Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (165462)	7/28/2001 12:41:44 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769669

Also, there is this news from the White House: White House Is Said to Strike a Deal Averting Subpoenas By JOSEPH KAHN ASHINGTON, July 26 — The Bush administration has agreed to cooperate with a Senate committee investigating how several sensitive environmental decisions were made, a move that is likely to end the threat that the Democratic-controlled Senate would issue its first subpoenas against the Bush White House, people involved in the matter said today. Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, the Democrat of Connecticut who leads the Governmental Affairs Committee, is expected to announce on Friday that the committee has reached an agreement with the White House that would permit access to documents involved in decisions made by the Interior and Agriculture Departments and the Environmental Protection Agency shortly after President Bush took office. nytimes.com

To: Neocon who wrote (165462)	7/28/2001 1:12:32 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769669

Well this proposal of the AFL-CIO Democrats to specifically target Mexican trucks driven by Mexicans and owned By Mexicans I'm sure is welcomed by MEXICANS all over the country. I figure MEXICANS feel the North American Free Trade Agreement has been bad for their MEXICAN brethren and the AFL-CIO Democrats have the economic well being of MEXICANs as their motivation to support this singling out of MEXICAN trucks. I think I'm amused. tom watson tosiwmee

To: Neocon who wrote (165462)	7/28/2001 2:22:49 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769669

This one is actually about a modest Bush victory! Neo, for those of us who are more interested in understanding the issue than scoring the game, have you seen anything that discusses the issues behind this? All I can find is news clips reporting what the two sides are pitching--no analysis at all on whether Mexican trucks and drivers are really safe or not or what options we really have under NAFTA, for example. Any leads? I found this editorial, part one of two, from Tucson, a Democratic stronghold. azstarnet.com Tucson, Arizona Saturday, 28 July 2001 Mexican trucks This is the first of a two-part series of editorials Mexican trucks have been cast as murderous machines and their drivers as misfits bent on mayhem and destruction. This image has been created by the Teamsters union and other free trade foes feverishly devoted to trade barriers. It is a malignant lie cast by the Teamster shills such as Sen. Patty Murray, the Washington Democrat. Murray led 69 other senators in a 70-30 vote in favor of a bill that will delay the free flow of goods between the United States and Mexico for years, if not indefinitely. Arizona Sen. John McCain led the battle against Murray's bill in an alliance with President Bush. To his credit, Bush called for implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement's provisions to allow the unfettered entry of Mexican haulers in the United States. Conversely, it would permit U.S. carriers unrestricted access in Mexico. Murray's bill, which is still being amended before it is sent to the House, violates NAFTA. It unfairly imposes restrictions on Mexico's trucking industry. It will continue to cost truckers on both sides of the border a great waste of time and money. If the bill passes, President Bush should make good his veto threat. Murray's bill is nothing less than protectionist nonsense. Murray's proposal requires constant inspection of Mexican trucks at the border, and a "compliance review" before the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration can grant operating authority for a Mexican truck. It requires weigh-in-motion scales and mandates that Mexican truckers obtain insurance from U.S.-based companies. McCain notes that a "compliance review" by definition assesses a trucking company's performance while it is operating in the United States. Murray's bill thus offers Mexican carriers a Catch-22: Mexican carriers cannot operate freely in the United States if they have not undergone a compliance review, but they cannot receive a compliance review unless they are in the United States. Murray also would require that each time a Mexican truck driver crosses the border his commercial driver's license be verified electronically. McCain points out that this would create even greater delays at the border where the backup is already as much as four hours. McCain proposes that driver licenses be verified at the time of vehicle inspections. The weigh-in-motion scales required by Murray's bill would usurp what has been a state responsibility. McCain suggests that the border inspection stations have the ability to weigh trucks and gives the Department of Transportation the responsibility for determining which inspection stations should have the costly weigh-in-motion scales. They can cost up to $3 million. McCain also opposes the insurance requirement. He notes limiting insurers to only U.S. corporations would restrict such companies as Lloyds of London, which provides coverage for some Canadian truckers. McCain also contends that the safety record of Mexican trucks is not nearly as bad as Murray suggests. She asserts that Mexican trucks have an "abysmal safety record," to which McCain counters: "Let me point out that the record of Mexican drivers is better than that of either Canadian or U.S. drivers. "Based on the available data provided by DOT, the out-of-service rate for Mexican drivers is 6 percent; it is 8 percent for U.S. drivers; and 9.5 percent for Canadian drivers. If the managers of this bill are concerned about drivers, perhaps they need to first focus on where the greatest safety problem appears to exist." Beyond the delaying tactics embodied in Murray's bill, it is perplexing that Senate Democrats would so aggressively act to thwart trade. In so doing, they give great credence to Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, who observed: "As it now stands, it bothers me that there's sort of an anti-Mexican, an anti-Hispanic, anti-NAFTA attitude - we really don't want to allow Mexican trucks to come into this country. If they meet safety standards and inspection and insurance standards, why not?" The "why not" stems from the fact that the Teamsters and other unions dislike Mexican trucks, or more precisely, the competitive threat posed by those trucks. The Teamsters union was successful in bending former president Clinton to its view. He refused to implement an essential part of NAFTA throughout his administration. Now Senate Democrats along with a handful of Republicans have bowed to the union and its unfounded fear of free markets. This is politics at its worst - short-sighted, ignorant and disgusting. Tomorrow: The myth of unsafe Mexican trucks and how trade barriers waste time and money for U.S. and Mexican trucking.