Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

first Mexican customs facility in the United States
http://www.insidebayarea.com/businessnews/ci_3254225 ^ | 11/27/2005 | Garance Burke

Posted on 11/27/2005 4:42:00 PM PST by cope85

New Kansas City customs port may expedite trade with Mexico Region hopes to capitalize on growing cross-border trade By Garance Burke, Associated Press

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Shipping American cars and electronics to Mexico may become much cheaper and faster early next year when the first Mexican customs facility in the United States is expected to open in the heart of the Midwest. It may be nearly 1,000 miles to the border from Kansas City, but this industrial hub will soon start building an inland port that would whisk thousands of trucks through export inspections and shoot them back out onto the North American Free Trade Agreement corridor, where they can roll through the border without further delays.

The $3 million facility, which would be the first foreign customs office inside the United States, will likely be approved by the U.S. and Mexican governments by year's end and is scheduled to open next May, said Chris Gutierrez, president of Kansas City SmartPort Inc., a nonprofit organization promoting the project.

Planners say manufacturing industries in the upper Midwest and Canada would be the first to benefit from the new customs operation, which they believe could expand to handle cargo from across the country.

Mexican government officials confirmed the two countries had agreed on the overall proposal, though both nations said finer points of the agreement were still being negotiated by customs officials — including security concerns and the legal standing of Mexican customs officials working in the United States.

After a visit to Kansas City in May, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Robert C. Bonner said the pilot proposal was "bold and imaginative" and could transform Kansas City into a "major new trade link" that would fit well with new border security initiatives to pre-approve cargo.

"We've always had the railroad and the river and the airlines and the roads, but this will open up tremendous new business opportunities for Kansas City," said Kansas City councilwoman Bonnie Sue Cooper, who said she proposed the idea to the Mexican Finance Minister Francisco Gil Diaz last year.

In the 1940s, Kansas City — at the intersection of two major interstate highways along the Missouri River — was one of the country's largest rail distribution centers.

Now plans are to fill a gravel lot that once held cattle with a big-box building that will process long lines of big rigs packed with goods for export to Mexico.

Providing the containers stay electronically sealed once they're inspected, the trucks will be free to cross the border and avoid further inspections, resulting in efficiencies and cost savings.

"Kansas City is the geographical

heart of the United States and of the entire NAFTA region," said Everardo Suarez, Mexican consul general in Kansas City. Once the agreement is completed, Kansas City would essentially function like a Mexican port.

The transition to the global economy comes just in time: since the city's stockyards and airline industry declined, it has been struggling to rebuild itself as a leader in global logistics.

"I think this project would go a long way to transform trucking," said Chaz Jones, a research analyst with Morgan Keegan, a Memphis investment bank. "Truckers typically get paid per mile. The more time cargo spends moving on the road, the more revenue it generates for a carrier."

In recent months, delays at the hurricane-damaged port of New Orleans and bottlenecks at Long Beach and Los Angeles have caused companies to look for alternative trade routes. Industry analysts said Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is one of several companies moving freight through Mexico as an alternative to using West Coast ports; Wal-Mart spokespeople would not confirm the move.

Because so much trade between NAFTA partners is carried by truck, Midwestern cities with good transportation infrastructure stand to capture some of that trade flow.

In August 2005, trucks carried 64 percent of imports from Canada and Mexico and 80 percent of U.S. exports to those countries, according to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

San Antonio has also invested significant efforts to develop a competing inland port. But Kansas City officials hope the customs facility will give the city a leg up, especially once the project's second phase, which will allow rail cars to clear Mexican customs as well, is completed.

Kansas City Southern owns two Mexican train lines which means they can send freight from the Midwest directly to the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas, where car manufacturer Mazda Motor Corp. has begun shipping vehicles from Japan to Kansas City.

"There might not be enough volume to open a rail facility today, but we certainly expect that will increase in the next few years," said Warren Erdman, a vice president at Kansas City Southern. "We have great interest in the proposal."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Mexico; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nafta; nasco; wto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

1 posted on 11/27/2005 4:42:01 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cope85

US blinks in softwood standoff 11/24/2005 WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Commerce Department announced it would comply with a NAFTA panel's order to cut a 16 percent duty on Canadian softwood lumber imports -- for now. Even though the Bush Administration still strongly disagrees with the repeated NAFTA rulings in Canada's favor, it will comply, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said yesterday. "We have serious concerns about the panel's decision. However, consistent with our NAFTA obligations, we have complied with the panel's instructions," Gutierrez said in a press release.

The ruling effectively means that the Americans would reduce duties from about 16 percent to less than one per cent. Separate antidumping tariffs averaging about 4 percent will not be affected.

