Author Topic: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks  (Read 9190 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #25 on: January 06, 2011, 07:42:36 PM »
What happens when one of these trucls runs over somebody?  Who do you sue?  How do we verify insurance? 

How do we verify the safety records of the drivers? 

How do verify the registration records of these things? 

What about the ease of smuggling drugs and illegals?

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #26 on: January 06, 2011, 08:04:14 PM »
Agreed... That is the kind of shit a kid uses. "But, but, they did it to."

The real question is when will either party put up someone who's actually looking out for the people and not the businesses?

Answer... Never.

Bush didn't do it

he tried to do it

just like Obama is trying to do it

I'm clearly against it so  saying "Bush was pushing for this too" is not trying to  justify Obama's run at it

I'm opposed to the idea regardless of who is pitching it



Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #27 on: January 06, 2011, 08:15:48 PM »
It was dead wrong when Bush pushed this crappola and I told you many times, I was bounced from FR for trashing Bush over these issues so much.   

Its treason in my mind to push an agenda like this.   

I'm with you on the first sentence

but then you go off the rails crazy in the second sentence

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2011, 05:06:59 AM »
WE ARE GETTING PLAYED FOR JERKOFFS AGAIN!

We are worried bout $2 Billion in tarriffs, yet not the hundreds of billions illegals and drug dealers from Mexico cost us?   

How fucking ridiculous is this? 


________________________ ________________________ _


LATIN AMERICA NEWS
JANUARY 7, 2011.
U.S. Jump-Starts Bid to End Truck Dispute With Mexico
By JOSH MITCHELL





The Obama administration launched a bid to resolve a festering trade dispute with Mexico over allowing foreign truckers onto U.S. roads.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Washington would seek talks with Mexico over a U.S. ban on that country's trucks operating north of the border. The ban has prompted Mexico to slap punitive tariffs on some $2 billion in U.S. goods.

Mexican trucks enter the U.S. in March 2009, the month Washington ended a pilot program allowing them in.

Mr. LaHood sent a blueprint to Congress outlining principles the White House would push. Mr. Obama could end the ban without congressional approval, but he is seeking to get key Democrats and others on board.

The transportation secretary said a formal proposal could emerge in coming months, and another U.S. official said the goal was to have the nearly two-year-old ban lifted "as soon as possible."

A Mexican official said that while Mexico welcomed the proposal, it was "just an initiative" and would not yet prompt the country to lift the punitive tariffs. Mexico says the ban violates the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The White House move will anger some Democratic lawmakers and unions that have opposed lifting the ban on the grounds that Mexican trucks are unsafe and the move would kill U.S. jobs.

International Brotherhood of Teamsters President Jim Hoffa said Thursday he was "deeply disappointed" by the White House proposal.

"Why would the DOT propose to threaten U.S. truck drivers' and warehouse workers' jobs when unemployment is so high?" he said.

A congressional ally of the union, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D., Ore.), would call for a hearing on the matter, his spokeswoman said.

But the White House has been under increasing political and economic pressure to resolve the dispute. Mexico's retaliatory tariffs have hit dozens of American products, from apples to pork to pistachios. That has angered powerful U.S. industries and their congressional allies, who say thousands of U.S. jobs have been lost or jeopardized as a result.

Mexico is one of the U.S.'s biggest trade partners, and the spat has hampered the Obama administration's goal of expanding U.S. exports to create jobs.

"If we're going to double exports within five years, we must hold on to export markets, such as Mexico, where American companies are already doing well," said U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue.

Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington think tank, said the move by the White House reflected a shift in the Obama administration's approach to free-trade issues.

"It's another tilt in the direction of pulling trade policy out of the basement, up into at least the first floor," Mr. Hubauer said.

He noted that the White House announcement came on the day that President Obama selected as his chief of staff William M. Daley, who helped the Clinton Administration push the North American Free Trade Agreement through Congress in the early 1990s.

Tensions over Mexican trucks operating in the U.S. heated up in early 2009 when Mr. Obama, shortly after taking office, signed legislation canceling a pilot program that had allowed Mexican trucks to carry cargo on U.S. roads.

The Teamsters union argued that Mexican trucks were unsafe, that some drivers didn't know English and that Mexican authorities didn't keep adequate safety records on drivers.

Mr. LaHood's blueprint says U.S. regulators will screen Mexican truckers for compliance with safety regulations, and keep tabs on their operations.

