First Mexican trucks set to roll inside U.S. on Saturday

posted at 6:54 pm on August 30, 2007 by Allahpundit

Been getting e-mails about this all day, some from the NAU freaks who think it’s the “next step” in the Master Plan and some from sober folks like See-Dubya who say, quite rightly, that cargo shipments across the border without inspection are an invitation to disaster.

Supporters of the plan say letting more Mexican trucks on U.S. highways will save American consumers hundreds of millions of dollars.

Labor and driver-owner groups have been fighting the measure — part of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement — since it was first proposed, saying the program will erode highway safety and eliminate U.S. jobs.

A one-year demonstration project would allow 100 Mexican motor carriers full access to U.S. roads. It can begin as soon as the inspector general certifies that safety and inspection plans and facilities are sufficient to ensure the Mexican trucks are as safe as U.S. trucks.

Since 1982, Mexican trucks have had to stop within a buffer border zone and transfer their loads to U.S. trucks.

The Teamsters have gone to court to stop them, as has the Owner-Operator Independent Driver Association. Exit question: Benign capitalist venture or a case for Sir Tancelot?

tancredo-lancelot.jpg

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

No offense but people like you need to wake up

No offence, but what has Bush done for national security? I think you need to wake up and see him for what he is – a naive, unread, globalist liberal dilettante who has surrounded himself with Yes men he can trust.

jihadwatcher on August 30, 2007 at 10:21 PM

As soon as they handle their business I will support their actions, as long as they whine about it not a chance.

doriangrey on August 30, 2007 at 10:07 PM

Dude, what are you talking about? Do you know anything at all about the Long Haul trucking insutry? Anything at all?

These guys are average blue collar Americans who get a $250K loan to buy a truck and then drive it for weeks on end before coming home for a day or two. They are your neighbors. The Federal Government regulates them heaviliy. They can only haul so much weight. They can only drive so many hours before a mandatory period of rest. Their trucks have to meet national safety standards and they are inspect and weighed constantly. They have insurance requirements. Etc., etc. They compete on price for every single load. Many of these guys are a week or two away from losing everything. So what business is it exactly that have neglected to have you treat them so disrespectfully? Their only mistake is not organizing and lobbying sooner but they are so busy busting their humps to put food on the table and make the truck payments it’s hard to fault them.

I hope you are never judged by your own standards man…

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 10:25 PM

1776–it was Coolidge. Great guy.

see-dubya on August 30, 2007 at 10:25 PM

1776–it was Coolidge. Great guy.
see-dubya on August 30, 2007 at 10:25 PM

D*mn it, I wasn’t sure which of the two is was. Sigh, should have looked! Thanks.

Spirit of 1776 on August 30, 2007 at 10:28 PM

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 9:38 PM

BigOldDog, nice try..Forget about the Fiddler, He fiddles while we burn..

Legions on August 30, 2007 at 10:32 PM

To what do you attribute no further successful (large-scale) attacks on the homeland after 9.11?

Spirit of 1776 on August 30, 2007 at 9:33 PM

Some part luck, some part the effort that Bush has made, some part the fact, at least my belief, that Al Quaeda got very lucky on 9/11 (I highly doubt they thought the towers would come down) and has a reluctance to carry out a smaller attack after. If the towers hadn’t fallen I would guess that we would have seen other attacks in the years after, but since they fell the next attack required far more planning and preparation – something along a 10 or 15 year line. that’s my take, at least. I also believe that, in the meantime, most of the terrorist energies have been focused on Europe, as far as attacks on the West – which will probably take the next big hit instead of us.

I actually think he is a fairly crafty politician, if unwilling to challenge the press on it’s community-based reality. Though maybe I should give more credit to Rove and less to Bush..

I don’t know, Spirit. Bush’s performance in the 2004 election pretty much put to rest any ideas that he was a crafty politician. He barely won an election that should have been a total blowout. I, for one, would have voted for anyone to the right of Bush. Anyone.

There’s an old saying in the markets, don’t confuse genius with a bull market. America is a conservative and independent minded country and Bush had only the retard Kerrey to deal with and he came very close to blowing it.

To put this all in perspective, I consider Bill Clinton to be pretty stupid, too. At least, I’ve never seen Clinton make any intelligent decisions – though I have seen Bush make some. I have very little respect for either of them, in terms of intelligence and would ask neither for their opinion on much of anything.

There is one thing he said, in his meeting with the Canadian PM and Fox I think it was in spring ‘05 (when they visited the Mayan ruins). Question was posed to him about security implications of open border trade/traffic and he responded that they were thinking in terms of regional defense…ie expanding the space covered by the umbrella of the US military. I’m not sure what to make of that.

Sounds like the NAU (and much larger) to me. We have always taken care of the defense of this hemisphere, without giving up our sovereignty – just as we took care of Europe’s defense without letting Europeans run rampant all over America. The two issues, of our taking care of the defense of other nations and our sovereignty, are disjoint and ones attempt (Bush’s) to conflate them is … well, typical of Bush’s reasoning and very telling as to his intentions.

One could say that is consistent with American policy since JQAdams laid out the Monroe doctrine…or one could say that is an interesting additional responsibility for our military to suit economic regional (not necessarily national) interests. Very curious.

Curious, indeed. Like I said above, I have no problem with us taking care of the defense of others, but that does not impinge on our own sovereignty. If anything, it would strengthen our sovereignty and impinge on the sovereignty of those not defending themselves.

Bush has done good things – as with his SCOTUS picks, but I find that he was pushed to this by his religious ideas more than by any secular thoughts about justice. That’s the take I was left with after the Harriet Myers fiasco.

The jury is still out. If Iraq actually forms a non-threatening, self-ruling country with individual liberty, then the benefit to all of us will be immense and I will admit that Bush was a genius in his pursuit of that. Personally, I don’t think it will work out and Bush seems like a deer stuck in the headlights on the issue of “what if Iraq doesn’t work”.