While protectionists oppose the move to lift softwood tariffs, US consumer groups applauded the move However, the government says it's asking for clarification of the ruling -- meaning the duties on Canadian imports can remain in place for another 45 days. Officials also added they have the right to appeal the ruling. The two counties have been at odds over the softwood issue for years. Canada says the duties are in violation of the free trade agreement. The U.S. has argued that Canadian softwood is subsidized because it's cut on Crown timberland, while U.S. softwood is sawed privately, placing it at a competitive disadvantage.

Canada accounts for about one-third of the U.S. supply of softwood, used mainly in homebuilding.

As expected, U.S. protectionist industry groups decried the move. However, consumer commended the Department of Commerce for "finally doing the honorable and right thing in recalculating lumber duties as directed."

American Consumers for Affordable Homes (ACAH), representing more than 95 percent of lumber consumption in the U.S., said such duties only punish consumers. "These duties on Canadian softwood lumber increase the cost of a new home by at least $1,000, pricing more than 300,000 families out of mortgage eligibility and home ownership," said Susan Petniunas, spokesperson for ACAH.

Industries that depend on lumber as an input and that oppose import restrictions include manufacturers of value-added wood products, lumber dealers, manufactured and on-site home builders, remodeling contractors, mattress and box springs manufacturers, and individuals, says ACAH.


2 posted on 11/27/2005 4:45:21 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cope85

come on in anyone


3 posted on 11/27/2005 4:46:18 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cope85

http://www.amerikanexpose.com/othlinks.html#NAF


4 posted on 11/27/2005 4:49:13 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cope85

What exactly is it that we export to Mexico? (besides jobs)


5 posted on 11/27/2005 4:52:15 PM PST by operation clinton cleanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cope85

Right on schedule with merging our countries by 2010 as per the Council on Foreign Relations agenda.


6 posted on 11/27/2005 4:55:15 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: operation clinton cleanup

we only have one vote in nafta,Mexico and Canada LOVE it


7 posted on 11/27/2005 4:55:33 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

One big happy global village ping.


8 posted on 11/27/2005 4:55:53 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

you got it


9 posted on 11/27/2005 4:56:04 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

thanks to the N.G.O


10 posted on 11/27/2005 4:56:39 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cope85

What are NGOs?Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have become quite prominent in the field of international development in recent decades. But the term NGO encompasses a vast category of groups and organizations.

The World Bank, for example, defines NGOs as “private organizations that pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake community development.” A World Bank Key Document, Working With NGOs, adds, “In wider usage, the term NGO can be applied to any non-profit organization which is independent from government. NGOs are typically value-based organizations which depend, in whole or in part, on charitable donations and voluntary service. Although the NGO sector has become increasingly professionalized over the last two decades, principles of altruism and voluntarism remain key defining characteristics.”

Different sources refer to these groups with different names, using NGOs, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), Private Voluntary Organizations (PVOs), charities, non-profits charities/charitable organizations, third sector organizations and so on.

These groups can encompass a wide variety of groups, ranging from corporate-funded think tanks, to community groups, grassroot activist groups, development and research organizations, advocacy groups, operational, emergency/humanitarian relief focused, and so on. While there may be distinctions in specific situations, this section deals with a high level look at these issues, and so these terms may be used interchangeably, and sometimes using NGOs as the umbrella term.

Since the 1970s, it has been noted how there are more non-governmental organizations than ever before trying to fill in the gaps that governments either will not, or cannot.

The above-mentioned World Bank document points out that “Since the mid-1970s, the NGO sector in both developed and developing countries has experienced exponential growth.... It is now estimated that over 15 percent of total overseas development aid is channeled through NGOs.” That is, roughly $8 billion dollars. Recognizing that statistics are notoriously incomplete, the World Bank adds that there are an estimated 6,000 to 30,000 national NGOs in developing countries alone, while the number of community-based organizations in the developing world number in the hundreds of thousands.

Such organizations must operate as a non-profit group. While in that respect, NGOs are meant to be politically independent, in reality it is a difficult task, because they must receive funding from their government, from other institutions, businesses and/or from private sources. All or some of these can have direct or indirect political weight on decisions and actions that NGOs make


11 posted on 11/27/2005 4:58:27 PM PST by cope85
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cope85

I shouldn't be, but am in shock to see this in writing. I've heard about it of course...

We can't even get a permanent checkpoint built in the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector to filter who is coming to our country.


12 posted on 11/27/2005 4:59:09 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

thanks to Bush and his best pal, Vicente Fox.


13 posted on 11/27/2005 5:00:31 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cope85

As a citizen in Kansas City, Missouri I'm fighting against this proposed pilot program.

