EYE ON TRUCKING: NAFTA’S a reality; now let’s make sure border program is a safe one

By LYNDON FINNEY
The Trucker Staff

10/10/2007

Before you read this, it’s very likely that the first trucks will have crossed the border as part of the Department of Transportation’s Mexico demonstration project, which, lest we forget, is part of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) first approved almost 15 years ago.

Its implementation was mandated when a NAFTA arbitration panel in 2001 ruled that not doing the demonstration project and subsequently opening the borders, would put the U.S. in violation of the NAFTA agreement.

The formal announcement that the demonstration project could finally be implemented came on Sept. 6 — at 9 p.m. EDT, no less.

Today, we want to address two issues related to the program.

First, there’s the issue of how the demonstration program, which likely will be made permanent and could last up to three years, will impact the U.S. trucking industry.

Second is the issue of how the DOT handled the announcement the demonstration program would begin.

First the impact on the industry.

In the days just preceding the Sept. 6 announcement, the Teamsters Union, the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, several members of Congress and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association had gone to court and/or held news conferences to denounce the demonstration program. One congressman, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., even went so far as to ask the Senate to “follow the House lead to stop the program.”

DeFazio chairs the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, which has jurisdiction over motor carriers, a DeFazio-issued news release said. He noted that in May, the House voted 411-3 to extend the program to three years. In July, the House approved an amendment to the bill passed in May to prohibit federal funds to implement the demonstration program. The Senate has not taken similar action.

In addition, truckers carried out numerous protests Sept. 5 at some Mexican border crossings.

Today, we’re calling for the aforementioned groups to end all notions of court proceedings, legislation and all other efforts to stop the demonstration program.

Let’s move past the emotional stage and band together to make sure the program is safe and effective.

We’ve all heard the cry that permanently allowing Mexican trucks to travel past the 25-mile border zone will take jobs away from American truckers.

Phooey!

There’s probably not a single U.S. carrier that doesn’t have job openings. Based on the reports we’ve all heard, the industry is going to need thousands upon thousands of additional drivers in the years to come, and there’s little chance the Mexico program will erase that need.

Been to a truck stop lately?

Sure you have.

Seen all those publications jammed full of driver recruitment ads?

Sure you have.

Enough said.

The real issue with the Mexican program is ensuring that Mexican trucks that enter the U.S. are safe to drive and that the men and women driving those trucks are held to the same standards as U.S. drivers now are held.

We believe that will be done. And by the way, we’ve had several influential people in the industry assure us recently that most Mexican companies have equipment comparable to that driven by U.S. truckers.

The second issue is the DOT’s handling of the announcement.

We’re not going into great detail in the matter today, except to say that (1) 9 p.m. EDT is a time usually reserved for important Presidential news conferences, and (2) the media were notified by e-mail about 30 minutes before the news conference, well beyond the time that most of the members of the trucking media had gone home.

Earlier Sept. 5, the DOT notified the media that John Hill, administrator of FMCSA, would hold a 4 p.m. EDT conference call to provide an “update” on the Mexico program.

It’s probably a safe bet to assume that Hill was going to announce the IG report had been received and that the project was ready to be implemented.

But three minutes before the scheduled time, the DOT canceled the conference call and the media were told that we would be notified when the call was rescheduled.

Few, if any of us, expected a 9 p.m. EDT news conference. Go home, everyone, get some rest and come back Friday to make an announcement if the report had arrived.

We’d all been watching intently and making daily phone calls to the DOT, the FMCSA and the IG’s office to stay on top of things, because we learned in mid-August that release of the report, required by law to determine FMCSA’s readiness to conduct the demonstration program safely and in compliance with a Congressional mandate, was imminent.

And that awareness was heightened with a report the last week in August by the Teamsters Union saying it had been told by a Justice Department attorney representing the DOT the program would begin Sept. 1.

Of course, the IG report didn’t get delivered in time for the Sept. 1 date, and we began daily calls to the IG’s office to find out whether the report had been issued.

Sept. 5 was the only day the IG’s office didn’t return our calls.

We’re still trying to figure out why it was necessary to hold a 9 p.m. EDT news conference to announce the implementation of a program in which the trucking media is so interested, but also a time when most of them would likely not be around to listen in.

But then we remembered that FMCSA is only charged with managing the demonstration project. And that FMCSA is only an agency of the DOT, and Hill’s boss is Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters, whose boss is President George W. Bush.

Get the message?

This program is being watched and directed at the very highest level of the U.S. government. The person at that level needs some positives in his last months in office.