Again, for all my criticisms of Bush, any Dem would have been far worse. That’s why I say that Bush did the minimum possible. It was better than nothing but it was still, to my mind, minimal.

progressoverpeace on August 30, 2007 at 10:32 PM

jihadwatcher on August 30, 2007 at 10:21 PM

Well how about keeping America save for the last 6 years?

You’re in for a big disappointment in the years to come if you think you’re going to get anybody willing to fight the war more aggressively than this guys has (barring another 9/11 tyoe event).

You’ve got yourself a bad case of BDS. You sound like the average poster at DU, dKOS and HuffPo.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 10:36 PM

Ahhh yes … the “NAU freaks” …

Sovreignty and freedom slip away each day and Allah is asleep at the wheel. Never had a civics class?

Buy a Koran and learn to speak Spanish. You will serve your new masters well.

AZ_Redneck on August 30, 2007 at 10:37 PM

No offence, but what has Bush done for national security? I think you need to wake up and see him for what he is – a naive, unread, globalist liberal dilettante who has surrounded himself with Yes men he can trust.

jihadwatcher on August 30, 2007 at 10:21 PM

You must have missed his press conference.

Reporter: Mr President, is it true that you and the leaders of Mexico and Canada were conspiring against the American people to sell them out to certain business interests?

George W. Bush: Don’t make me laugh! That is so comical. How can some people be so silly?

Reporter: Mr President, is it true that you have decided to put a fence along the border with Mexico after all? And a follow up question sir, if so what will it look like?

George W. Bush: That is a very good question and yes I have. What will it look like? Well it will run the full length of the border and have special security gates every 100 feet.

All the security gates will have on them:

1) Press one for Spanish (with a response of “Welcome Amigo, please take a free map to the wonderful employer of your choice. If you are in a truck the speed limit for you is 90 mph.”).

2) Press two for Arabic (with a response of “Welcome honored member of the Religion of Peace, please make yourself right at home”).

3) Press three for English (with a response of “Go to Hell you damed bigoted nativist conspiracy monger who does not want what is right for America!!!”).

MB4 on August 30, 2007 at 10:38 PM

You’ve got yourself a bad case of BDS. You sound like the average poster at DU, dKOS and HuffPo.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 10:36 PM

jihadwatcher sounds to me more like a poster at Robert Spencer’s http://www.jihadwatch.com

MB4 on August 30, 2007 at 10:42 PM

How many illegals do you think the truck drive can drive over at the same time?

Tim Burton on August 30, 2007 at 10:44 PM

How many illegals do you think the truck drive can drive over at the same time?

Tim Burton on August 30, 2007 at 10:44 PM

Una porcion entera. Quiza ciento por viaje.

MB4 on August 30, 2007 at 10:48 PM

Ahhh yes … the “NAU freaks” …

Sovreignty and freedom slip away each day and Allah is asleep at the wheel. Never had a civics class?

Buy a Koran and learn to speak Spanish. You will serve your new masters well.

AZ_Redneck on August 30, 2007 at 10:37 PM

Yep.

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 10:49 PM

Nope, just some union guys angry at a completely coincidental non-conspiracy, nothing to see here people move along move along. *Waves hand*

angryoldfatman on August 30, 2007 at 10:51 PM

Park your rigs and see how long it takes for the government to cave.

doriangrey on August 30, 2007 at 9:43 PM

That’s a good point and I think its true. But the truckers won’t park their trucks because the Unions will never advise them to do so. The Unions are on-board for all of this too, in my opinion.

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 10:55 PM

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 10:55 PM

Hello? This thing on? THESE AREN’T UNION GUYS! These are average blue collar Americans who have good enough credit to buy a truck and the balls to strike out on their own and the willingness to spend weeks away from home to feed their families.

If they don’t park their trucks it’s because in a week or two of not working they’ll be repocessed! You think the government would pull this crap if they were organized, strong and financially backed so they could shut down the country for a week or two?

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:04 PM

From JunkYardBlog

In some ways, this policy moots the entire border fence debate. If someone can hitch a ride on an uninspected–or minimally inspected–tractor-trailer into the country, why bother sneaking in through the desert or across the river–or across a fence?

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 11:04 PM

I’m an American first and a Capitalist second.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 9:45 PM

Amen. The W$J RINO types are Capitalists first, Americans second. That’s why they are on the wrong side of this entire border security issue. They don’t give a sh!t about security, they just see the dollar signs. If it’s good for the economy but bad for America then Americans should be against it. The constitution does not elevate economic interests over security interests.

infidel4life on August 30, 2007 at 11:08 PM

If they don’t park their trucks it’s because in a week or two of not working they’ll be repocessed! You think the government would pull this crap if they were organized, strong and financially backed so they could shut down the country for a week or two?

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:04 PM

I thought there was a big truckers union in the USA. In fact, it seems I can remember the truckers parking their trucks for a few days …. maybe a week… I don’t remember, when I was a kid. Did the trucker’s union go bust? What happened to the trucker’s union ?

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 11:09 PM

I’d love to see what happens when major claims are filed against some of the carriers from Mexico. Do you have any idea how much money is loaded on a set of doubles, much less triples? How about when a Mexican driver falls asleep at the wheel and slams into a school bus? Will that company have the assets to provide for the monetary losses of destroyed freight or the medical expenses of those injured? Who do we blame? The unions destroyed their own by caving into the Free Trade Agreement. The owner operators are the children that survived, without the benefits or pay scale.

If it’s on a shelf a trucker brought it there. Goods cannot make it to your local retailer without them. To add unfair competition and loss of border security is placing our hopes on 9/10, and forgetting the day after.

24K lady on August 30, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Nope. The trucking industry was deregulated and now Long Haul trucking is dominated by independent Owner/Operators. Basically a guy with a truck, a cell phone and massive payments.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:12 PM

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:12 PM

I did not know that. Thanks for the info.