Considering the historic nature of this arrangement, however, one would expect that there would be some documentation, including documented permission from the federal government, which traces the genesis of locating a Mexican customs facility within the sovereign border of the United States.

Surprisingly, Kansas City SmartPort president Chris Guiterrez and Councilwoman Bonnie Sue Cooper claim that there are no documents. And shockingly, the Kansas City, Missouri City Council obligated the funds for this pilot project based on nothing more substantial than it being a good idea.

Moreover, there are major concerns that have not been adressed.

We may be able to glean some information regarding the various issues associated with cross-border inspection services from the National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade. The Center’s findings are contained in a study, “Expanding Trade through Safe and Secure Borders,” conducted by The University of Arizona’s Office of Economic Development.

The Center suggests that, “If cross-border inspection services are envisioned as an eventual element of the CyberPort concept, it would be advisable to conduct an in-depth study of possible civil liability and insurance issues, which could very likely become a concern for certain U.S. agencies.” Moreover, the Center also noted that the concept of an inland port would require “enhanced security.”

The Center’s April 2004 newsletter, “The Inter-American Trade Report” Carlos Guzman-Leuffer explains that, “One of the most important obstacles that would face any proposal of the Cyberport project is the sovereignty issue in the NAFTA countries...”

Our City Council and economic development officials seem unconcerned about the state of Missouri's sovereignty.


14 posted on 11/27/2005 5:00:49 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; cope85
Once the agreement is completed, Kansas City would essentially function like a Mexican port.

Why do we even bother fighting this? It's clear our destiny has been determined by the ruling class.

15 posted on 11/27/2005 5:02:09 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

I'm going to fight it. The U.S. citizens in Kansas City, Missouri should not have to wait until the ink is dry on the paper to have a voice in this arrangement.


16 posted on 11/27/2005 5:04:36 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist

Good!! Keep us posted?


17 posted on 11/27/2005 5:05:50 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

Chris Guiterrez was anything but transparent when I spoke to him about this 8 weeks ago. When he asked me what my concerns were I stated that I was unconfortable with the fact that the facility will be the sovereign territory of Mexico. He stated that that was untrue. Ha! I quoted back to him his own statements in Logistics Today that confirmed that the facility will be Mexican territory. He was silent. What really irritates me is that Kansas City Smartport is not subject to Missouri's Sunshine law. How convenient. If I want documents I have to file a FOIA request to multiple federal agencies.


18 posted on 11/27/2005 5:10:10 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cope85
we only have one vote in nafta,Mexico and Canada LOVE it

Were any GM workers in Mexico or Canada part of the recent layoff announcement? I worked on a GM parts distribution system in the late 90's to make the GM parts distribution seamless between US/Canada/Mexico.... guess it was a success!

19 posted on 11/27/2005 5:10:25 PM PST by operation clinton cleanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist

I also spoke with the AP reporter about this issue. She said that the people she interviewed were also concerned with the issues I brought up. I asked her why she didn't put those concerns in her article. No answer.


20 posted on 11/27/2005 5:12:57 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cope85
Two words. No, better make it three.

Narcotics. Coyotes. Terrorists.

(I'm sure they'll manage to find a way, even though I can't think of one.)

No cheers, unfortunately.

21 posted on 11/27/2005 5:14:15 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist

What an idiot I am. I posted to myself. My face is red.


22 posted on 11/27/2005 5:14:38 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist

One of the first things I'd be asking those city council bozo's is where is their authority to execute this agreement without the consent of the citzenry. It would also be worthwhile to see if they have their "oaths of office" filed properly.........if not, then I do believe they might have some liability problems for acting outside the scope of their authority.


23 posted on 11/27/2005 5:14:41 PM PST by american spirit (Can you handle the truth? - www.rbnlive.com ( 4-6 CST M-F)) / click "listen live")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist; Borax Queen

I know other people who, at times past, have also posted to themselves.

But I won't mention any names. : )


24 posted on 11/27/2005 5:17:40 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist
He stated that that was untrue. Ha! I quoted back to him his own statements in Logistics Today that confirmed that the facility will be Mexican territory. He was silent.

Sounds like when anyone asks Jim Kolbe at town halls about his membership in the CFR and the plan for merged countries. He sneers and either goes silent by ignoring the question, or quickly says "there is nothing sinister" or something else along those lines.

25 posted on 11/27/2005 5:17:41 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: operation clinton cleanup

Sounds like a pretty large operation just to accomodate the 3 or 4 trucks per day that transport Americans goods to Mexico...

But I suspect this 'port' will also double as a port for Mexican trucks that will by pass border inspections coming up from Mexico...