—Paul Kiernan
contributed to this article.
Write to Josh Mitchell at joshua.mitchell@dowjones.com


.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2011, 06:24:21 AM »

I'm clearly against it so  saying "Bush was pushing for this too" is not trying to  justify Obama's run at it

Stop it. You were trying to justify Obama. Just like you have tried to do in many other threads.


Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2011, 07:42:04 AM »
Stop it. You were trying to justify Obama. Just like you have tried to do in many other threads.

what do you think I was trying to justify?

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2011, 09:09:36 AM »
Bush didn't do it

he tried to do it

just like Obama is trying to do it

I'm clearly against it so  saying "Bush was pushing for this too" is not trying to  justify Obama's run at it

I'm opposed to the idea regardless of who is pitching it




I wasn't really claiming YOU were... I was just saying my statement based on the principle of many people in fact saying "Bush did it too."

Which, I'm sure you will agree, many people do use that as a reason.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2011, 09:25:43 AM »
I wasn't really claiming YOU were... I was just saying my statement based on the principle of many people in fact saying "Bush did it too."

Which, I'm sure you will agree, many people do use that as a reason.

many people bring it up but depending on the context I don't think it's unreasonable to point out what a prior POTUS has done, especially the one immediately preceding the current one.    In this case the last 3 POTUS's have been for something like this and I've been against it in each case.  Obama has continued many policies of the Bush administration which I also don't agree with.   

Each party tends to cite the others prior use or support of something and then when they are in power turn around and do the exact same thing or worse. 

When Dems were in the minority and using the fillabuster the Republicans were all up in arms complaining about it and calling for the "nuclear option" and then just a few years later when they were in they were in the minority they took abuse of the fillabuster to a whole new level.   I don't think it's unfair to point out these types of things

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #33 on: January 07, 2011, 09:37:51 AM »
many people bring it up but depending on the context I don't think it's unreasonable to point out what a prior POTUS has done, especially the one immediately preceding the current one.    In this case the last 3 POTUS's have been for something like this and I've been against it in each case.  Obama has continued many policies of the Bush administration which I also don't agree with.   

Each party tends to cite the others prior use or support of something and then when they are in power turn around and do the exact same thing or worse. 

When Dems were in the minority and using the fillabuster the Republicans were all up in arms complaining about it and calling for the "nuclear option" and then just a few years later when they were in they were in the minority they took abuse of the fillabuster to a whole new level.   I don't think it's unfair to point out these types of things

I agree when they are pointing out the hypocrisy, but not to validate.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #34 on: January 07, 2011, 10:16:23 AM »
I agree when they are pointing out the hypocrisy, but not to validate.

if that's the only argument and it's not relevent then I definitely agree

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #35 on: January 13, 2011, 03:21:46 PM »
Bump for ozmo.   

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #36 on: January 13, 2011, 03:23:43 PM »
It's been happening for 20 years, fellahs.

bigger than any 4-year flash in the pan presidency. 


we'll see open roads between nations in another decaade or three, and we all know it.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #37 on: January 13, 2011, 03:26:17 PM »
It's been happening for 20 years, fellahs.

bigger than any 4-year flash in the pan presidency. 


we'll see open roads between nations in another decaade or three, and we all know it.


If we ever have a WW, please remind me not to get in a fox hole with you.    You would blow us up and say "Wel we all knew the chinks were going to win eventually" or some shit like that.     

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #38 on: January 13, 2011, 03:30:18 PM »

If we ever have a WW, please remind me not to get in a fox hole with you.    You would blow us up and say "Wel we all knew the chinks were going to win eventually" or some shit like that.     

hahahah I understand the reality of shit.

and we all know, if you had to get into a foxhole and shoot shit out with a few getbiggers in there with you........ I'm betting you'd pass on a few "conservatives" here who don't own a piece and haven't fired one in their lives, and opt for 240. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #39 on: January 13, 2011, 03:34:49 PM »
hahahah I understand the reality of shit.

and we all know, if you had to get into a foxhole and shoot shit out with a few getbiggers in there with you........ I'm betting you'd pass on a few "conservatives" here who don't own a piece and haven't fired one in their lives, and opt for 240. 

Not sure - you might be too busy jerking off to Obama speeches than able to fight at that point.   

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #40 on: January 13, 2011, 03:43:33 PM »
Not sure - you might be too busy jerking off to Obama speeches than able to fight at that point.   


great point.  I hadn't thought of that. 

OzmO

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22731
  • Drink enough Kool-aid and you'll think its healthy
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #41 on: January 13, 2011, 03:46:23 PM »
Bohica.  This is why I hate our politics at times. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #42 on: January 13, 2011, 03:52:08 PM »
Bohica.  This is why I hate our politics at times. 