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 11:14 PM

Maxx on August 30, 2007 at 11:14 PM

That’s why these guys are barely surviving. They compete on price for every load and the competition is fierce because the barriers to entry are low (a loan for a truck, insurance and a CDL is about all it takes). Most companies that once had their own fleets found it a lot cheaper to simply outsource to Independents so a lot of those jobs that may have once been unionized are long gone.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:22 PM

This is a problem of simple math and economics. This plan does not only allow for Mexican truckers to truck in goods from Mexico, it forces these same truckers to continue trucking in America.

1. Back in the mid 90′s in So-Cal truckers got around $0.80/mile with a load. If they went 200 miles that equals $160.00. If they returned with a load they would get $320.00.

The Mexican truckers are bringing in imported goods, I do not believe their trip will be 2-ways which means if when they deliver their goods, they have to truck something back to make any money. If not, not only are they going to get paid for a one way load, they are also going to be getting paid much less. I don’t think that they will be getting the equivalent in dollars.

2. When they break down on the side of the rode, are they going to have enough in American dollars to pay for repairs? If not…what is going to happen to all those wonderful trucks. We have enough broken down trucks already, we don’t need anymore. Just like we do not need anymore drunk drivers, murderers, rapists, gang bangers, and child molesters…we have enough already! But I digress.

Allowing them to truck here, forces them to continue trucking here. Everything costs more. How else are they going to pay for the things they need on their truck (repairs, gas, insurance, etc)?

toofa on August 30, 2007 at 11:25 PM

Well how about keeping America save for the last 6 years?

How has he kept America safe? What has he done to stem the flow of illegal aliens? What has he done to stem the flow of muslim immigrants and their sharia wishes and terror sympathies? What has he done to remove islamic influence from the corridors of Washington? What has he done to make CAIR unwelcome? What has he done to educate his Secretary of State on the threat of islam? What has he done to secure our airports? What has he done to keep our ports from falling into the hands of states that sponsor terrorism? What has he done to reduce the 22,000 visas his government handed out last year to Saudi students to come to America to “study”. What has he done to secure the arrest of bin laden? What has he done to get America off of Saudi oil? Indeed, what has he done to separate his administration from the terror-funding House of Saud? What has he done to get America’s public schools off of their addiction to leftist teacher unions and their agends? What has Bush done to get the FBI off of their CAIR-sponsored sensitivity training? What has Bush done to…

Should I go on? Bush has done nothing that he was elected to do. Nothing. Not one iota. Al Qaeda is running amuck in Iraq, the Taliban are resurgent in Afghanistan, the new US-backed government there has instituted a sharia constitution that almost executed a man for converting to Christianity, his administration is waist-deep in dealings with islamic/muslim advocacy groups, some of our schools are now teaching islam to our children, and Bush himself takes his advise on Islam from one, Karen Hughes, a muslim apologist ex-nun that feeds him, Rice, and his top aids pablum about the “religion of peace”.

The only reason why we have not been attacked since is that the terrorists talk too much, they are unsophisticated rubes at best, stupid at worst, and they yell Allahu Akbar so loud for so long, you know they’re coming. That is why they have not been successful since. And none of that has anything to do with George Bush. It is, in fact, despite George Bush.

Bush is Jimmy Carter in a mask. I kid you not. Go ahead. Rip that mask off. You’ll see.

Of course, some would say that Caitlin Upton is George Bush in a mask.

jihadwatcher on August 30, 2007 at 11:28 PM

I just hope these truckers understand the concept of “Slower Traffic Must Yield to the Right”…cause their hooptie-drivin’ compatriots sure as hell don’t.

And anyone who’s ever driven the I-5 thru the Central Valley between LA and the Bay Area/Sacramento knows exactly what I’m talking about.

The Ugly American on August 30, 2007 at 11:29 PM

progressoverpeace on August 30, 2007 at 10:32 PM

I don’t know, Spirit. Bush’s performance in the 2004 election pretty much put to rest any ideas that he was a crafty politician. He barely won an election that should have been a total blowout. I, for one, would have voted for anyone to the right of Bush. Anyone.

Hm. You could be right. But 42% (total made-up guess) of people think Bush stole the ’00 election though, so ’04 was filled with resentment. There was no major victory coming.

I have very little respect for either of them, in terms of intelligence and would ask neither for their opinion on much of anything.

Bush is famously a great reader. And if Steyn is to be trusted, echoes an understanding of the macro issues. I think execution is lacking in that regard, but my personal opinion is that he is pulled in a variety of directions, beit Rice vs. Cheney, Rumsfeld vs. various generals, etc. I don’t think he is lacking in intelligence, but he is not forthcoming with information. And worse he seems to move the goalposts. And as you referred to Myers, one certainly must question his judgment.

The two issues, of our taking care of the defense of other nations and our sovereignty, are disjoint and ones attempt (Bush’s) to conflate them is … well, typical of Bush’s reasoning and very telling as to his intentions.

I agree. I try to form my opinions slowly so I don’t have to revisit and revise them all the time, and mine here is not yet fully formed. But it does seem clear that Bush has in mind to change the functional nature of our relationship with our neighbors. I am unclear as to the end desire of that, however. My own impression is that he is committed to any actions that he thinks will improve the economic situation of our neighbors, but Mexico, in my opinion, would be far better served if the US gave a hand in cleaning up the corruption south of the border instead of inviting the victims of that political system to go north.

Iraq is a whole separate issue, but I’ll echo what I’ve said before. All governments exist by the consent of the governed – so projecting an ideology is tricky at best.

Spirit of 1776 on August 30, 2007 at 11:29 PM

Correction: The dreaded I-5.

Or as I like to call it…purgatory.

The Ugly American on August 30, 2007 at 11:31 PM

The only reason why we have not been attacked since is that the terrorists talk too much, they are unsophisticated rubes at best, stupid at worst, and they yell Allahu Akbar so loud for so long, you know they’re coming. That is why they have not been successful since. And none of that has anything to do with George Bush. It is, in fact, despite George Bush.

jihadwatcher on August 30, 2007 at 11:28 PM

If you aren’t a Leftist you sure know how to sound just like them.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:53 PM

Those of you who want to blame Bush for this needs to stop. It is not GW’s program. It is part of the NAFTA and was signed by B.J Clinton. GW has no choice but to implement this program.