26 posted on 11/27/2005 5:18:42 PM PST by Iscool (Start your own revolution by voting for the candidates the media (and gov't) tells you cannot win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; Lobbyist

I thought s/he got tired of talking to me, lol!


27 posted on 11/27/2005 5:18:45 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: american spirit

There is nothing in the city charter that gives them the authority to do this. Moreover, I'm unsure that they can use property - paid for by taxpayer money - for a foreign government. I have been advised that I have no legal standing in the courts against this pilot project. Anyone have any other ideas?


28 posted on 11/27/2005 5:19:56 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

They ARE attempting that....but, even if that does happen, you will have a clear conscience that you've done everything reasonably possible to educate yourself, object, voice concerns, and tell others.

If more Americans today were more like our patriots, none of this would be happening.


29 posted on 11/27/2005 5:20:25 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SwinneySwitch; HiJinx; cope85

ping


30 posted on 11/27/2005 5:20:57 PM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

I didn't get tired. I'm just a blonde. What do you expect?


31 posted on 11/27/2005 5:21:15 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen; Lobbyist

Then Lobbyist certainly doesn't know you very well.....besides being intelligent, BQ, you're also quite entertaining. : )


32 posted on 11/27/2005 5:21:44 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist

lol


33 posted on 11/27/2005 5:21:58 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; Lobbyist

awwwwwwwwwwwwww, anti-loss of sovereignty love-fest!

Kumbaya! (j/k!!)


34 posted on 11/27/2005 5:23:11 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

Please forgive me. I feel like I've done something wrong.


35 posted on 11/27/2005 5:23:23 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
If more Americans today were more like our patriots, none of this would be happening.

Too many liberals have tainted the gene pool.

36 posted on 11/27/2005 5:23:57 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist
What an idiot I am. I posted to myself. My face is red.

Well that's not a big deal, but when you posted the correction to yourself, then.......

37 posted on 11/27/2005 5:24:24 PM PST by bad company ( Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen; Lobbyist

**Kumbaya!**

*chuckle*

or is that

**ahmmmm ahmmmmmmm ahmmmmm**? : )


38 posted on 11/27/2005 5:24:42 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist; nicmarlo

No, no, we're just kidding around, usurping the thread! I'll get kicked off for being too goofy and going off topic.


39 posted on 11/27/2005 5:25:16 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

and the result = sleeping sheeples.


40 posted on 11/27/2005 5:25:31 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

Namaste!


41 posted on 11/27/2005 5:25:49 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen; Lobbyist

as I said....quite entertaining. : )


42 posted on 11/27/2005 5:26:00 PM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

I left my headlights on the car this afternoon while at lunch. When I came out the car was dead. I couldn't find the latch for the hood on our car so the kind gentleman who offered to help could jump start it. Calls to my husband resulted in hysterical laughter. I was not amused.


43 posted on 11/27/2005 5:27:25 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Lobbyist

Oh dear!


44 posted on 11/27/2005 5:31:38 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cope85

Thanks for the links!


45 posted on 11/27/2005 5:32:01 PM PST by Lobbyist (I want my American dream!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cope85
The $3 million facility, which would be the first foreign customs office inside the United States, will likely be approved by the U.S. and Mexican governments by year's end and is scheduled to open next May, said Chris Gutierrez, president of Kansas City SmartPort Inc., a nonprofit organization promoting the project.

Does anyone still think that Bush REALLY plans to do ANYTHING about illegal immigration? I would REALLY like to say what I'm thinking about the traitors in the White House and Congress, but if I did, I'd get banned in a heartbeat.

Suffice to say, short of an armed revolution, America is doomed to become a third world country. The ONLY winners are the traitors!! We've been sold out for the big corporations!!!

46 posted on 11/27/2005 5:41:19 PM PST by NRA2BFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Borax Queen

I see a red glow to my southwest. Is that you blowing your top? LOL IF you will look to your northeast, you will see another red glow, and that would be me! :o) Can you believe this? What a bunch of traitors. From the House through the Senate and straight to the White House. We have been sold out in the name of globalism.


47 posted on 11/27/2005 5:50:46 PM PST by NRA2BFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree
Us exports to Mexico $97b

http://www.usmcoc.org/eco2.html

48 posted on 11/27/2005 5:53:59 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree
I see a red glow to my southwest. Is that you blowing your top? LOL IF you will look to your northeast, you will see another red glow, and that would be me! :o)

ROTFL!!! and no, I cannot believe it!!! what the ...

49 posted on 11/27/2005 6:41:32 PM PST by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

"But I suspect this 'port' will also double as a port for Mexican trucks that will by pass border inspections coming up from Mexico..."

Yep. Sounds like one of Bush's "Smart Borders" plans.


50 posted on 11/27/2005 6:42:52 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson