Michael Howe

Congress cuts funding for Mexican trucks - Will it Stick Though?

Michael Howe — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:42:27 GMT

Congress has passed a bill that cuts funding for the controversial Mexican truck program, but lawmakers expect the Bush administration to keep the foreign vehicles rolling on American roads amid safety and security concerns.

Joe Kasper, spokesman for Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., told WND that "without federal funding, it will be difficult to continue the program. However, we must expect that the administration will continue looking for ways to do so."

The newly passed 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act prohibits the Department of Transportation from using the funds in it "to establish a cross-border motor carrier demonstration program to allow Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones along the international border between the United States and Mexico."

"In a Democratic-sponsored spending bill filled with rewards for special interests, this is actually one of the few beneficial provisions included in the bill," Kasper said.

He points out Bush is expected to sign the bill.

Read The Entire Article at World Net Daily - Including reactions from the American Trucking Association, and comments about a plan by Mexican Truck Drivers to block the border in January.

Mexican trucks roll on despite opposition

Michael Howe — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:11:36 GMT

The following is an excerpt from a story I wrote for World Net Daily on 12/13/07:

FMCSA's website lists 10 Mexican carriers with a total of 55 trucks that are approved to transport goods throughout the U.S.

The FMCSA was asked to comment but did not reply to phone calls or e-mails.

About 40 more Mexican carriers will soon join the 10 already approved. The agency, according to its website, said it "has notified an additional 37 Mexico-domiciled motor carriers that they have successfully passed a Pre-Authorization Safety Audit."

The FMCSA says there are four U.S. carriers participating in the cross-border program.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., continues to show frustration with the Bush administration.

His spokesman, Joe Kasper, told WND, "Rather than working with Congress to ensure the program is implemented in a manner that is safe and efficient, the department has instead decided to continue its plan of opening our roadways to an increasing number of Mexican trucking companies."

Kasper called it "a dangerous program that threatens our security and the safety of vehicle motorists."

"It now appears the only way Congress can make the department listen is by ensuring it does not have the funds to move the program forward as currently planned," he said.

Read the Entire Story at WND!

Corridors of the Future

Michael Howe — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:06:42 GMT

Infrastructure development is rapidly becoming one of the hottest issues on the political scene within the trucking industry.

Equally controversial is the issue of how to fund the necessary infrastructure developments. Recent studies have shown that traffic congestion is becoming more and more problematic for commercial transportation and daily commuters alike. One solution is to invest in the infrastructure of the transportation system and plan for the future. Most would agree that infrastructure improvements on the transportation grid are needed, but the debate comes with the questions of where and how much.

The Pennsylvania Legislature passed a bill in July 2007 that would add tolls to Interstate 80. The purpose of the tolls is to fund the continued maintenance and infrastructure development of the interstate. This is a significant test case, because if this is allowed to occur, other states could follow suit and convert other interstates to toll roads. Congress, however, has taken action to prevent it. U.S. Rep. John Peterson and U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson introduced legislation in September to prevent the tolling of interstates.

“The American public should never be charged to use interstate highways that were built with their own tax revenues. As it stands, toll roads create an unnecessary fiscal burden on citizens and the idea is one that I fundamentally oppose. This legislation will provide an important safeguard against this practice by ensuring that drivers are never tolled for using roads that were built with federal funds,” said U.S. Rep. Charles Gonzalez, a co-sponsor of the House bill.

“This bill will protect drivers from paying tolls on roads that were already paid for by taxpayers,” said Hutchison.

Peterson said, “The recent news that the state is re-engaging potential bidders for the turnpike is a crystal clear indicator that we are making inroads in overturning Pennsylvania’s reckless, short-term fix to toll Interstate 80, which passed without consideration of the negative, long-term economic consequences. The court of public opinion – which was virtually shut out before Act 44 was passed – is increasingly on the side of keeping freeways free.”

Closely related to the question of how to fund infrastructure improvements is the question of where to begin. The Federal Highway Administration announced on Sept. 10 that it has identified six interstate routes as “Corridors of the Future,” including parts of I-95, I-70, I-15, I-5, I-10 and I-69.