Helloyawl on August 30, 2007 at 11:54 PM

If you aren’t a Leftist you sure know how to sound just like them.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:53 PM

Brother Dog trust me, he is hard right for sure.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 12:05 AM

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 12:05 AM

yeah,next he’ll be telling me the is no terrorist threat (after all they are, “unsophisticated rubes at best, stupid at worst.”) and the war on terrorism is a bumper sticker.

Quack, quack, quack…

TheBigOldDog on August 31, 2007 at 12:12 AM

The Big Old Dog-

Kusos.

I’m an American first and a Capitalist second.”

That’s one T-shirt slogan that won’t be smuggled into the U.S. from Mexico anytime soon.

The rabid anti-capitalists are also anti-American, so they won’t buy it.

The uber-capitalists (WSJ, et al) wouldn’t finance it, (even if they could make some initial easy money on it from Mexican sweat shop production), because it reminds people that the country should come before the mere wallet.

But, without more people grasping it’s meaning, we’re selling out our birthrights for a mess of “free trade” pottage.

Trade is never never never never “free”.

That’s a barbed fish-hook (erosion of the culture and wage scales) hidden in a piece of dubious bait (fast profits).

No foreign trucks or truckers on American roads is only common sense for our security and safety and economic survival.

We at the beginning of a global war against the terroristic Jihad, and the leadership still seem to think it’s good ole 1992.

I guarantee that Geraldo will be on the scene at the first disastrous Mexican trucking accident in the U.S., blaming it on bad Chinese tires.

Or Bush’s failure to keep up the roads.

profitsbeard on August 31, 2007 at 12:27 AM

It’s about money, always is, not for the small or independent truckers but for the huge trucking company’s.

The Teamsters have had heavy competition in this country for years and as an organization you see more and more ANSWER type influence.
The reason Teamsters is finally objecting is that they see the end in sight.
I don’t like unions but they do have their usefulness.

A number of large US Trucking corp. are already international and have contracts across both the north and south borders.
Opening up the Mexican border to trucks just means greater opportunity to put the little guys and unions out of business and create a bigger bottom line.

There’s nothing wrong with profits, I just don’t appreciate being the squishy stuff between the giants toes through perfidy and that’s exactly what this is.

Like I’ve said before, this is America the beautiful, home of the free and the brave not America the transnational corp. business opportunity.

“Let the watchwords of all our people be the old familiar watchwords of
honesty, decency, fair-dealing, and commonsense.”… “We must treat
each man on his worth and merits as a man. We must see that each is
given a square deal, because he is entitled to no more and should
receive no less.””The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally
upon the welfare of all of us.”
Theodore Roosevelt
Source:New York State Fair, Syracuse, September 7, 1903

We draw the line against misconduct, not against wealth.
Theodore Roosevelt, 1902
Source:The Supreme Court in American History pp91

Damaging self serving huge money interests have been reined in from excess many times in our history, not to redistribute wealth but to allow individual entrepreneurship and fair play.

“Fascism should more properly be called Corporatism; it is the wedding of State and Corporate power.” – Benito Mussolini

There, that’s my nut job comment of the day (alright maybe it’s my second).

Speakup on August 31, 2007 at 12:31 AM

If you aren’t a Leftist you sure know how to sound just like them.

TheBigOldDog on August 30, 2007 at 11:53 PM

I am in agreement with jihadwatcher and I don’t think anyone would confuse me for a leftist.

progressoverpeace on August 31, 2007 at 12:33 AM

But, without more people grasping it’s meaning, we’re selling out our birthrights for a mess of “free trade” pottage.

profitsbeard on August 31, 2007 at 12:27 AM

Which is why Americans should be given full ownership of our citizenship and be allowed to sell it – subject to the normal security checks of the person wanting to buy the US citizenship. Only if Americans see how much it is really worth to be a US citizen (hundreds of thousands of dollars) and how rapidly the price of US citizenship falls with attacks on our sovereignty will the public understand what sovereignty really means and how it is really affected by policies such as Bush is trying to promote.

Let a poor American family see their greatest asset (their US citizenships) plunge in value and then we’ll see some defense of US sovereignty.

progressoverpeace on August 31, 2007 at 12:37 AM

Kudos.

(Kusos is probably a dialect.)

profitsbeard on August 31, 2007 at 12:37 AM

progressoverpeace-

Let a poor American family see their greatest asset…plunge in value…

That would be a good “index” for AP/MM to start tracking here in a changing sidebar:

The Value of American Citizenship in US dollars Index“.

I’d guess it reached its overall peak value circa 1990.

profitsbeard on August 31, 2007 at 12:45 AM

Quack, quack, quack…

TheBigOldDog on August 31, 2007 at 12:12 AM

jihadwatcher has certainly attack Bush, but he has done so from Bush’s right flank, not his left.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 12:49 AM

I am in agreement with jihadwatcher and I don’t think anyone would confuse me for a leftist.

progressoverpeace on August 31, 2007 at 12:33 AM

lol. Conan the Barbarian might. That’s probably about it.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 12:52 AM

profitsbeard on August 31, 2007 at 12:45 AM

I have been trying to push this idea for years. Usually the response is total and unequivocal shock and disgust, from all sides, but I think the recent amnesty fiasco has changed a lot of views.

lol. Conan the Barbarian might. That’s probably about it.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 12:52 AM

:)

progressoverpeace on August 31, 2007 at 1:09 AM

Many of the major truck lines bankrupted years ago. Anyone remember Consolidated Freightways? How about Transcon Lines, Pacific Intermountain Express and..on down the line. They couldn’t make it economically in an expanding deregularized market. The Teamsters moved into more expanding markets to colonize. They gave up on trucking – or perhaps they knew and hoped that one day with NAFTA they could somehow organize those drivers coming over the border. Perhaps Canadian drivers too. How about organizing all of North America? Every time you see a truck going down the road with a placard stuck to it’s rear end asking if you’d like to be a driver call 1-800-SUCKER. They’ll help you finance it and put yourself on the road to financial ruin.