Issues like this make me nt regret a damn thng I ever say about Obama.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2011, 04:49:00 PM »
bump for hugo 

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #44 on: January 22, 2011, 08:49:52 PM »
WE ARE GETTING PLAYED FOR JERKOFFS AGAIN!

We are worried bout $2 Billion in tarriffs, yet not the hundreds of billions illegals and drug dealers from Mexico cost us?  

How fucking ridiculous is this?  


________________________ ________________________ _


LATIN AMERICA NEWS
JANUARY 7, 2011.
U.S. Jump-Starts Bid to End Truck Dispute With Mexico
By JOSH MITCHELL





The Obama administration launched a bid to resolve a festering trade dispute with Mexico over allowing foreign truckers onto U.S. roads.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Washington would seek talks with Mexico over a U.S. ban on that country's trucks operating north of the border. The ban has prompted Mexico to slap punitive tariffs on some $2 billion in U.S. goods.

Mexican trucks enter the U.S. in March 2009, the month Washington ended a pilot program allowing them in.

Mr. LaHood sent a blueprint to Congress outlining principles the White House would push. Mr. Obama could end the ban without congressional approval, but he is seeking to get key Democrats and others on board.

The transportation secretary said a formal proposal could emerge in coming months, and another U.S. official said the goal was to have the nearly two-year-old ban lifted "as soon as possible."

A Mexican official said that while Mexico welcomed the proposal, it was "just an initiative" and would not yet prompt the country to lift the punitive tariffs. Mexico says the ban violates the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The White House move will anger some Democratic lawmakers and unions that have opposed lifting the ban on the grounds that Mexican trucks are unsafe and the move would kill U.S. jobs.

International Brotherhood of Teamsters President Jim Hoffa said Thursday he was "deeply disappointed" by the White House proposal.

"Why would the DOT propose to threaten U.S. truck drivers' and warehouse workers' jobs when unemployment is so high?" he said.

A congressional ally of the union, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D., Ore.), would call for a hearing on the matter, his spokeswoman said.

But the White House has been under increasing political and economic pressure to resolve the dispute. Mexico's retaliatory tariffs have hit dozens of American products, from apples to pork to pistachios. That has angered powerful U.S. industries and their congressional allies, who say thousands of U.S. jobs have been lost or jeopardized as a result.

Mexico is one of the U.S.'s biggest trade partners, and the spat has hampered the Obama administration's goal of expanding U.S. exports to create jobs.

"If we're going to double exports within five years, we must hold on to export markets, such as Mexico, where American companies are already doing well," said U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue.

Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington think tank, said the move by the White House reflected a shift in the Obama administration's approach to free-trade issues.

"It's another tilt in the direction of pulling trade policy out of the basement, up into at least the first floor," Mr. Hubauer said.

He noted that the White House announcement came on the day that President Obama selected as his chief of staff William M. Daley, who helped the Clinton Administration push the North American Free Trade Agreement through Congress in the early 1990s.

Tensions over Mexican trucks operating in the U.S. heated up in early 2009 when Mr. Obama, shortly after taking office, signed legislation canceling a pilot program that had allowed Mexican trucks to carry cargo on U.S. roads.

The Teamsters union argued that Mexican trucks were unsafe, that some drivers didn't know English and that Mexican authorities didn't keep adequate safety records on drivers.

Mr. LaHood's blueprint says U.S. regulators will screen Mexican truckers for compliance with safety regulations, and keep tabs on their operations.

—Paul Kiernan
contributed to this article.
Write to Josh Mitchell at joshua.mitchell@dowjones.com


.
God I fucking hate these unified one world order
asshats...  Obama has just about doublecrossed everything he said he stood for during the election.  Yet people are praising him ::)  You have got to be kidding ::) They seem to be doing everything they can to destroy us as fast as they can.  unbelievable ::)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #45 on: January 23, 2011, 07:01:59 AM »
Deroy Murdock

About    |    Archive    |    Latest    |    Log In

January 21, 2011 12:00 A.M.

America’s Economy: The Ninth-Freest
The numbers are in: Our lost economic liberty is being noticed.




We’re No. 9!

