Mrs.Rosados Rants and Raves
Local and/or world News or just hip blah
just opinions unless i give you links
then you make your own opinions
Gender: female Member Since: July 19, 2007 Last Signed In: October 16, 2009 Profile Views: 559 Blog Views: 341 Federal and State Highways Goodbye America Hello North America Union August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 November 08 December 08 January 09 February 09 March 09 April 09 May 09 June 09 July 09 August 09 September 09 October 09 November 09 
RSS 2.0    Share!
|
|
|
Our Federal and State highways and bridges are among America's great assets; they enable us to drive freely and safely all over out country, and they belong to all of us, paid for by our taxes. But they are expensive assets; they require maintenance, repair, and expansion due to raising population and traffic.
Anyone who does much driving on our highways in ordinary sedans knows how crowded with big trucks out highways already are. So we're not happy that President Bush's latest concession to Mexico is to allow Mexican trucks for the first time to have open access to all our highways, roads, and bridges. It is painful for me to note that the BUSH Administration is less protective of the U.S. interests than the late, unlamented Clinton Administration. To his credit, Clinton kept Mexican trucks off our highways except for north of the border. U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters went to El Paso to make the announcement that for the first time, starting in April, 100 Mexican trucking companies will be allowed to make deliveries anywhere in the United States, and she put no limit on the number of trucks the 100 companies can operate. This is a major step towards Bush's vision of the North American Community. To find out why the Bush Administration ignores the comfort and safety of ordinary American drivers like me, just follow the money. Big corporations are eager to have made-in-Mexico-by-cheap-labor products( look at Wal Mart) delivered in the United States by Mexican drivers, who are paid 33 to 40 percent less than U.S. truckers. George W. Bush will never face the voters again, but other Republicans will pay the price for his coziness toward Mexico and his elitist disregard for American workers. Even the Wall Street Journal, an enthusiastic supporter of the movement of goods, services, and people, legal or illegal, across our southern border, admits that rising public opinion against the important of cheap labor "helped propel Democrats to take back Congress in November." The job issue will be even bigger in 2008, and the cost to Republicans even more damaging. The problem is not only the increased wear and tear on highways that U.S. taxpayers will subsidize, and not even the crowding of the roads that will make driving less pleasant for us all, but it's our worry about safety. That concern is real even if you don't buy Teamster President Jim Hoffa's statement that "They are playing a game of Russian roulette on American's highways." Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff assures us he is "committed to retaining a big level of security and safety standards under this program." But we are entitled to disbelieve his promise; Michael Chertoff is impudently repudiating Congress's Secure Fence Act and President Bush's much photographed pre-election signing of the Act. Del Rio Mayor Efrain Valdez boasted on Feb. 22 that "Secretary Chertoff stated publicly after the meeting [with Texas border mayors] that Texas doesn't need a fence." Maybe a Secretary Chertoff will give us "virtural" safety standards like the "virtual fence" he sometimes talks about. At the present time, only about two percent of trucks coming across the border are inspected, so the drug dealers just consider it a cost of doing business that a few of their illegal loads will be caught. U.S. truck drivers must meet strict requirements that include enforcement of hours, regular physicals, age limits, and drug and alcohol tests. We have no way of telling how many hours Mexican truck drivers have been on the road before they reach out border inspectors. Mexico has no limits on how many hours a driver can drive a truck, and no credible drug testing of drivers. The Mexican trucking industry, with few exceptions, has never successfully been monitored, much less supervised. National Transportation Safety Board member Debbie Hersman doubts that we have the personnel to take on the additional work of sending inspectors to Mexico. She says we already lack enough inspectors to conduct safety reviews of at-risk domestic carriers. Over the last several years, there have been many fatal accidents caused by cars and trucks driven by Mexicans, legal and illegal. The most tragic and costly truck accident is Midwest history, resulting in the incineration of Rev. Scott Willis's six children in 1994, was caused by a Mexican truck driver's inability to comprehend warnings in the English language. Secretary Peters claims that the Mexican drivers will be able to understand English, but we are entitled to doubt Bush's enforcement of the English-language regulation. Mexican drivers unfamiliar with our roads and signage, plus language incompatibility, are a danger to all driving Americans. I don't have a link for this but next post will have a few links for you to check out for yourself thanks for reading.... Mrs. Amanda Rosado