24K lady on August 31, 2007 at 1:10 AM

Many of the major truck lines bankrupted years ago. Anyone remember Consolidated Freightways?

24K lady on August 31, 2007 at 1:10 AM

I used to work in their IT department (1997-1998). They called the main company CNF after the stock symbol. They changed their name to Con-way Incorporated. The company’s new NYSE stock symbol is CNW.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 1:53 AM

I just found this, so you are technically right.

“Consolidated Freight was the 3rd biggest trucking company in the US. In the 1930s they started their own truck manufacturing operation, Freightliner, now part of DaimlerChrysler. In the late 1990s, the non-union, less-than-truckload part of the firm was split off to form CNF, while the unionized truckload portion continued as Consolidated Freightways. CF filed for liquidation bankruptcy in 2002 and has ceased operations.”

The CNF part lives now as Con-way Incorporated. The unionized part that kept the Consolidated Freightways name died.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 1:59 AM

Guess I’m turning into one of those “NAU Freaks”, but don’t worry AP I won’t hold a grudge. Seems like every few months either some Democrat or one of the Bush bunch is ramming their open society crap down our throats and honestly I figure that Soros must own at least half of the GOP in exactly the same way he owns the Democratic party.

I don’t know where most of you folks are or what you do but the last 6 or so years has been pretty damned lean around here. I’ve only had one COLA raise in that time and the wife took a pay cut and lost her insurance to keep her job when her employer started bringing in illegals to do the work. Now we hear that she won’t have a job at all in a few months because they’re moving operations overseas.

Honestly we’re worse off financially then we were under the Clinton administration and it looks like it will get a lot worse very soon. So I understand what those independent truckers are looking at when they see Bush and his cronies rolling Mexican trucks down the highway on a collision course with their lives and while I don’t think the Democrats are an ounce less involved in this mess than the Republicans I do think they do a hell of a lot better job of hiding it.

Buzzy on August 31, 2007 at 3:53 AM

Frankly the Republican party has become so much the party of business special interests that if the Democrats were to nominate a half way decent candidate (who that would be, don’t ask me) he would win in a landslide.

Mort Sahl noted that when we had a population of only several million, we produced leaders like Washington, Adams, Franklin, Hamilton and Jefferson. Now with a population of 300 million we have corrupt politicians like Bush, Kerry, Hillary, Edwards, Kyl, Lott, Graham, Reid and Pelosi. The list is almost endless.

MB4 on August 31, 2007 at 4:14 AM

Two points:

Zane wrote: “time to impeach yet?” Who and on what grounds. The only Constitutional grounds are bribery, treason, or “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The later term of art referred to punishable offenses or criminal violation of law when the Founders put that into the Constitution.

The Treason Party (Democrats) are screaming for the impeachment of Cheney and Bush out of pure partisan bullsh*t and BDS.

Second point, Illinois underwent a major CDL corruption scandal, that eventually resulted in the former governor being convicted of “pay for play” and who is now awaiting the results of his appeal before entering federal prison in Minnesota. The briberies was broken open when an ILLEGAL ALIEN, with a “bought” CDL and an defective truck, dropped part of his brake assembly on the interstate outside of Milwaukee, causing a following minivan to explode,burning to death the children of the family riding in it.

The last name of the driver of the truck with the fake CDL was Guzman, and not only didn’t he speak English, but had no skills as a driver, either.

There is EVERY EXPECTATION that with Mexican nationals driving Mexican trucks, that could NOT MEET any federal or state safety standard anywhere in the lower 48 (or even Canada), these road killings will become more common. I’m with the teamsters on this one.

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 5:59 AM

God bless Tancredo. Without him, we might be stuck with the allahpundits of the world protecting our borders. Heaven forbid.

Kevin M on August 31, 2007 at 6:01 AM

You can’t talk intelligently about this issue without mentioning port security. Truckers don’t just move stuff around the country. They are the primary transport for cargo in and out of our ports. Rail cars are on the increase, but require massive infrastructural changes.

About 50% of trucked goods enter our country through a US port. LA/LB Harbor is the largest in America. It is the main port o call on the west coast. Don’t presume to discuss trucking without considering that truckers are all over our ports. Port security is as important as airport security.

American workers will have thorough background checks, with different levels of clearance required for the various industries. Mexican truckers are currently scheduled to receive the least scrutiny of all port workers. Per my understanding, background checks will only go back to the date of their first entry into the United States. That means we will know very little about their criminal and/or driving history.

The Race Card on August 31, 2007 at 6:33 AM

I guess trucking is one of those jobs Americans won’t do huh?

Kahuna on August 31, 2007 at 7:17 AM

On a news clip I watched a few weeks ago they showed a border patrol agent opening up the hood of a pickup truck. Laying on top of the f’en engine were three illegals, two men one women. Seeing how the Dept. of Transportation only can do inspections on (lets take a guess here) .05% of the trucking industry, are you really going to trust them to inspect these mex. trks.. And do you really believe the temptation of making, oh I’ll take another guess here, a thousand $$ a head to jam in as many illegals as you can in the forward area of the semi-trailer. They actually will be making more on the human freight. Like they showed on the news report, if they will stuff them inside an engine compartment, the back of a semi will be like staying at the Hilton. PS, don’t worry about these trucks, its all financed by the mex. drug cartels. You’ve seen the type of weapons they can finance compared to our own police forces and now you will see the ultimate in the trucking industry. These f’en trucks are going to be so spank’en new its going to calm all your FEARS. And the WSJ will say, see we told you so, no worries.

Legions on August 31, 2007 at 7:20 AM

I really wish that Tancredo or Hunter had more traction in this Presidential race at least their conservative credentials don’t involve a recent transformation of questionable timing and we know that as President either would push hard for border security.