America has slipped one spot since last year — from earth’s eighth-freest economy in 2010, according to the 2011 Index of Economic Freedom. This 17th annual report, jointly published by the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, sifts through the wreckage caused by government’s turbocharged acceleration during the Bush-Obama years. America’s slump in the rankings (we’re down from No. 5 in 2008) confirms the urgent need for Washington to revitalize free markets and restrain government intervention.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ADVERTISEMENT


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Among the 179 countries examined in the Index, Hong Kong is ranked first, followed by Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Canada, Ireland, and Denmark. These nations all outscored the U.S. across ten categories, including taxes, free trade, regulation, monetary policy, and corruption.

America barely made the top ten. Bahrain was tenth, with 77.7 points, one decimal point behind America’s 77.8 score. Chile reached No. 11 with 77.4, just 0.4 points behind the United States.

Even worse, with a score below 80, the U.S. is spending its second year as a “mostly free” economy. As it departed the family of “free” nations in 2010, it led the “mostly free” category. Even within this less-than-illustrious group, America now lags behind Ireland and Denmark.

How did our once-unassailable country wind up so winded?

“The national government’s role in the economy has expanded sharply in the past two years, and the federal budget deficit is extremely large, with gross public debt approaching 100 percent of GDP,” explain the Index’s authors, Terry Miller and Kim R. Holmes. “Interventionist responses to the economic slowdown have eroded economic freedom and long-term competitiveness. Drastic legislative changes in health care and financial regulations have retarded job creation and injected substantial uncertainty into business investment planning.”

Miller and Holmes also criticize Washington for abandoning the free-trade posture of earlier years, an area where Democrat William Jefferson Clinton boldly guided his party, starting with the NAFTA trade pact. Washington Democrats these days scorn Clinton’s enriching example. As Miller and Holmes write, “Leadership and credibility in trade also have been undercut by protectionist policy stances and inaction on previously agreed free-trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia.”

On fiscal freedom, the Index rates the U.S. as below average. The top American federal income-tax rate is 35 percent, versus a worldwide average of 28.7 percent. At 35 percent, America’s federal corporate tax outpaces the world’s 24.8 percent average and increases U.S. exports . . . of jobs. America’s overall average tax burden was 26.9 percent of GDP, compared with 24.4 percent globally.

America also earns a below-average score for government spending. Worldwide, such expenditures average 33.5 percent of GDP; in the U.S., 38.9 percent.

Compare America with Rwanda, the Index’s most-improved nation. This landlocked African country leapfrogged 18 spots, from No. 93 in 2010 to No. 75 today. How?

“Rwanda scores relatively high in business freedom, fiscal freedom, and labor freedom,” Miller and Holmes observe. “Personal and corporate tax rates are moderate. With a sound regulatory framework that is conducive to private-sector development, Rwanda has achieved annual economic growth of around 7 percent over the past five years.”

As I noted on my visit there last month, Rwanda remains poor, with a long list of challenges. Yet there is no denying its self-confidence and unflagging commitment to pro-market modernization. Rwanda is moving on up.

America remains blessed with wealth, durable institutions, and creative, clever, industrious citizens. Yet its self-doubt is fueled by an insatiable state that constantly devours more of the nation’s output, and with little to show for its gobbling. Depleted, America stumbles downhill.

Miller and Holmes surveyed the globe and reached this conclusion: Rather than multi-billion-dollar stimuli and 2,000-page regulatory behemoths, “the best results are likely to be achieved instead through policy reforms that improve incentives that drive entrepreneurial activity, creating greater opportunities for investment and job growth.”

The path back to American prosperity and preeminence lies in the leadership of both parties in Washington abiding by the previous paragraph.

— New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a nationally syndicated columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. Murdock visited Rwanda thanks to a grant from the SEVEN Fund of Cambridge, Mass. The views expressed here are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of the SEVEN Fund.
 


Purge_WTF

  • Guest
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #46 on: January 23, 2011, 01:23:52 PM »
  North American Union here we come.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #47 on: January 26, 2011, 06:49:02 PM »
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/jan11/11-01-21.html


Obama's Plan to Admit Mexican Trucks
by Phyllis Schlafly January 21, 2011

Phyllis Schlafly


It is amazing that, with unemployment unacceptably high, the Obama Administration has endorsed a plan that will cost U.S. jobs and make highway driving for Americans more dangerous and less pleasant. Obama wants to admit Mexican trucks to drive on all U.S. highways and roads.

Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, explained what this means: "U.S. truckers would be forced to forfeit their own economic opportunities while companies and drivers from Mexico, free from equivalent regulatory burdens, take over their traffic lanes." We wonder if Mexico has any regulatory standards at all.

