Mexican Trucks will NOT cross the US border

Aug 20, 2002
10,154
687
www.usaviation.com
LED by ALL Democrat senators, and 20+ Republicans, the Mexican trucks will NOT enter the US, anytime soon.

But the bigger picture is the Senators who voted TO allow them to enter.

21 Republicans voted to allow them into the US.

Bush vows to Veto the bill, but if all 76 NO votes hold, then EL CHIMPO is screwed.
 
LED by ALL Democrat senators, and 20+ Republicans, the Mexican trucks will NOT enter the US, anytime soon.

But the bigger picture is the Senators who voted TO allow them to enter.

21 Republicans voted to allow them into the US.

Bush vows to Veto the bill, but if all 76 NO votes hold, then EL CHIMPO is screwed.

At face value, I have to agree with you here, Bear. The question also remains, was this a stand alone bill, or was it attached as a rider to another bill that the GOP wanted to pass, thereby forcing them to vote FOR amendment that they otherwise would have voted against. This is a common "poison pill" technique practiced by both sides. My gut tells me you are right, but I would like to know ALL the facts before commenting further.
 
It was not a stand-alone bill. It was essentially an all-encompassing appropriations bill for the Housing, Transportation, and related agencies. This vote was simply for an amendment to the larger bill.

The Repubs had their own amendment (The Cornyn amendment). Their apparent intention was to reject the dem's amendment and adopt the repubs amendment.

The dem's amendment would deny the entry of Mexican trucks beyond the commercial border zone of the United States on the belief that the trucks participating in this program would not meet the same safety standards as U.S. trucks and, therefore, would be unfit for U.S. roads.

The repubs amendment sought to relieve the dem's (union's) fear that the trucks are unsafe. The amendment sought to do this by limiting the amount of trucks, requiring a strict application process, meet all DOT standards, US Federal inspection pass before application approved, 3-month interval tests, border inspections.

The bottom line is, those people who fear that Mexican trucks will not be held to the same safety standards as U.S. trucks in America are incorrect. They will receive the two inspections in Mexico, another inspection at the border, and the potential for an inspection anywhere else on the highways, just as American trucks. Those inspections are performed by U.S. inspectors.

The Dems, uh, Unions, are solely concerned about protectionism... about limiting competition. They are scared that Mexicans can do it better. And they can! It is much more efficient and much cheaper for American consumers to allow these Mexican trucks to travel in the United States. The alternative, and status quo is to offload the cargo in Mexico, reload it onto an American truck, and then have it come into the United States. This is a very lengthy, time-consuming, and costly process.

Moreover, this repub amendment will allow US trucks to enter Mexico too. So, if you are concerned about losing jobs, the US trucks can go to Mexico and pick up the goods and bring them to the US too... thereby keeping the money in-house. If the US transportation companies cannot compete with the mexicans on price, then our capitalist nation and efficient market suggests that the US companies should lose that job then.


(I recognize this is an unpopular stance on this board).
 
To tell you the truth ..Lilly..your painting ALL the democrats with the Union brush, does'nt make sense, because I know a ton of truckers, who vote democratic, and do NOT belong to a union.

These very same people ALSO don't want the trucks coming into the US.

An even "larger eye opener" is the 2 dozen Republicans, who voted WITH the Democrats.

I'm anxious to hear your analogy about the LAST line, that I just wrote. :huh: :huh:
 
To tell you the truth ..Lilly..your painting ALL the democrats with the Union brush, does'nt make sense, because I know a ton of truckers, who vote democratic, and do NOT belong to a union.

These very same people ALSO don't want the trucks coming into the US.

An even "larger eye opener" is the 2 dozen Republicans, who voted WITH the Democrats.

I'm anxious to hear your analogy about the LAST line, that I just wrote. :huh: :huh:


Didn't ever claim that "ALL" democrats are card-carrying members of the union. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that dem's cater to the unions, and that many unionites support the dems.

Analogy... between what and what?? I am not drawing inferences.

I never stated that my stance is popular, hence the disclaimer at the bottom of my post. As I stated, two amendments were up for vote. And both were voted upon... and like most other competing amendments, senators often vote 2 different ways despite the conflicting ideas in each amendment. They do this sometimes to avoid the backlash come election time.

That happened here as well, many more repubs voted for the Cornyn amendment... but not enought to pass. In full disclosure, however, about 12 repubs voted no on the Cornyn amendment I believe. Like I said, it is unpopular (who wants to be the person to vote to allow the mexican terrorists into our country with trucks full of dynamite). But I do think that this type of blocking actually hurts the very people it is supposed to help.
 
Lilly,

"Terrorists...trucks full of dynomite"...............GREAT points that you've made !

What about "Israeli like" inspections of said trucks and drivers BEFORE they step/drive onto US soil ??

An equal parallel would be similiar to the procedure of Inspecting EVERY container BEFORE it was uloaded from freighters, and BEFORE it touched the US piers(an ammendment proposed by the democrats, that BUSH vowed to VETO) !! :down:
 
Lilly,

"Terrorists...trucks full of dynomite"...............GREAT points that you've made !

What about "Israeli like" inspections of said trucks and drivers BEFORE they step/drive onto US soil ??

An equal parallel would be similiar to the procedure of Inspecting EVERY container BEFORE it was uloaded from freighters, and BEFORE it touched the US piers(an ammendment proposed by the democrats, that BUSH vowed to VETO) !! :down:


Perhaps you didnt get the point that they would be subject to the exact same scrutiny of US trucks.
 
Perhaps you didnt get the point that they would be subject to the exact same scrutiny of US trucks.

Why trucks and a super highway?

This agreement goes way beyond conventional thinking. It is a proven fact that train freight is cheaper and more reliable than trucking. Building a rail infrastructure form south to north makes much more sense than this super trucking highway.

Why is it that this was a clandestine decision?

JMHO, the RLA.

If there were the same proposal regarding rail, ‘everyone’ would have to comply with the RLA. By circumventing the RLA, the ‘equipment’ may be substandard, the ‘operators’ will not be drug tested (until after an accident), and do not have to comply with international commerce laws/regulations.

This is just another ‘scam’ agreed to by both parties to increase their coffers. And ‘WE’ the American people drink their Kool-Aid. :down:

JMHO,
B) UT
 
This is just another ‘scam’ agreed to by both parties to increase their coffers. And ‘WE’ the American people drink their Kool-Aid. :down:

JMHO,
B) UT

Exactly!!!!!!

...and if our government dems/repubs gave two cents about the American people they would have closed the borders on 9/12/01!

We allow thousands to cross unabated every week without a f...kin clue as to who or what enters this country, all the while our leaders play 'OZ'... :down:
 
What about Canada, the Pacific coast, Atlantic coast and the Gulf? I figure at least 1 million troops and then all the equipment. Guess that 500 billion dollars we spent liberating Iraq might come in handy.
 
What about Canada, the Pacific coast, Atlantic coast and the Gulf? I figure at least 1 million troops and then all the equipment. Guess that 500 billion dollars we spent liberating Iraq might come in handy.

Not to worry Gar, as soon as Billary gets the troops home she will secure the borders! :lol:
 
No, you stated that W should have sealed the MX border. I am asking 1, why close the MX border while leaving the rest of the nation exposed and 2, how could we close off tens of thousands of miles of border much less afford to do so. I would hope Clinton or who ever becomes POTS has the common sense to realize that the idea is neither affordable nor realistic.
 
"SHET", I can't be anymore honest than this !

The Democrats..Don't/won't close it, because the immigrants hopefully/most likely turn into VOTES !

The GOP Won't EVER, because the Immigrants = Cheap labor for all those giant agri-business's(that contribute "zillions $$" to the GOP) !!! aka- CAPITALISM, at ANY CO$T !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1