I’ve got a feeling we may have won the ShAmnesty battle but we just lost the war to the Department of Commerce.

Buzzy on August 31, 2007 at 7:55 AM

WSJ $$$$ I believe, is now just an extention of the Mex. Drug Cartel. Go where the money is. How can it not be so. To sell out the country, when you already have yours. This goes for all of their external’s as well, like the Bu**Way Boys. Who I’m sure will champion this as good for our country, on an up and coming program. I’m going to look forward to watching a Mad Maxx type strap Geraldo to the front bumper of his rig, and drive him into the front doors of the WSJ, with a mic in one hand (of course) so he can do a commentary on the situation at hand. OK just a little humor there, I need it to stay sane..

Legions on August 31, 2007 at 8:20 AM

This is one of the little yet effective ways of taking the greatest country in the world and turning it into a second class crap-fest, one stupid idea at a time.

I am not a union supporter, but I support the rights of American truckers to keep foreign trucks off our soil. They should mass on the border in protest with their trucks blocking entry.

The security risk here is monumental. How do we know that these trucks are inspected, the drivers licensed, the loads legal and the operation insured, or don’t we care? Sanctuary cities, Mexican truckers with full access to our roads with open borders, why don’t we just surrender now?

Hening on August 31, 2007 at 9:07 AM

WSJ $$$$ I believe, is now just an extention of the Mex. Drug Cartel. Go where the money is.
Legions on August 31, 2007 at 8:20 AM

So which ethnic group holds the gun to the head of each American drug user and forces them to use and purchase drugs? Stop the demand and the supply goes elsewhere. It is not rocket science or some convoluted conspiracy to take over the US through trucks, coke and weed.

As for the American truckers, they can’t hire people fast enough to meet the demand for drivers.

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 9:25 AM

At this point, I would really love to hear doriangray’s response to Big Old Dog’s reality check on the trucking industry. I noticed he’s disappeared. Doriangray has no sympathy for hard-working American families (entrepreneurs) – “shit or get off the pot”. I wonder how many truckers could afford to not get paid at all for a few weeks while they make a stand for our country that our government isn’t willing to make.

He calls our American truckers whiners and I guess he believes they deserve what they get if they can’t compete with Third World labor. He suggests that pure capitalism would cause them to lower their prices (regardless of their higher costs living in a regulated First World country) to match those of truckers living in a Third World country.

Interesting. I’m curious what job doriangray has that he would be so willing to compete with his counterpart in Mexico for a fraction of what he makes now. I wonder how long it would take before he’s whining that he can’t make a living on Third World wages. I wonder how long it would take him to organize and mobilize his entire industry to shut down the economy – in a “shit or get off the pot” kind of way.

Way to toss your fellow Americans under the truck, doriangray. You big semi-informed, tough guy capitalist, you.

Redhead Infidel on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

We are doomed. Our goverment is selling us out.
Now someone give me hope.

sonofliberty on August 31, 2007 at 9:47 AM

sonofliberty on August 31, 2007 at 9:47 AM

Doomed? Come on – how exactly are they selling us out? Cheaper goods and products for the consumers is a bad thing?

Redhead Infidel on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

Good points about the truckers. Not an easy job, with a lot of pressure to cheat on the hours driven and a lot of time away from loved ones. They definitely earn their money.

The only real criticism I have about truckers is how much they speed and the risks that poses. I understand this is caused in part by the pressure to get to the destination faster than they should.

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 9:54 AM

I just read the news clip about this on Drudge. In it it stated…..

Supporters of the plan say letting more Mexican trucks on U.S. highways will save American consumers hundreds of millions of dollars.

What a crock. It will save American corporations hundreds of millions of dollars which will not necessarily reflect lower consumer prices, while exposing American motorists to further highway danger.

Currently these Mexican Trucks must (somewhere) unload onto American trucks who continue their transport into America. Sounds to me that there will be one less chance of spotting WMD’s and WMI’s coming into our nation.

WMI= wayward Mexican Illegals

Ernest on August 31, 2007 at 10:02 AM

OK, so who’s brilliant idea was this again?

It’s not enough that we have to have illegal alien drunk drivers on our streets killing Americans, but now we have to give them GIGANTIC TRUCKS so they can do it ever so much better?

I wonder… After the first person is killed by an illegal alien driving a big rig while schnockered, who will the remaining family memebers sue? The US Government for allowing such idiocy, or the Mexican company that owns the trucks? It certainly won’t make much difference. I mean, it’s not like the family will get anything, even if they win…

jedijson on August 31, 2007 at 10:14 AM

This country wants to die; there’s no other explanation.

dhimwit on August 31, 2007 at 10:20 AM

jedijson on August 31, 2007 at 10:14 AM

There are 16,000 deaths a year caused by drunk drivers. Are you only concerned about the ones caused by illegals? How about toughening up the penalties for drunk driving so that it puts all drunk drivers behind bars?

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:24 AM

The Repubs pulled a good one on us in 2000 with this liberal Bush…so, who can we trust in ‘08 to close these open boarders. Bush is make me puke to think I voted for him, twice.

oldernslower on August 30, 2007 at 7:50 PM

The answer to your question is pictured above in a chain link chest plate holding a sword.

Joey1974 on August 31, 2007 at 10:39 AM

there is cloth covering the chain link plate but it’s there trust me….. oh by the way for all those who think that people that are worried about the NAU are nuts I give you………… http://www.thorcotransport.com/

Joey1974 on August 31, 2007 at 10:42 AM

Redhead Infidel on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

At this point, I would really love to hear doriangray’s response to Big Old Dog’s reality check on the trucking industry.

His reality check was…Bull$hit…10% of the 3.3 million truckers in America are O/Os. There are over 360,000 carriers. 100 Mexican carriers isn’t $hit.

Doriangray has no sympathy for hard-working American families (entrepreneurs) – “shit or get off the pot”. I wonder how many truckers could afford to not get paid at all for a few weeks while they make a stand for our country that our government isn’t willing to make.

