Congress removes funds to support the * plan to allow Mexican truck drivers across our borders

[DainBramaged]

http://www.teamster.org/07news/nr_071219_2.asp

Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa today praised Congress for banning funds for the Bush administration’s reckless pilot program to let trucks from Mexico travel freely on U.S. highways.

The ban was part of the omnibus spending bill that Congress passed Wednesday. The Teamsters opposed the pilot project from the start because of real concerns that trucks from Mexico aren’t safe.

“Congress just made driving safer in the United States by ensuring that dangerous trucks from Mexico aren’t lurching along our highways like unguided missiles,” Hoffa said. “We expect the Bush administration to obey the law and put a stop to this dangerous program as soon as it is signed into law.”

Hoffa said the Teamsters have nothing against Mexican truck drivers, just the companies that exploit them.

“Just ask any Teamster who drives in the Southwest,” Hoffa said. “This is about safety.” “The Teamsters won’t quit our fight to stop the Bush administration’s reckless program,” Hoffa said. “We will continue our lawsuit to prevent the program from starting up again.”

The Teamsters Union is suing to block the program in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The case is expected to be heard in February. Some trucks from Mexico have been allowed to travel beyond the narrow border zone since earlier this year under the Bush administration’s unsafe pilot program.


Another Union victory while America sleeps.

I'm sure many here don't care about driver training, drug testing, or vehicle inspections and think that this is just more Union protectionism.

[Faux pas]

1. Great news! This goes beyond road safety, I believe it's a huge

national security issue.

[DainBramaged]

3. Absolutely

[B Calm]

2. Great news! About time this congress does something right!

[Perry Logan]

4. Congress does the right thing--and within three posts we have someone bashing Congress. Not good.

[Orsino]

60. Well, before we break out the champagne...

...let's make sure we understand all they did, and exactly what they might have traded away to win on this point.

Congress needs 24/7 bashing to get even the occasional good deed out of them.

[pampango]

5. While Europe celebrates tearing down borders, we celebrate building them up.

""The free movement of people is one of the main rights of human beings," European Commission president Jose Manuel Barrosso..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3109939

Most of us at DU believe that European societies are better at providing their people with adequate social safety nets, national health care, better working conditions and regulations, etc. But when it comes to a European belief in continental integration versus our commitment to national sovereignty, many here think that the Europeans have gone down the wrong track. Is that because they don't have to deal with Mexicans (and all of the negative attributes some ascribe to them)?

[DainBramaged]

6. OK, so you want uninspected, unregulated and uninsured trucks pounding the highways

Just so you can get cheap goods, not even including the language barrier, untrained drivers, and potential threats to our security from dangerous cargo just to let Mexican trucks and their drivers roam freely around the US?

OH, and we are not Europe, lest you forget. There are three countries on our Continent, not a dozen small stae-like countries.

[pampango]

7. No and I expect that the French do not want uninspected, unregulated, and uninsured

trucks from Lithuania or Estonia either. Europe's answer to that problem would seem to be to require common standards then allow freedom of movement.

Your conclusion that I support national integration, in order to get cheap goods is an interesting, if unsupportable, take on my post. I believe that Estonians, including their truck drivers, have a right to freedom of movement, not because of higher or lower prices but because they, simply, have a right to freedom of movement. (Similar to the fact that minorities have a right to live anywhere they want, even though it may cause "problems" for some people whom they choose to live next to. Whether minorities moving into a neighborhood is good, bad, or indifferent in the view of the people that already live there is irrelevant to the right of anyone to live whereever they want.)

By the way, with regards to language barriers, Europe is known to have more than a few languages. They somehow have found a way to not let that keep people apart.

Oh and I don't view the bogeyman of "Mexican trucks and their drivers roam freely around the US" with the same dread that you do. Of course, I don't view Mexicans with the same set of negative attributes that you seem to ascribe to them.

[DainBramaged]

11. Don't assume anything with me.

THEY (the truck drivers from the land of Nod) TAKE FUCKING AMERICAN JOBS, PERIOD. I DON'T CARE IF THEY WERE PURPLE.

Take your holier than thou attitude and tell a trucker he can buy food with it.


Think about what the Slim Jim guy used to say.

[pampango]

13. Agreed. I don't make assumptions about you and you don't jump to conclusions about me.

Fair enough.

US versus THEM seems to be what it boils down to. (I hope I'm not making another assumption here.) THEY are after OUR jobs. (At least THEY are not after OUR women, or men depending on your gender and orientation.) Where we differ is that I don't see much difference between THEM and US other than being a "winner" or a "loser" in the geographical lottery of where one happens to be born. To me it is admirable that Europeans are getting beyond a fixation with national borders when determining what rights are a person has.

Using your perspective the French and Germans should be afraid, very afraid, of the cheap labor that will come in from Estonia or Rumania. They don't seem to be as focused on the prospect that THEY will take OUR FUCKING GERMAN JOBS or OUR FUCKING FRENCH JOBS. Why? Maybe that have fought too many wars with each other and would rather integrate their societies and economies than emphasize national sovereignty. Maybe their social safety nets are expansive enough that they are willing to share the wealth and take more chances than we are willing to do.

I thought the "holier than thou" crack was what conservatives used against liberals. You know, that they (the cons) lived in the real world and we (the libs) lived in ivory towers or some such thing. So "Thanks", I guess. I will take that as a compliment.

[DainBramaged]

14. If you love the European systems so much...............

[pampango]

15. Love it or leave it, huh? n/t

[DainBramaged]

26. You brought it up so go help the workers assimilate

[pampango]

30. Thanks for the offer, but I think the Europeans can handle it without much

help from Americans. ;)

[Tejas]

18. Of course not, you're too busy making assumptions

about Germany and France and trying to compare their immigration/terrorism/economical/safety/etc equations to the US.

You seem too quick to assume even just the basics, such as the idea that trucks from Mexico are on par with those in Europe.

[pampango]

22. I am not European trucking expert, but I would bet that the trucks

that will be coming into France and Germany from Estonia, Rumania and Turkey are not up Western European standards initially. I understand that the trucks from these much poorer countries will only be allowed in after being subjected to the same safety inspections as apply to all European trucks. We should apply the same regulations to Mexican trucks as we do our own.

[rockymountaindem]

52. Western Europeans are afraid of losing jobs to E. Europeans

For instance, the admittance of Bulgaria and Romania came with the stipulation that their citizens not be allowed on the common labor market after the experience of Polish workers coming across into W. Europe and working for very low wages. Similar concerns are also a major hurdle to Turkey's entry to the EU, among other things.

[DainBramaged]

28. Why do you think you can hijack this thread for your own agenda

If you love the European standard so much, get a driving course and go over to Europe and drive a truck. You and I are done, bother someone else.

[pampango]

33. Sometimes we can learn from how others deal with problems similar

to ours. I didn't realize that discussing how Europeans deal with their poorer neighbors was "hijacking."

Have a good one.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[A HERETIC I AM]

21. Where do you get the idea that the Mexican trucks that are (will/would) participate in this program

are "uninspected, unregulated and uninsured trucks"?

Where does that come from? What makes you think they would be uninsured, not regulated and not inspected?

Is it also your perception of this agreement that Mexican trucks would be allowed cabotage inside the US?

Do you actually think the agreement allows Mexican trucks to "roam freely around the US"?

Seems to me we've been through this conversation before - a few months back. I am still waiting to read of the rash of deaths attributed to the Mexican Trucks that have been driving on US highways for months now.

[pampango]

23. The idea may come from the fact that the US is bigger and stronger

than Mexico. Just because we agreed with Mexico, as a part of NAFTA, that their truckers would have greater access to our highways doesn't mean we have to actually live up to that promise.

If there are parts of the agreement that we decide, after the fact, that we really don't want to live up to, rather than renegotiating the agreement, we just unilaterally decide that we are not going to do what we said we would. We are big enough to get away with that. Now if little ol' Mexico tries to do something like that to us, they had better watch out. ;)

[A HERETIC I AM]

40. Pampango, i am fairly sure where you are coming from, i just want to know Dainbramaged's POV

because i think his opinion comes from the perspective of hysteria and hype, as opposed to fact and letter of agreement.

The point that has been put forward over and over by the anti-Mexican-Trucker-gets-to-drive-his-truck-in-the-USA side boils down to essentially this;
1) They will take American jobs
2) they drive unsafe trucks (and therefore are a hazard on the road and will kill my kids/mom/loved ones
3) They are uninsured so when they do have an accident, no one will be able to collect for damages
4) Their drivers are untrained and/or teenagers behind the wheel of 40 ton behemoths rocketing down main street, USA

(exaggerations aside, those are basically the points expressed on DU on this subject over the last few months.)

