Broken pact; Mexico expected to ban U.S. truck drivers

LAREDO MORNING TIMES ^ | 12/21/2007 | ASHLEY RICHARDS

[hinckley buzzard]

Aside from a handfull of owner operators I wish them lots of luck finding American drivers who go to mexico.

Personally I could not imagine investing all that money in a big rig and then taking it into Mexico. Between the thieves, hijackers, drug thugs and federales, the risk is just too high. And I can imagine the insurance costs.

[norton]

Added:
It's been only a short time [3 years?] since mexican drivers tried to form a union just to gain leverage on the LA/LB harbor traffic. At one point they were parking their rigs just off the 710 intending to reduce movement of goods...
went flat.
Bad pun.

[Ben Ficklin]

Where is J. Edgar Hoover when you need him?

[nicmarlo]

Still watching over folks like you.

[hoosierham]

I have been opposed to NAFTA and the like from the beginning but our government has sold out the American citizen in favor of corporate profits and political kickbacks.

AMERICANS CAN WIN IF THE PLAYING FIELD IS FAIR,BUT NOT WHEN THE DECK IS STACKED.

The Constitution refers to Treaties as one way something becomes supreme law of the land and our Senators have approved way too many treaties.

The U.S. of A. must withdraw from unreasonable agreements and treaties.

Could we really be any worse off in a "trade war" than now,since we send trillions of dollars for oil to people who hate us and are actively working to destroy our nation;plus trillions to Communist China for everything from toys to electronics ,the profit of which is being used to build a huge military?

[nicmarlo]

Though they like to say that NAFTA is a treaty, it isn't. It's just a law. And because it's just a law, they could EASILY repeal it or pass a new law. But there's too many traitors in the Senate and House who are getting their pockets lined by foreign interests, lobbyists, and graft.

Note that the House vote was 234-200 and the Senate vote was 61-38. A treaty requires no House concurrence but does require the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senators "present." [U.S. Constitution - Article II; Section 2]. Two-thirds of the Senate present for the NAFTA vote did not concur. The Bill was passed but no treaty was authorized.

NAFTA is not a treaty.

"As law but not treaty, NAFTA can be altered or repealed with the simple passage of another law. So, when a Congress critter says that their hands are tied, that they are "bound" by NAFTA, it's likely a disingenuous argument. However, in the case that they are speaking out of ignorance, that they actually believe that NAFTA is a not easily altered treaty, then they should be reminded that NAFTA is simply law and that they have the power to create or change laws."

[Credit and thanks given to Colorado Buckeye for this information.]

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 103^rd Congress - 1^st Session

As compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate Vote Summary

Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R.3450)
Vote Number:	395	Vote Date:	November 20, 1993, 07:28 PM
Required For Majority:	1/2	Vote Result:	Bill Passed
Measure Number:	H.R. 3450
Measure Title:	A bill to implement the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Vote Counts:	YEAs	61
	NAYs	38
	Not Voting	1

[Ben Ficklin]

No, he is dead. What you are trying to say is that the “self-annointed” are carrying on.

[nicmarlo]

No, not self-annointed, those who are loyal and patriotic are carrying on in the spirit of his and all those before him who fought for and died for this country so that traitors, like you, could never, ever, take it over.

[Kimberly GG]

“Did we sign away our country for NAFTA?”

Looks that way and the ONE Republican Candidate to put a stop to this nonsense is DUNCAN HUNTER.

[Ben Ficklin]

You've identified the problem that the self-annointed have faced thru-out civilization.

Are you going to go with him because of his strong stance on the pinkos or against him because of his "wide stance" on homosexuality?

[Exit148]

So what happens to the highway? Kaput, too? (I hope I hope)

[Ron H.]

John Cornyn has lost all credibility.

Precisely, he has since at least 2004 been more concerned with how Mexico and his big corporate sponsors fares than he does about his own constituents and we American citizens. I never trust the man when it comes to defending America and its best interests as he tries to sell us out when he thinks we're not watching.

[sheana]

Cuellar is part of the ‘No Mexican left behind’ bureacracy.

[Niteflyr]

My mother drives for Schneider and she’s telling me right now from my living room that Schneider hasn’t been allowed into mexico for many years. They have a big transfer point in Laredo but the trucks don’t cross the border because they’re too expensive to replace.

But I thought Mexico was our friend??...(heavy sarc.)

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I am not worried so much about the trucks themselves, although "our" government seems not to be able to find its *ss with both hands when it comes to enforcing trade violations committed by Mexico and other countries.

The greater problem is that Mexico does not keep track of driver records. Therefore, even if "our" government wanted to check driver records, that would be impossible.

Furthermore, corruption in Mexico is so rampant that we could never be confident that their drivers' documents (which, in a country that had its sh** together, could be linked to criminal records) matched the persons bearing them. Even if they use fingerprints, the person they fingerprint may not be who they think.

But don't worry! The Bush administration will go ahead with the program, even though it's not supposed to have funds from congress. Even if an administration that cares about its citizens succeeds Bush, it will have too much momentum by that time, and the courts and other powers will make sure it continues.