Mexican trucks are known to be overweight and lacking in safety regulations we consider essential, such as anti-lock brakes. Mexico doesn't have national databases that track drivers' records, background checks, drug usage, and arrests, and it's known to be easy to get a commercial driver's license with a bribe.

Nevertheless, Obama's Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood, has announced he wants to admit Mexican trucks, and he thinks he can appease Congress by presenting on January 6 what he calls a "concept document." It is two pages of bureaucratic pablum that does nothing to assure the safety of Americans on our highways and roads.
 
 
The concept document calls for a "review" of the Mexican carriers' safety program, the driving records of Mexican drivers admitted to the program, and inspection of Mexican trucks for safety and emissions. But the document says nothing about what the standard of review and inspection will be, and whether trucks and drivers who don't pass inspection will be rejected.


Under the concept document, Mexican trucks would be subject to border inspections at the "normal border inspection rate," and subject to inspections within the U.S. "at the same rate as U.S. companies." That doesn't reassure us; the "normal" border inspection rate means that only a few violators will get caught, which the Mexicans will consider just a cost of doing business, and the notion that Mexican drivers need inspection only at the 50 percent U.S. rate is ridiculous.

U.S. law requires truck drivers to speak and understand the English language. The concept document says it will "conduct an English Language Proficiency" test of each Mexican driver, but it doesn't say the Mexican drivers must speak English or pass the test.

We know from the House testimony of the previous Transportation Secretary, Mary Peters, that the Department's policy is to approve Mexican drivers as "English proficient" even when they respond to an examiner's questions in Spanish. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), who was conducting the hearing, was so astounded at this answer that he asked Secretary Peters to repeat it.

The concept document contains other provisions about monitoring, inspections, review, and drug and alcohol inspection. But the document contains nothing about requiring Mexican trucks to meet U.S. standards and rejection if they do not.

Mexican trucks have been barred from operating inside the United States since March 2009. They are limited to a border zone where they must then transfer their cargo onto U.S. trucks.

Mexico claims the current ban violates our treaty obligations under NAFTA. That's not true because NAFTA is not a treaty; it was never ratified by two-thirds of Senators as our Constitution requires for a treaty, and is merely a law passed in 1993 by a simple majority vote.

Perhaps the Obama Administration plan to admit Mexican trucks is just a political maneuver. It may be a tactic to reach out to the business community, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and at the same time be a sneaky way to defeat Republican Members of Congress in 2012 by forcing them to vote on the admission of Mexican trucks.

This issue defeated one of our best conservatives in the House, the great track star Jim Ryun (R-KS), who unexpectedly lost his seat in 2006 after voting to admit Mexican trucks. The feminist Democrat who defeated Ryun, Nancy Boyda, then sponsored a bill to ban Mexican trucks, which passed the House by the overwhelming vote of 411 to 3, with the Senate passing a similar bill 75 to 23, votes that are a good indication of popular opinion.

With the drug war in full battle array along our southern border, this is no time to start admitting Mexican trucks. It's a safe bet that many of the trucks will be carrying illegal aliens and illegal drugs.

Another safety problem exists for U.S. trucks that would get access to Mexican roads under this misguided proposal. Trade is supposed to be two-way street, but U.S. drivers don't want to drive into northern Mexico, the most dangerous area in the world because of the ongoing war between drug cartels.
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #48 on: March 03, 2011, 04:57:46 PM »
Official: Obama, Calderon reach trucking agreement
 AP/WorldMag ^ | Mar 3, 12:26 PM EST | Julie Pace


WASHINGTON (AP) -- An administration official says President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon have reached an agreement on resolving a long-standing dispute over cross-border trucking.

The official says the leaders will announce a clear path to open U.S. highways to Mexican trucks during a joint news conference at the White House Thursday afternoon. Calderon is in Washington for wide-ranging meetings with Obama on everything from border security and immigration.


(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39766
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama Admn proposes to open U.S. roads and highways to Mexican Trucks
« Reply #49 on: March 04, 2011, 05:42:11 AM »
MEXICAN TRUCK DEAL FAILS TO PROTECT U.S. HIGHWAYS, COMMUNITIES
Teamsters Union ^ | 3/3/11 | Galen Munroe




Plan Threatens Jobs, Highway Safety and Border Security

(WASHINGTON) – Today’s announcement by the White House to move forward with opening the U.S. border to long-haul Mexican trucks drew strong condemnations from Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa and highway safety proponents.

“This deal puts Americans at risk,” Hoffa said. “This agreement caves in to business interests at the expense of the traveling public and American workers.”


(Excerpt) Read more at teamster.org ...