program set up by the North Amereican Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which will allow 100 preapproved Mexican companies to begin sending their rigs and drivers stateside. The government's Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration says the courts decision is welcome news for U.S. truck drivers who they claim are anxious to work south of the border.

Those opposing the program say U.S. transportation officials have failed to comply with congressional requirements aimed at making sure Mexican drivers and trucks will be safe on U.S. roads and highways.

Some even say the program will allow low-paid Mexican truckers to take jobs from American drivers. There are also fears Mexican drivers will be used to smuggle drugs or terrorists across the border.

The program will begin September 6th.

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/...n=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

One more step toward screwing the US for global profit. Losers.

 

[jillian]

The problem is that the 100 Mexican trucking companies will not be subject to our emissions standards; will not be paying wages comparable to what our drivers get; will not be paying the U.S. taxes while using our infrastructure; and will not be subject to security checkpoints.

I think Congress needs to address those issues since the Court couldn't absent controlling legislation.

 

[Gunny]

The problem is that the 100 Mexican trucking companies will not be subject to our emissions standards; will not be paying wages comparable to what our drivers get; will not be paying the U.S. taxes while using our infrastructure; and will not be subject to security checkpoints.

I think Congress needs to address those issues since the Court couldn't absent controlling legislation.

Was wondering if I was the only one that was aware of this. It's BS, is what it is.

I agree with you on this one.

 

[jillian]

Was wondering if I was the only one that was aware of this. It's BS, is what it is.

I agree with you on this one.

Thanks. I think most of us can agree on this one. And, believe it or not, I found out about it listening to Randi Rhodes on the way home from work. She agrees with us too.

 

[William Joyce]

The problem is that the 100 Mexican trucking companies will not be subject to our emissions standards; will not be paying wages comparable to what our drivers get; will not be paying the U.S. taxes while using our infrastructure; and will not be subject to security checkpoints.

I think Congress needs to address those issues since the Court couldn't absent controlling legislation.

This is the liberal case, which is valid, and there is a conservative one, too. But as we can all see, our politicians aren't ideologues, they're professional America-screwers for profit.

 

[jillian]

This is the liberal case, which is valid, and there is a conservative one, too. But as we can all see, our politicians aren't ideologues, they're professional America-screwers for profit.

The "liberal case"? As opposed to what? Those are the only issues that should matter to any of us.

Don't ever mistake the "racist" case for the conservative one.... the terms are not interchangeable.

 

[Gunny]

Thanks. I think most of us can agree on this one. And, believe it or not, I found out about it listening to Randi Rhodes on the way home from work. She agrees with us too.

The fact is, this benefits Mexico/Mexicans, and whoever's buying their goods.

It means just that much more easy access crossing anything they want across the border.

And it means trucks belching smoke plowing through states where US citizens couldn't get an inspection sticker if their vehicles did the same.

So all in all, just BS from the word go.

 

[Toro]

The U.S. House erected a roadblock to trade June 26 when it voted by a 2-1 margin to keep Mexican-owned trucks off U.S. highways. The vote was couched in safety concerns. But it was really an effort to protect the Teamsters union from competition and to protect American consumers and producers from lower prices.

Under current rules, neither Mexican-owned nor American-owned trucks can cross the border to deliver goods directly to destinations inside the other country. If a U.S. exporter wants to send a load of widgets from Pittsburgh to Monterey, Mexico, the U.S.-owned truck must stop at the U.S. side of the border within a narrow “commercial zone” and offload its cargo. Then the goods are carried across the border in a short-haul truck called a drayage vehicle only to be reloaded onto a Mexican-owned truck for the long haul to its final destination. Mexican exports headed to the United States must follow the same cumbersome process in reverse.

The North American Free Trade Agreement, enacted almost eight years ago, was supposed to open the border to trucking. But the Clinton administration, under political pressure from the Teamsters union, which represents 120,000 drivers in the freight industry, refused to implement the trucking agreement, citing safety concerns.

