Skip to comments.Authorities shift focus to Ĺsuper corridorĺ
Posted on 05/30/2007 6:22:13 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
A proposed North American super corridor would relieve overburdened highways and promote economic growth in three countries, supporters say.
But others wonder whether the proposal might bring in cheap exports and put unsafe Mexican trucks on U.S. roads.
The issue takes center stage at a three-day conference that begins today in Fort Worth, Texas. More than 350 transportation, logistics and economic development specialists from the United States, Canada and Mexico are meeting.
The conference is sponsored by Dallas-based North Americas SuperCorridor Coalition.
The nonprofit coalition, whose members include public- and private-sector organizations, wants to develop an integrated transportation system linking the three countries.
The corridor includes interstates 29, 94 and 35, giving North Dakota and Minnesota a stake in the outcome. The project has drawn heavy criticism, including claims that it threatens U.S. control of its own borders.
Such claims are extremely inaccurate, false and unhelpful to the countrys actual needs, said Francisco Conde, the coalitions director of special projects and communications.
The real issue is that the U.S. Interstate Highway System, completed in 1970, is increasingly overwhelmed by the countrys growing population and economy, he said.
The transportation system needs to be expanded for growth to continue, he said.
North Dakota and western Minnesota have less immediate need for the super corridor than the southern Great Plains does, said Jerry Nagel, president of Fargo-based Northern Great Plains, which seeks to maximize the areas potential through regional collaboration.
The existing highway system in this area is still adequate which isnt the case in the southern Great Plains, where some highways are stressed by heavy traffic, he said.
Texas lawmakers for months have wrangled over construction of what is known as the Trans-Texas Corridor.
Plans call for a transportation network across Texas, including a 10-lane highway with six lanes for automobiles and four lanes for trucks. Freight and commuter railways and a utilities corridor are also part of the proposal, which would stretch the system from Laredo, Texas, to Canada.
The idea has sparked controversy in Texas, where rural interest groups are opposed to paving thousands of acres of farmland for transportation.
There arent any plans for super corridor-related construction in North Dakota, said Bob Fode, director of transportation projects for the state Department of Transportation.
David Martin, president of the Chamber of Commerce of Fargo Moorhead, said his group supports the super corridor project. The regions continued growth requires expanded transportation opportunities, he said.
North Dakota Commerce Commissioner Shane Goettle said a transportation corridor would help the state. Both North Dakota and Minnesota are exporting more to Mexico and Canada, according to U.S. government figures.
From 2001 to 2006, North Dakota increased its exports to Mexico from $38 million to $55 million and its exports to Canada from $394 million to $727 million. In the same period, Minnesota exports to Mexico rose from $435 million to $595 million, with exports to Canada rising from $2.6 billion to $4.1 billion.
The proposed super corridor worries the American trucking industry.
We are concerned about the safety standards of Mexican trucks, said Thomas Balzer, managing director of the North Dakota Motor Carriers Association.
Theres also concern that Mexican truckers will improperly carry goods between U.S. cities while theyre in this country with international shipments, he said.
Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said it likely will be 20 years before the project has any impact on Minnesota.
He said its too early to know how such a corridor would affect the Red River Valley, but there are some concerns over how an influx of Canadian and Mexican imports could affect North Dakota and northwestern Minnesotas economies.
Theres a lot of concern out there with some people about Canadian cattle, and hogs and wheat. Youve got a different situation on the Mexico border, Peterson said.
It depends on where it goes and how its developed.
The Advocate wants to correct promptly any error in fact or clarify any misleading information we publish. To report any error or need for clarification, please call 361-574-1222. Harris County Commissioners Court voted in early May to pull out of the I-69 Alliance because the portion of the highway that was to be I-69 has become part of the Trans-Texas Corridor and no longer would go through Harris County, said Kathy Luhn, policy director for the Harris County judge's office. Also, the toll road bill would take away Harris County's right to build its own toll road, which the court didn't agree with while the I-69 Alliance supported the bill, Luhn said. A story on Page A1 on Monday, May 28, said the court withdrew from the project because too much was spent on membership fees. Luhn said that was a secondary reason for withdrawing.
Copyright, (c) 2007, The Victoria Advocate
Trans-Texas Corridor PING!
and the push for SPP continues:
This is the next step in the loss of our sovereignty!
It's almost like they've planned it.
They’ll face heavy opposition in this area.
ROFLOL! What control?
No one wants to believe that this is a part of the Conspiracy.
My big question here is, Why do they not build some new railroad lines? The railroads can haul more at any given time, and it would create thousands of American jobs. It would also keep the Mexican trucks off our highways. Solves many problems and answers many questions.
Here is comes...
The NWO is coming soon. Get ready for your implants.
There are roads in my town and I never got to vote on them! LOL!
It isn't efficient or cost effective.
While it wastes a lot of time, it doesn't necessarily waste a lot of man hours, since train transport isn't manpower intensive. Therefore the Teamster's Union hate that idea as well, not to mention that a trains might also be used for domestic transport, where the threat of Mexican trucks delivering foreign goods doesn't pose a large threat to that part of their business.
Trains are most effective when you want to move huge quantities of something from one spot to another all at once. That means storing all that stuff. That means increased inventories. That means tying up huge amounts of assets in the supply chain. That just doesn't work well for most businesses.
Invade Mexico now. We’ve already got half their people, we might as well have the territory.
If they'd print junk that, what else in the story is false? (Hint for writers - the orginal plan called for completion in 1975; as with many governmental programs, that deadline wasn't met. )
According to this source, the system was only 70 per cent complete by 1970. "By 1970, Wisconsin had completed its initial rural Interstate system at a time when only 70% of the country's system was complete."
And we aren't just talking about minor interstates:
Meanwhile, down in Georgia, the state's segment of Interstate 95 was completed in January 1980.
What's your point?
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.