Senate Panel Delays Program to Open Border Zone to Mexican Trucks

[Riley]

I've been out on the road, not asleep at the wheel. This is monstrous news, folks! The fact that the administration considered allowing Mexican trucks north of that 20 mile barrier is beyond absurd. I have never regretted a vote for President so much as I have this one. My next vote will not be for a President that will continue this trend to devalue our jobs, or allow them to be sent overseas.

WASHINGTON — Mexican trucks could have to wait longer than anticipated to haul freight deep into the United States.

The Bush administration in February announced that it would soon allow 100 Mexican trucking companies to travel beyond the current 20-mile limit for a one-year pilot project.

But a Senate panel on Thursday voted to delay the plan by requiring the administration to publish details about it and giving the public time to comment on it. The action came as part of a supplemental spending bill to pay for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260621,00.html

[bilmorgbc]

I think if you will check your facts Clinton was the the one that signed NAFTA. I was hoping Bush would kill it, but he didn't.

[Riley]

Sorry to disagree, but I kept up on that while it was happening. It was the original President Bush who promoted NAFTA during the early 90's, and signed the agreement on 17 Dec 1992 -- before he left office. Ah yes, the original promoter of the *New World Order* who put NAFTA on our doorsteps. Check the Bush Presidential Library --> http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/photos/p...=P38667-13.jpg.

I hoped President Clinton would kill the measure rather than sign it into law after it had been approved by Congress in late 1993. But, members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and/or the Trilateral Commission (TC) don't view the world the same way many of us patriotic United States citizens do.

While we see the world from the view of doing what's best for our fellow citizens and putting the interests of the United States first, too many of our elected leaders have adopted and embraced a larger view of international relations that is not compatible with either the best interests of our country or our national security.

They plan to level the playing field and give every nation on the planet the same opportunities that once belonged to us exclusively, and they are enacting these laws and strategies at the expense of the vanishing American middle class.

[bilmorgbc]

My point was without Clinton's signature it would not have become law.Bush started the mess but Clinton made it law.This Bush can only follow the law unless congress repeals it.I wish he had tried to do that, but no luck.

[Riley]

I think you missed my point entirely. It appears you are trying to make this a right vs. left issue, conservative vs. liberal, and finally -- a Republican vs. Democrat topic. It isn't.

The politicians at the top have adopted *globalist* thinking. In International Relations courses taught at finer universities across the nation, the concept that the U.S. must take a less prominent role in decision making for the rest of the world has been a prominent theme for quite some time now. As students, we were told that the playing field had to be leveled, that we must share our wealth.

Take a look at what is happening today, it is almost like a nightmare come true. Our leaders raise their right hands and swear an allegiance to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, but I believe they are giving our country away instead to those who are more *globally* minded.

Why pay $15 an hour to employees in the US when your factory can be built across the border and employees there will do the same work for $1 or $2 an hour?

[Riley]

A better question yet, there are others that apply more directly to each of us drivers.

The price of fuel has doubled. What did we do other than to meekly accept this change?

With the price of fuel going up and up, what corners do you think our companies are going to cut to compensate for the rising costs?

How many drivers from south of our border are we going to allow to take our jobs and our loads before we stand up to give a damn?

[bilmorgbc]

Unless something has changed in the agreement, the way I understood it was like Canadian trucks have done for more than twenty five years.They load in Canada,deliver in the USA and must load back to Canada.I understood the Mexican trucks would have to follow the same rules.No truck, including ours, can move freight point to point inside another country. The deal is on hold right now, but the way I see it the companies most affected will be auto parts between Mexico and Detroit. Well, I guess produce will also be affected.

[Riley]

It may be on hold for now, but this is in the fast-lane to be put into action if Congress allows it.

While what you say about our trade/driver/load arrangement with Canada is true, it would be wise to be aware of what similar arrangements and conditions with Mexico are.

Please listen to what Teamsters President James Hoffa had to say on the subject when speaking before a US Senate committee. You might not like what you hear...