According to the FHWA press release, “Today’s announcement follows a yearlong competition to select a handful of interstate corridors from among the 38 applications received from public and private-sector entities to join the department’s ’Corridors of the Future‘ program, aimed at developing innovative national and regional approaches to reduce congestion and improve the efficiency of freight delivery. The selected corridors carry 22.7 percent of the nation’s daily interstate travel.”

The routes will receive the following funding amounts to implement their development plans: $21.8 million for I-95 from Florida to the Canadian border; $5 million for I-70 in Missouri, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio; $15 million for I-15 in Arizona, Utah, Nevada and California; $15 million for I-5 in California, Oregon and Washington; $8.6 million for I-10 from California to Florida; and $800,000 for I-69 from Texas to Michigan.

What does this mean for truck drivers? It means more construction delays, but sometimes that is acceptable if the infrastructure is truly being improved. The real question is whether this program will address congestion in a meaningful manner that will not ultimately cost the trucking industry more money through user fees, increased fuel taxes or tolls. With the movement in Congress to stop the tolling of interstates, and a lack of commitment to increasing the fuel tax, there are legitimate questions about how future infrastructure improvements – including the “Corridors of the Future” – will be funded in the next budgeting cycle.

Read the story as originally published in the November Issue of Challenge Magazine.

Tolls On The Interstate

Michael Howe — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:03:09 GMT

The prospect of placing tolls on Interstate 80 in Pennsylvania is a controversial topic, and one that is unpopular with many in the trucking industry. The state of Pennsylvania, however, is continuing to move forward with its desire to turn this federal highway into a toll road. In October, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission entered into a 50-year lease agreement that would allow for the tolling of I-80. This effort stems from a Pennsylvania law passed by the state legislature in July that was supported and signed by Governor Edward Rendell.

The Pennsylvania DOT and the Pennsylvanian Turnpike Commission filed a formal application with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on Oct. 13, requesting permission to implement tolls on I-80. According to the lease agreement and the application, the use of tolls would result in funding restricted to roads and bridges. However, the funding from I-80 tolls would not be limited to I-80 itself – and this is part of the controversy...........

Read the Entire Article, and my thoughts on this proposal in Challenge Magazine.

Howe to Make Guest Appearance on the Martha Zoller Show

Michael Howe — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:24:40 GMT

Michael Howe will make a guest appearance on the Martha Zoller Radio program Thursday at 10:00am EST.

The topic of conversation.....none other than the Mexican Trucking Program and the latest announcement that US Taxpayers will be funding satellite tracking equipment for Mexican trucks. You can read the World Net Daily article written by Howe here.

This will be Mike's 4th appearance on the Martha Zoller Show! Listen online!

Taxpayer Money to Equip Mexican Trucks

Michael Howe — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:11:05 GMT

Taxpayers foot bill for Mexican truckers
Safety equipment tab starts out at $367,000
By Michael Howe
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has announced that U.S. taxpayers will be footing the startup costs of a program to install satellite tracking technology on vehicles taking part in the Mexican Truck Demonstration Program.

The announcement confirmed the U.S. government would "initially spend approximately $367,000 to outfit all trucks from the United States and Mexico that take part in the program."

According to the administration, "the decision to require the installation of satellite tracking technology on trucks in the program was made after members of Congress expressed a desire to know whether participants are complying with federal safety and trade laws."

A key opponent of the program, and author of the language in the transportation appropriations bill to halt funding of the program, continued to express disappointment Barry Piatt, spokesman for Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., told WND, "It's an indication that they are going forward with the program, despite strong and pretty clear opposition from both chambers of Congress."

Congressman Duncan Hunter's office told WND he agrees. "The tracking technology, while a step in the right direction, does very little to ensure compliance with safety and security standards. The focus must remain on implementing reliable and enforceable standards that ensure Mexican truckers with access to U.S. roadways do not threaten the safety of vehicle motorists or America's security," explained Joe Kasper, spokesman for Hunter, R-Calif.

According to the FMCSA, the technology will help continue to ensure that trucks operating as part of the program are complying with the agency's rigorous safety standards and U.S. trade laws.

The FMCSA intends to use the information gathered from the equipment to ensure trucks comply with hours-of-service laws and rules that govern the trips into and out of the country. The GPS-based technology also will allow real-time tracking of truck location, documenting every international-border and state-line crossing. The equipment does not provide cargo information.

"The satellite-based technology will be used to track trucks by vehicle number and company only – no driver information will be collected," the administration statement said.

This, Hunter believes, does not go far enough. Kasper told WND, "Tracking technology, especially when driver data is not being collected, comes nowhere close to achieving this goal. Congressman Hunter continues to support an easily assessable database that includes driver history and background information, as well as stronger inspection requirements and enforcement standards."

At an Oct. 18, 2007, meeting of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters told members that the satellite tracking system would help ensure safety, and that the DOT was working to compromise with Congress to continue the Mexican Truck Demonstration program despite language in the funding bill that would kill it.

Reacting to methods of compromise, Piatt told WND, "The fact that the administration is ignoring the view of Congress makes it less likely, not more likely, that it will look for a compromise on this. Congress has stated clearly that it believes going forward with such a program, without the information needed to assure safety on American roads, is not safe."

He also questioned whether or not there are truly efforts to compromise. "Those rumors have been around, mostly fed by the administration, for some time. As the author of the Senate language, I can tell you their thumbing their nose at Congress – so to speak – is not helping their cause on this issue in Congress."

For some, the fact that the FMCSA will spend just under $400,000 of American taxpayer money to equip all trucks, Mexican or U.S., with satellite tracking equipment raises questions. Kasper said, "I am not familiar with the funding aspect. But one would assume that there would be a shared funding responsibility (between the two countries)."

FMCSA spokeswoman Melissa Delaney was contacted regarding the funding but did not respond to inquiries.

View the Story as published in World Net Daily

Listen to Michael Howe and Peter Boyles discuss this story on 630 AM KHOW Radio, Denver, Colorado.

Keyes and Cruisin' Through The News

Michael Howe — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:16:49 GMT

Alan Keyes, Republican Presidential hopeful, was the featured guest on Monday's (Oct 29) show. There is one thing for certain, he is definately passionate about what he believes.

To be honest though, it was a very difficult interview because Mr. Keyes rarely took a breath, so it was challenging for Geoff or I to ask him questions. Like many politicians he had a knack for repeating himself and dominating the conversation. He seemed to think it was the Alan Keyes Show.

On the issues, he directly attacked Romney, Guliani, and Thompson. He also attacked - though not by name - the second tier candidates. His primary issues of concern were related to abortion and gay marriage - he called for a constitutional amendment on each.

With regard to Iraq, he did make one comment that I really liked. "You don't spread Democracy through the barrel of a gun." However, though he seemed opposed to the Iraq War he was in favor of having troops over there fighting the War on Terrorism. Everything else should be handled diplomatically.

On Illegal Immigration, he is a proponent of the border fence, establishing a national border guard, creating a citizen auxiliary, and for enforcing the laws that are already on the books. Enforcing the current laws is also how he would deal with the current illegal population.

Overall, I enjoyed his enthusiasm, but I was disappointed that we were unable to engage him in a real conversation. He overused the term "sovereignty" - connecting it to abortion, gay marriage, the border, Iraq, the UN, separation of church and state, and more.

In the Cruising Through The News segment:

Tom Tancredo announced he will not run for re-election to his House seat in Colorado. This will end up being a very hotly contested open seat that could have major implications for control of the House. Tom has done a wonderful job of elevating the illegal immigration issue - I wish he would stay in the House and continue the fight.

We also touched on Secretary of State Rice and her efforts to consult with former President's about their dimplomatic work in the Middle East. I say "Good for Her!" There is nothing wrong with a first hand historical lesson.

Other items included the Iraq War Protests and vandalism at the Mexican Consulate in New York (let's hope we aren't letting this immigration issue get out of hand - maybe Congress and the Administration should actually do something about the issue before the populace gets carried away).

No Border Fence; Yes to the Turtle Fence?

Michael Howe — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:05:20 GMT

On this week’s show Geoff and I discussed a number of topics…..and had a lot of fun….