In February of this year, a NAFTA arbitration panel ruled unanimously that the United States was in violation of its commitments, and the new Bush administration rightly agreed to open the border to Mexican trucks by the end of this year. But again under union pressure, the U.S. House voted 285-143 on June 26 to deny funds to the Transportation Department to implement the trucking agreement.

Opponents of Mexican trucks cite safety concerns. But the U.S. government remains free under NAFTA to impose the same or even stricter standards on Mexican trucks on U.S. roads as it does on American-owned trucks. The Bush administration is seeking an additional $88 million for border inspection facilities to do just that.

Opponents counter that Mexican trucks that have been inspected at the border fail safety tests at a higher rate than U.S. trucks. But the Mexican trucks inspected so far tend to be the older drayage vehicles rather than the newer, long-haul trucks that would be used to ship goods to cities inside the United States. In California, where inspections have been intensified, the failure rate of Mexican trucks is virtually the same as U.S. trucks. Mexican trucking companies have a powerful incentive to operate safe trucks inside the United States for fear of losing their license to operate.

http://www.freetrade.org/node/233

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Sounds like the safety issue is anything BUT. NAFTA exists, comply or withdraw from the agreement. Simple as that.

 

[jillian]

The fact is, this benefits Mexico/Mexicans, and whoever's buying their goods.

It means just that much more easy access crossing anything they want across the border.

And it means trucks belching smoke plowing through states where US citizens couldn't get an inspection sticker if their vehicles did the same.

So all in all, just BS from the word go.

It benefits the Mexican companies. It doesn't benefit the average Mexican. It will not raise their standard of living or wages. It will only reduce the standards for our own workers.

And yes, they shouldn't have any right

I don't think there's anything in NAFTA that would prohibit legislation requiring that if they use our infrastructure, they pay competative wages; and comply with our drug testing regs; emissions standards; and basic security concerns.

And, yes... it's BS from the getgo.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It benefits the Mexican companies. It doesn't benefit the average Mexican. It will not raise their standard of living or wages. It will only reduce the standards for our own workers.

And yes, they shouldn't have any right

I don't think there's anything in NAFTA that would prohibit legislation requiring that if they use our infrastructure, they pay competative wages; and comply with our drug testing regs; emissions standards; and basic security concerns.

And, yes... it's BS from the getgo.

I suggest your wrong. We do not get to dictate to others what they pay. Drug testing YES, emission standards YES and of course security issues. And as I understand it Bush is trying to do those things already. Remind me again who created NAFTA? I do not recall it being Bush.

 

[lieberalism]

this is another liberal sell out and will result in more mexicans getting in. they should just bus in the mexican straight to the welfare office and be done with it. why go through all the fuss of pretending they are driving a truck?

 

[lieberalism]

anyone who thinks nafta could be used to regulate these mexican truck drivers is insane. nafta was specifically made to take advantage of poor mexican labor laws. it did that, and in turn made america worse because now they are all coming up here to find jobs that actually pay more than 10 cents a day.

 

[007]

And bush has the balls to snicker and joke about people that are cautious of his globalist agenda.

Just wait until the first truck with 45 tons of pot is caught, or a trailer packed with 250 illegal aliens, or causes an accident that kills a whole family of vacationers. Oh yeah... it'll happen alright, over and over.

 

[eots]

that's the basic plan to compete with world wide cheap labour health and safety standards ours must be eroded down to the same level

 

[Waterrescuedude]

Hey, I don't know about you guy's, but I'd say the "wild west" is back on the board.

Can't hardly wait to see what the Mexicans think about our 400 lb truck drivers, how bout you?

It just amazes me as to the terrible shape OUR truck drivers are in these days. Their all FAT AS PIGS, no disrespect..............

I got NO PROBLEM with Mexican drivers on our roads, I'd say they are a comp let assets.

Now, if we can just go to Mexico without being robbed, murdered, the world would be good, or at the least EVEN..................

SO YOU WANT TO SEE THE RATE OF ILLEGALS TRIPLE???? Brilliant!!!!