How many of the 330,000 O/Os can afford to not get paid at all, not just temporarily?

He calls our American truckers whiners and I guess he believes they deserve what they get if they can’t compete with Third World labor.

Welcome to the real world.

He suggests that pure capitalism would cause them to lower their prices (regardless of their higher costs living in a regulated First World country) to match those of truckers living in a Third World country.

Pull you head out of… I never made any thing even resembling such a suggestion.

Interesting. I’m curious what job doriangray has that he would be so willing to compete with his counterpart in Mexico for a fraction of what he makes now.

I’m a quality Control Inspector in San Diego Ca. been doing that for a long fu^king time.

Way to toss your fellow Americans under the truck, doriangray. You big semi-informed, tough guy capitalist, you.

My pleasure, just let me know when I can toss you under as well. Like a hell of a lot of Americans I work in an industry where there is a lot of competition, not just from my fellow Americans but from foreign nationals as well.

A full half of the people I work with are foreign nationals so suck it up. Welcome to the world the other half of America has been living in for the last 4 decades. My boss is a Russian and my co-workers are Mexican and Filipino, so you know where you can stick your BS.

Guys like you and BOD threw us under the truck decades ago, if you want5 to get ahead in my industry you have to get an advanced education, I have a fricking B.F.A and thats only enough to put me one rung higher on the ladder than my foreign national competition who don’t have anything other than a few months on the job experience. So no, I don’t have any sympathy for you guys at all.

When you have to have a master degree to drive a truck and make 35,000.00 a year then come crying to me and maybe I’ll be sympathetic.

doriangrey on August 31, 2007 at 10:48 AM

Spanish speaking transformers piss me off too.

Just be on the lookout for El Optimo Primo hauling in a dirty bomb the Al Qaeda Islamicons gave him before crossing the border.

BirdEye on August 31, 2007 at 11:22 AM

You gonna sue that Mexican trucker down in Tiajuana? The same way we sue Chinese maufacturers?

Independent American truckers are the best thing about our highways. They are Americans, They are loyal. When police are looking for someone on the road our truckers keep an eye out.

American truckers are barely surviving now.

I waited at a bus stop with a trucker hitching his way home because he couldn’t afford the last repair. He was financed to the hilt and worked unbelievable jobs to stay above water. No way can he maintain a legal life style, insurance and all and compete with the Mexicans.

Why don’t we just throw in the towel, open the gates and let the Mexicans have it all because we cannot compete against this. Ralph Nader warned about the safety issues of Mexican trained drivers on our roads and having trucks and trucking companies that were not US based. These people have no incentive to be good to the US, their only incentive is to avoid getting caught.

Station a truck in Mexico and it can be furbished in the best way to avoid security inspections. Switching to American trucks at the border was invaluable for our national security.

entagor on August 31, 2007 at 11:43 AM

doriangray said: “Pull you head out of… I never made any thing even resembling such a suggestion.”

Oh really? Then what did you mean by “Capitalism equals competition, in the capitalistic system you compete or you go out of business”? Not that that’s wrong, mind you, on a level playing field – but for a First World country to be forced to compete with Third World wages IN OUR OWN COUNTRY is inherently unfair.

“if you want5 to get ahead in my industry you have to get an advanced education, I have a fricking B.F.A and thats only enough to put me one rung higher on the ladder than my foreign national competition who don’t have anything other than a few months on the job experience. So no, I don’t have any sympathy for you guys at all.

When you have to have a master degree to drive a truck and make 35,000.00 a year then come crying to me and maybe I’ll be sympathetic.”

Yeah, that’s pretty pathetic. And it explains a lot – I’d be bitter too if I were you. It sounds like foreign nationals have an advantage that requires you to make herculean efforts to stay ahead of lesser-qualified individuals. But I have to ask – what have you been doing about it for the past few decades? Did you organize? Strike? Oppose it in any way? Have you personally done anything to protect your own industry that you demand the truckers do to save theirs? (Once again, Americans having to do the job the American government WON’T DO.)

See, doriangray, that’s kind of my whole point. Of all the unconstitutional powers our government has taken upon itself, trade is ONE of the few things they are supposed to protect. Our government is bound by their Constitutional powers to protect the interests of American industry and workers. Yet, just as with our border, they REFUSE to do it, instead forcing our citizens to compete with Third World, under-trained, and under-educated (as per your own example) nationals.

100 Mexican carriers isn’t $hit.

If you think it will stop there, you’re sadly naive. It never does. NAFTA is a perfect case in point. Here in Texas, one of the agreements of NAFTA promised that an increase in Mexican exports of goods and services would lead to a fall in illegal immigration into the United States (i.e., that we would import goods, not people). Just the reverse has happened. The United States is importing both at unprecedented levels. So today it might be 100 carriers with 100 trucks apiece, and five years from now it might be five times that. Wait until you see the proliferation of Mexican truckers within in the next couple of years. What they don’t have today, will be there tomorrow in droves.

By the way, I’m sorry about your job situation. It sounds like it really sucks, so I’ll back off. I haven’t taken anything personal, especially the whole wanting to toss me under a truck thing ;), because it sounds like you’re in a tough spot.

Redhead Infidel on August 31, 2007 at 12:06 PM

This is one of the rare occasions that I agree with the Teamsters. How in the world can we ensure safe standards if we have a bunch of foreign drivers with foreign trucks all over our highways? Are they going to make them get US endorsements on their operators licenses, with all of the requisite testing and training required of American truckers? And are we going to inspect the trucks for road worthiness, just like American trucks are inspected?

Are the Mexican trucking companies going to have any standards for protecting their drivers, such as not allowing them to drive more than a certain number of hours each day, etc?

What about background checks for the drivers? All kind of mischief could occur if a bunch of Jose Carranzas come in as truck drivers

This is a strong reason to not allow illegal aliens to work in this country — they have no protection if they are abused by their employers, and the public has no recourse if they get ripped off by an illegal alien.

We’re doing very well right now without all of these potential problems. There is absolutely no need to bring in all of this underpriced competition for American truckers.

jimbo2 on August 31, 2007 at 12:54 PM

By the way, on a hopeful note…

There is only one Presidential candidate who is talking about the disadvantageous (and by disadvantageous I mean really economically STUPID) and unfair trade deals we’ve made since WWII, and how he plans to roll them back. He will renegotiate it all, so that Americans have a level field to compete on. That includes CHINA.

Duncan Hunter.

Redhead Infidel on August 31, 2007 at 12:57 PM

$hit or get off the pot. Mexico cannot supply enough truckers to replace the O/Os. Park your rigs and see how long it takes for the government to cave. If they don’t what’s the difference you’re all “according to you” going out of business anyways.

Fallacious. Underpriced competition drives down the price that O/O operators are able to charge – whether or not they can be fully ‘replaced’ by Mexicans. There will reach a point where it will not be profitable enough for them to do business, whether or not there is a demand for their services or not. That is to say, a demand may go unmet if it is unaffordable to provide or purchase.

Granted as usual they are exaggerating their concerns, but more than likely they are also thinking long-term. Which makes sense, since many of them have families, they need not just secure income now but a reasonable security over time to afford supporting their families. Some might go out of business before they need to just to get a head start in a different business.

In short, we will begin to bleed truck drivers as they are replaced by their underpriced ‘competition’. If and only if these Mexican drivers/carriers must pay tariffs equivalent to their share of the road tax, pass inspections and have certifications should they be allowed to roll.

‘Capitalism’ is not about unlimited screw-you opportunism, it is about preferring private ownership and competition to collectivism, nationalization and redistribution. If you want to think that Capitalism must be Lassez Faire to be Capitalism at all, you’re living in the wrong country. Certain limits are mandatory, which our history of flim-flam artists and snake-oil salesmen should paint a clear picture of.

Or am I not making myself clear?

RiverCocytus on August 31, 2007 at 1:38 PM

Why don’t we just let ships from every nation dock where they want to and drive the delivery truck right off the the ships to deliver goods where ever they want to. We can’t deliver shit in Mexico. There are no US truckers driving down supplies down there as far as I know.

What’s wrong with a border Depot? Teamsters have a lock on the rates charged and labor used but we should address that issue head on instead of trying to go around them.

Egfrow on August 31, 2007 at 1:44 PM

Years ago (and I can imagine it is worse) a business associate of mine had three “guards” on the payroll at the Mexi-cali, Caliexeco border. Anything he wanted to deliver or receive, no problem. This was not some big time drug dealer, he imported and exported rice. Imagine what the drug dealers could buy, or the “human” dealers can buy.

right2bright on August 31, 2007 at 1:57 PM

right2bright,

I don’t think we have to imagine to hard.

Egfrow on August 31, 2007 at 2:01 PM

RiverCocytus,

Capitalism’ is not about unlimited screw-you opportunism, it is about preferring private ownership and competition to collectivism, nationalization and redistribution.

That’s I think this is still a bad idea. Instead of confronting anti capitalist practices of Driver’s Unions such as the teamsters because they are feared. The Spinless are taking the back door way by hiring non Union, (Non Citizen) drivers from another nation. This will bite us in the ass because the Nation of Mexico is Socialist. It won’t be long until these drivers are under the strong arm thumb of Cartels in Mexico. There is no freedom without thugs taking their cut by force.

Egfrow on August 31, 2007 at 2:05 PM

Funny how this is now the second time that conspiracy nut Gregor has accused me of running away and not arguing (on top of insinuating AllahPundit is in on the NAU plot)… just before he himself, Gregor, runs away.

RightWinged on August 31, 2007 at 6:01 PM

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 9:54 AM

Do you really think retailers will pass on the the savings to the consumers..?? If you do, you are really living in a dream world. I say they would cut-throat amer. drivers and pocket the money and take that money right to the nearest horror house. These are americans who in large part also have a lot of their kids fighting for this country. Fighting so you can sit here and post..Who do you think has their kids over there..Its not anyone from the WSJ, not even the upper middle class anymore. No most are the dirt poor. And if you want to keep a viable military fighting force for when you grow up, you will find that paying these folks a higher wage is a good thing for you and your offspring. Let me explain. When they can’t afford but to have 1 or 2 kids because of the low wages that you and doriangrey have planned for them, where now are you going to get your army of the future to protect daddy’s castle. Or maybe you feel having an all ghetto army is the wave of the future..I see the gangs in there now and I kind of like the armies of the past. If a familiy has 4,5 or up kids, a few join up no problem. On the other hand if you have lets say one son, then no way is Mom or Dad going to want to see him guarding your castle when you have given them so much pain. Most elites feel that if you put people in a soup line they will do anything. Well times were a lot lot different back in the 20′s. Most people now adays have had a taste of the good life unlike the 20′s folk who were for the most part dirt poor to begin with and took the soup lines with a grain of salt. Try and pull that in todays society and I will say no one will be safe. I only tell you this because I truly believe another depression will not be anything like the last one. And if I’m wrong and you and doriangrey plan works then more power to ya.

Legions on August 31, 2007 at 9:03 PM

I have to laugh when I hear open society supporters maintain that the SPP / NAFTA agenda is about Mexican goods exported to the US. It’s once again China has bought up the ports in Mexico and there will be many more Chinese goods coming across our borders than Mexican goods (if you don’t count illegal narcotics).

I’d say that Hillary isn’t the only politician in the pocket of the Chinese these days.

Buzzy on August 31, 2007 at 11:36 PM

Doomed? Come on – how exactly are they selling us out? Cheaper goods and products for the consumers is a bad thing?

Bradky

Yeah you can enjoy your cheap t.v. when you watch
the nuke go off.The goverment needs to protect our
borders not give the bad guys another easy way in!

sonofliberty on September 1, 2007 at 8:05 AM

sonofliberty on September 1, 2007 at 8:05 AM

Yawn… heavy on fearmongering, absent of facts.

Bradky on September 1, 2007 at 2:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2