My POV is that all of the above is basically nonsense, has no basis in fact and completely ignores the details in the agreement that was carefully and painstakingly hashed out over the last 20 years.

So again i put the question to Dainbramaged:

Where do you get the idea that all the Mexican trucks will be uninsured, uninspected, unregulated and allowed to "roam freely"?

[Romulox]

77. Bogus argument: Europe still has borders. Egyptians or Chinese, e.g., cannot "move freely" in EU.

[senseandsensibility]

8. I am glad to hear this

Thank you and congratulations to the Teamsters for their hard work!

[rndmprsn]

9. good for them...

i read where a truck on a mexican highway blew up and killed over 30 people just a couple months ago, this is a safety and union issue for me.

[pampango]

10. I read that there was a college student of Korean ancestry who killed 30 people

a few months ago at Virginia Tech. Do we ban Korean students or mentally ill students as a consequence? Or do we try to come up with ways to allow them to participate fully in society, while protecting the rest of us at the same time?

Would my son (who attends Virginia Tech) be somewhat safer, if mentally ill students were completely banned from the campus? Probably, but that obviously would not be fair to the vast majority of mentally ill students. He has to live with a little more risk in order that others are better able to exercise their own rights.

[DainBramaged]

12. Not in my thread, this is about unsafe trucks

I won't bite.

[Tejas]

16. your total disregard for public safety

"a little more risk in order"

You too easily show that you could care less about the safety of us that are closer to the problem addressed in this thread, wreckless abandon on your part comes to mind.

If your son were one of the 30, something tells me you would still sanction the idea that "the risk WAS worth it".

Thank goodness the risk of unsafe trucks crossing our borders isn't left up to you.

[pampango]

20. My son could be on of the next 30, God forbid, but that does not

motivate me to prohibit mentally ill, or Korean, students from attending Virginia Tech. Obviously there have to be regulations.

"A little more risk" is a part of many things in life. I drive to work and endure more risk than if I stayed at home. I volunteer at a local food kitchen, even though there is a little bit of risk involved than watching TV. We all do things that involve some element of risk if the reward is worth it.

If I left the impression that we should not regulate truck safety, or the mental health of college students, that is my fault for not expressing myself more clearly.

I hope you are right, though, that even if my son were one of the 30 at Virginia Tech (or if I get in a car accident with a teenage driver on my way to work or a volunteer activity) I will still believe that mentally ill (or Korean) students and teenage drivers have rights. I may well favor stronger regulations after such an event, but I hope that I would not favor taking away the rights of certain students or drivers.

There are freedoms and rights for myself and for others that are worth taking risks in life.

[High Plains]

17. So, should we now expect Mexico to ban US trucks?

This is stupid nativist shit backed by Republican-lovin' Teamsters.

[Tejas]

19. nope. n/t

[DainBramaged]

27. You really have it wrong. And we don't cruise the highways in Mexico

[spoony]

24. Excellent news.

And piss on the anti-union propagandists who want to twist this into a "big US v. poor Mexico" issue.

[pampango]

29. Now anyone with a differing opinion is an "anti-union propagandist"?

How dare someone speak on behalf of people who are not even Americans? Guess we just have a different world view.

If the French, and their truck drivers, can overcome their fear and open their borders to poor Romanian and Estonian drivers and the competition that they represent, we are capable of the same.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pampango]

34. I try to state my opinion not call anyone names or put a label on them.

If you don't like that, I'll try to remember that you are one of those who expect people to agree with them and give multiple pats on the back rather than any discussion. (Though you won't know it's me since I am "ignored".) ;)

[brentspeak]

36. Pampango is a DLC cheap-labor advocate of sending American jobs overseas

A self-interested bogus "free" trade member of the investment class. He likes to call people "racists" to push his free-trade, cheap-labor agenda on DU.

[DainBramaged]

38. Let him hire the illegals I want jobs for Amercans not cheap ass investors

posing as Progressives

[pampango]

42. I realize that you have me on "ignore" but I do have to give you credit

for calling me a new name in every post rather than repeating the same one over and over.

[pampango]

41. Why do people whom you don't agree with have to be labelled

as DLC advocates, free traders, mouthpieces, apologists, etc.? Though this is the first time I have been referred to as a member of the investment class. Can't people simply have opinions that differ from yours and have that lead to a discussion? Is that not what DU is for?

I don't believe I have called anyone a racist or any other pejorative term on this thread or any other regardless of how many times my expression of an opinion is responded to by name calling and one-line zingers.

[ChromeFoundry]

45. Loves the Outsourcing of US Jobs.....

Same ole' "brown people" remarks, as well.

[pampango]

48. I didn't see a "brown people" reference in the thread. Did you? n/t

[ChromeFoundry]

61. Didn't Bother Looking.....Already Know What to Expect From You

"Brown people, xenophobic, racist, etc......All the same.....From you. Enough Said.

Found on a 30 second search:
pampango (1000+ posts) Wed Sep-19-07 02:42 PM

"So far, people are against illegal immigration, and against legal immigration."
Frustrating isn't it. Few here will admit to being against immigration (too racist and xenophobic), but many will oppose every specific program for allowing foreigners to enter the country legally, e.g. H1-B visas, Mexican truck drivers, temporary workers, etc. There is always a "bigger picture" involved that that causes them to oppose the legal entry of foreigners into the country under a specific program, even though, of course, they are in favor of immigration in principle."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2997209#2997487

pampango (1000+ posts) Sat Jul-07-07 03:33 PM

"I'd usually think this xenophobic, 'cause that's what it is. n/t"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2906971#2907841

[OhioChick]

46. Agreed. n/t

[B Calm]

25. I just forwarded this message to all my 18 wheeler peers, and many

of them are anti-union-right-wing nut cases!

[bullwinkle428]

32. I work in an industry that supplies the trucking business, and

have spent some time on trucker message boards. I can totally confirm what you're saying! "Hitlery iz teh evil kommunist!" is typical of what passes for reasoned political discourse in the eyes of a lot of these guys!

[brentspeak]

37. Good news, for once

[OhioChick]

39. Glad to Hear.

K&R
:kick:

[A HERETIC I AM]

43. As an obviously proud Union man, are you as upset about Canadian Truckers?

The US has had a cross-border agreement with Canada for years. Does this situation fall under the same level of ire? If not, why not? If the answer to "why not?" is because the trucks are in better shape in Canada, then what if the trucks entering from Mexico were fully inspected, insured and complied with all DOT regulations, just like the ones coming in from the Great White North? Would that suffice?

[DainBramaged]

44. As long as there were Teamsters behind the wheel

[A HERETIC I AM]

47. So the overwhelming majority of the trucks that come across from Canada every day

that AREN'T driven by Teamsters, you have a problem with?

Why?

Do you know what "cabotage" is? Do you realize that Canadian Truckers do not have it and neither do/will any Mexican Truckers?

[B Calm]

54. Why don't Canadian truckers have cabotage regulations? You

would think they would have, if only for our national security.. Now with the case of Mexican trucks we need to impose cabotage regulations, because of our need to regulate our public safety!

[A HERETIC I AM]

59. Actually, no. Cabotage for them would be a BAD thing.

That indeed WOULD cost American jobs. I do not advocate it for Canadian companies and i certainly don't advocate it for Mexican companies.

Cabotage is the transport of goods or passengers between two points in the same country. Originally starting with shipping, cabotage now also covers aviation, railways and road transport. Cabotage is "trade or navigation in coastal waters, or, the exclusive right of a country to operate the air traffic within its territory."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabotage

Canadian trucking companies do not have cabotage and neither would/will Mexican trucking companies. That is one of the most misunderstood parts of the agreement in question. Also, the agreement with Mexico is reciprocal, similar to the agreement we have with Canada, meaning certain American trucking companies (those that apply for and are approved, just like their Mexican counterparts) will be allowed to deliver freight into Mexico.

[B Calm]

63. No way would it cost American jobs! That doesn't make sense.

There's no damn way American trucking companies will operate in Mexico when there's such a well of cheap labor mexican truckers to hire! I'm beginning to think you don't like labor and are working for the cheap labor cons.

[A HERETIC I AM]

69. Please try and understand what "Cabotage" means.

Do you actually think that Mexican trucking companies were/are/will be allowed to haul from point to point inside the US? (Or Canadian companies, for that matter) or that American companies will be able to do the same in Mexico or that they can presently do it in Canada?

Is that what you and the others think? Because it is NOT the case.

No Mexican trucking company will be allowed to haul a load in from Matamoros, deliver to Chicago (or wherever) then pickup a load in Chicago and deliver it to New York (or wherever). The load from Chicago to New York is cabotage and it is strictly prohibited. That company will only be allowed to pick up a load destined for delivery IN MEXICO. Period.

[A HERETIC I AM]

49. One other thing...

Before the Mexican Truckers began running under this program earlier this Summer, how much of the cross-border freight that was hauled to its US destination do you think was hauled by Union drivers? All? Most? Some? None?

My bet? You have no clue and the inkling of the clue you THINK you have is completely wrong.

[DainBramaged]

55. You are simply anti-Union disguised as a "member" here

I have a clue, and that is to avoid discussion this with you


Why not just spit out what you have to say and stop being cryptic, then we don't have to guess anymore.

[Nailzberg]

56. International Brotherhood of Teamsters represents Canadian haulers n/t

[A HERETIC I AM]

57. How many of the Canadian Haulers that come across the border each day are Teamsters?

Any idea what the percentage is?

For that matter, what is the percentage of American truckers that are Teamsters?

[B Calm]

66. Local drivers or over the road drivers?

[A HERETIC I AM]

68. Either

What is the percentage of Canadian truckers entering the US every day that are Teamsters and what is the percentage of American drivers, local OR long haul that are Teamsters?

[Snotcicles]

70. Well now you for one should know at least all of the Allied ones are. And as far as taking

American jobs. If a mexican driver has a load going to say New York, do you think he is going to rattle back to Mexico empty?
Hell no, his truck will be crammed full freight going to Texas with a drop in PA one in OH in IND in ILL in MO in OK all done off the cheap wages they will pay that poor fool. Or how about he gets a load going into say MO and we want you to go to NY to get a load going back to Mexico but we want you to take this crap from MO to Pa and we have some more crap in Pa going to NY can't see the impact on American Truckers jobs it would have?

[A HERETIC I AM]

71. Yes, of course, many Car-Haul companies are Teamsters..

but you know as well as i do that many are not - Waggoners, BMT, the list goes on and on.

I completely understand the concerns you are bringing up and i share them, but the agreement in question does not allow for what you describe, just as the provision does not exist for American carriers in Canada or Canadian carriers in the US. If the Mexican truck that delivered in New York is to reload, the freight must have a destination in Mexico, not inside the US.

Enforcement is the key.

BTW, hope you are well up there in the Motor City.

Best wishes for you and your family for the holidays!

[Snotcicles]

73. Things are ok up here but wages are dropping like a hot potato.

A new deal is coming for Allied to take over PTS, and that will cut their wages by 17.50% and it looks like it is going through.

I don't know all the specifics of the NAFTA deal but I believe it has and will continue to weaken the middle class.

[Nailzberg]

79. I have no idea, and I don't care.

I was just reading the thread, and personally thought the comparison of the Canadian border agreement to the situation on the Mexican border, and how it relates to the Teamster's level of ire was a fallible argument because the labor situation varies drastically between the two countries.

Nevermind, I'll butt out.

[Elwood P Dowd]

50. I see the same couple of fake free trade and outsourcing supporters are here as usual.

Start a thread about Mexican trucks and fake free trade deals such as NAFTA, and the the usual suspects show up with multiple reasons to support this crap. As real wages for median income workers continues to tank, they now want the truckers in competition with drivers willing to work longer hours for 75% less pay. It's obvious they support the race to the bottom this republican/corporate plan is backing. Wonder what they will post when THEY MEET THE BOTTOM???

[A HERETIC I AM]

51. Just for the hell of it...

I'll assume you are referring to me. So i'll ask you then, Elwood. Why is it that we can have an agreement for cross border freight transport with Canada but we can't have one with Mexico?

Why is it that Jimmy Hoffa Jr. isnt leading a movement to stop Canadian truckers too?

The above are simple questions. It is not a promotion of a point of view either way, no matter how much you, Dainbramaged and Brentspeak might want it to be one.

Why is it that you and the others who apparently REFUSE to understand this agreement do not have the same ire for Canadian truckers?

[Elwood P Dowd]

53. The Canadian truckers make a living fucking wage!!!

You are supporting a scam. You are neither a Democrat, a liberal, or a progressive. You support the corporate/republican drive to lower wages in the name of massive profits for CEOs and wealthly investors. That's all this is about, and you know it. Take your corporate agenda somewhere else.

[A HERETIC I AM]

58. Blah blah blah

Because i disagree with you on a point of logistics, i am neither a Democrat, a liberal or a progressive, eh? What a completely stupid argument.

You support the corporate/republican drive to lower wages in the name of massive profits for CEOs and wealthly investors.

What i support is a logical, reasonable, workable solution to a logistical nightmare that has existed for years. What i would like to see is an agreement that allows cross border freight transport with Mexico that is similar to the agreement we have with Canada. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's all this is about, and you know it. Take your corporate agenda somewhere else.

What this is about is whether or not it makes more sense for goods to move from a factory in the US to Mexico or from Mexico to the US on 3 trucks or just one. That's what this is about. If that is a "corporate agenda" then i have no idea how you would define such a term.

So - if the Mexican truckers made a "living fucking wage" (however you prefer to define that) would you THEN be OK with this program?

[Kajsa]

74. Where are US jobs outsourced to?

Canada or Mexico?

[Snotcicles]

76. My guess is to which ever offers the lower cost. It won't

equalize until there is parity. And Mexico has a long way to go to reach parity.
I would like to see if the volume of U.S. truck traffic into Canada has increased since the value of the American dollar has decreased.
So far NAFTA has done little to raise the Mexican economic standards. That makes them an attractive labor source. The increase in wealth is more than likely being skimmed off the top by the wealthy and it is being encouraged by American interests. Lower labor cost over there, lower labor cost migrating into America. The bootstrap's are being used to pull downward not up IMO. Until the distribution of wealth reaches the working class in Mexico all three labor partners suffer at the advantage of the wealthy ownership class.
Just look at the disparity in wealth in this country and how rapid the gap is widening. And to think it will correct itself through free markets alone would be to ignore what we are witnessing here at home.

[Kajsa]

80. I completely agree with you, Snotcicles.

There is disparity in Mexico.

What percentage owns what percentage of the wealth?

Isn't it something like 5% own 97% of the wealth?

That needs to change.

Too bad Obrador isn't president.
Like presidential candidate Luis Donaldo Colosio
and others who have been"stopped" , either by assassinations or stolen
elections, he would have worked to help the poor
and build a strong middle class in Mexico.

[Snotcicles]

75. Well I for one am more concerned about area standards like wage and benefit

and Canada is a lot closer to if not better than our scale, So the equalization would maintain a high level. I think the lower scale of the Mexican area standards would dilute both the northern standards at a much greater pace than it would improve the Southern.

[Romulox]

78. Why does the Democratic UNDERGROUND attract so many *neo-liberal* posters???

And why do the mods tolerate the far-right/corporate posters who call anyone who opposes them "racist"? Where I come from, "racist" is a series charge--like calling someone "communist" in the 1950s--but around here, it is an acceptable counterargument to those who oppose globalization... :shrug:

[Kajsa]

81. Excellent question, Romulex!

Two big thumbs up.

I'd like to hear the answer, also.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :hi:

[QC]

82. Why do you hate brown people? n/t

[doc03]

62. Safety is an issue but I think

the real concern the Teamsters have is the Mexican drivers will drive the truckers wages down even further. I listen to the truckers talk shows a good bit and from what I hear wages are their main concern and rightly so. The safety thing goes over better, if they say the Mexican drivers will bring the wages down someone would turn it into a damn racial thing. Safety is more politically correct.

[lonestarnot]

65. Whatever, it is a viable issue.

[VP505]

67. Its not just truckers

that will be seriously affected, its also the longshoreman and port workers that will be bypassed as goods are shipped into Mexico, loaded on trucks and hauled north.

[doc03]

72. I agree, but the Repugs will

say it will help consumers because it will keep prices down and we will be able to buy more. It's the old Trickle Down theory, we buy more then more Mexicans will have jobs making more products and it will increase their standard of living and so on. We all know how that works.

[lonestarnot]

64. Union! YES!