Posted Monday, July 16, 2007
In a month, August 20 and 21, the leaders of the United States, Canada and Mexico will sit down together in Montebello, Quebec to discuss making the borders between these three nations disappear. They will discuss progress on a vest highway project passing through America to link Mexico with Canada. So far, no one has asked the citizens of these three nations weather they want to do this. It is not up vote in Congress and, indeed, Congress has no supervision over the gnomes in the United States Department of Commerce who are busily "harmonizing" the laws under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP). This, we're told, is not a treaty so Congress has no constitutional oversight obligation. I guess it's more like a nice big handsake between the presidents and prime minister of these three nations who, lets face it, just know better than the rest of us. I mean, do Canadians really think they're in charge of Canada? Americans should have a say about programs affecting America? Or has anyone asked Mexicans if they want to be part of some "harmonized" configuration not unlike the European Union? Last time I checked, the European Union lacked a constitution because some of its member states, notably France, had rejected the one that was offered. The Constitutions of the United States, Canada, and Mexico are about three sovereign states determining their own regulations and laws. So far, fourteen U.S. states have passed resolutions in their respective and sovereign legislatures directing the federal government to abandon further activities involving SPP. Part of the opposition is directed at what is generally called the NAFTA superhighway; an exceptionally wide corridor that could include rail lines, freeways, and pipelines from Mexico to the Canadian border. The Texas legislature passed the law intended to slow down the high project with a two year moratorium. The vote in the Texas House was 137-2. The Texas Senate passed it with only four votes in opposition, but the Governor vetoed it in late June, thus opening the door to the seizure of private property needed for the Trans Texas Corridor (TCC). Turns out that Texas had already signed a 50-year lease wit ha private Spanish company named Cintra, one that permits for no competition by way of building new government roads or improving existing ones going in the same direction. Why are we not surprised to know that SPP was kicked off 2005 by meeting in Crawford, Texas of the then-presidents of the three nations hosted by President George W. Bush, a former Governor of Texas? Bush has been a leading proponent of the "immigration reform" legislation that more than two-thirds of Americans polled say they do not want. Tucked into those "reforms" were provisions to advance SPP. A Teddy Kennedy amendment to S. 1348 asserts that, "It is the sense of the Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced immigration." Oh, yeah? And here I thought the economic well being of Mexico was the job of Mexican government. As this is written, the President and the Congress have the lowest popularity ratings ever. Perhaps it has something to do with a secretive process involving the highest levels of the government and the consortium of multinational corporations who are eager for the nation-busting North American Union and the superhighway? Indeed, "secretive" is the mode of the operation for the SPP from the beginning. Last year, from September 12 to 14, a gathering sponsored by something called the North American Forum, brought together some very powerful people, but the media was not informed about it, nor has a list of attendees been available. One Canadian commentator has written that, "There is no better indication that these meetings and the SPP itself, constitute a parallel governing structure-unaccountable to any democratic institution or the public." This is not the way America, Canada, and presumably, Mexico, is suppose to be governed. The public outcry against the proposed immigration reform bill was enough to kill it in its present form. In his book, "The Late Great U.S.A." Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., warns that, "There are movements afoot in Mexico, Canada, and in the U.S., similar to those the Europe that led to the formation of the European Union that, if left unchecked, will erode U.S. sovereignty and lead to a North American Union." Perhaps when Congress begins to raise our taxes, authorize a superhighway, and offer yet another amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, the American people may take notice and want to do something about it. By then, however, it will be too late. That's what President Bush is counting on. Meanwhile, he has a big calendar counting down the days to January 20, 2008 when he can start cashing in on having sold out he rest of us. link to this resouce 
1
|