President Bush has requested $46 Billion in additional funding for the Iraq War. I believe the Democrats will use this opportunity to call for an end to the war itself, but will not have what it takes to end the war. Either you want to stop the war or you don’t. Congress can end the war at anytime by stopping the funding, but the Democrats would rather continue to blame the President in this political season instead of making the tough stand.

The claim that you can support the troops but not the war is nice, but….if you had the choice to end the war and bring them home, or leave them there and continue funding the war…..that is exactly the choice Congress has. Stop the politics and commit fully to winning the war.

Geoff and I also wonder if the media is biased on these issues……hmmm, no doubt in my mind.

We also discussed a very interesting story about US veterans who were POW’s in previous wars and their thoughts on torture. This was a very difficult discussion, but overall I believe the US should take the lead in the proper treatment of POW’s – YET, at the same time we MUST do what it takes to protect America and the lives of American’s around the globe.

The craziest story we discussed was related to a turtle fence. The state of Michigan wants $318,000 in federal money to build a fence to keep turtles off of a highway and being killed during their migration. WHY ARE WE NOT WILLING TO BUILD THE FENCE ON THE BORDER, BUT WE WANT TO BUILD ONE TO SAVE A TURTLE? PRIORITIES PEOPLE, PRIORITIES!

We also commented on the news that the University of Northern Colorado claims its enrollment has dropped because District Attorney Ken Buck (Weld County) held a forum about the negative impacts illegal immigration. So, now even the sharing of information about illegal immigration is bad. Come on UNC – don’t blame the messenger, instead focus on the core issue! Heck, maybe tuition is too high; maybe crime is the issue; maybe – just maybe, the press about the UNC back up punter that stabbed the starting punter for the football team had something to do with it.

Several other items were discussed, including water, S-CHIP, state of Colorado budget, mosquitoes, silly comments at CU, and more…..

Listen next week as we interview Alan Keyes, Republican Presidential candidate.

Senate Committee Discusses Mexican Trucking

Michael Howe — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 09:21:52 GMT

Future of the Program Is Unclear
By PolitiTruck Staff
Copyright PolitiTruck.com 2007

The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee held an oversight hearing October 18, 2007, on the US Department of transportation.

The intent of the hearing was to provide general oversight on current regulatory and programmatic activities at the U.S. Department of Transportation. One issue discussed was the Mexican Truck Demonstration Program.

Opponents of the Mexican Truck program often cite safety concerns as a reason to delay the program. In his opening statement, Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-HI) expressed concern about the safety of highways, even without the Mexican truck program. “Highway and truck fatalities have either risen or remained stubbornly high in recent years, and efforts by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), in particular, appear to not be achieving the safety improvements that we expect and that the driving public deserves.”

The FMCSA oversees the implementation of the Mexican Truck Demonstration Program.

Senator Trent Lott (R-MS), in his introductory comments, encouraged Secretary Peters to take a stronger lead in transportation issues. Lott said, “You as Secretary, and our transportation department, need to be more proactive. Get out ahead of us and challenge us more.”

Referring to the Mexican Trucking Program, Lott said, “With cross border trucking, I supported you on that and we haven’t pulled that off yet.”

The question and answer period of the hearing also saw the Mexican Truck Demonstration Program discussed, with most of the questions coming from Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR).

Pryor asked Secretary Peters about the status of the proposal to track Mexican trucks with satellite. Peters said, “We are moving forward with the GPS devices. At one time we thought there was only one provider that could provide those devices and thought we might be able to move to a more immediate contract to do that.”

The initial DOT plan did not go ahead as planned however. “What we have found is that there are several vendors that are interested in providing those devices, so appropriately we are holding an open competition and by the end of this calendar year we should be able to have a program in place to put a GPS device on every Mexican truck that is participating in the demonstration program,” explained Peters.

Those concerned about the program see the satellite tracking as of little benefit. Todd Spencer, Executive Vice President of OOIDA, said, “I don’t see how this ensures anything from a safety or security standpoint. We’d like FMCSA to explain in more detail exactly how this system will actually keep track of the hours of service of a trucker.” OOIDA also points out that the FMCSA’s own press release states, “no driver information will be collected or tracked.”

Pryor also inquired about drug testing and physical examinations for Mexican truck drivers. Peters indicated she is satisfied with how that process is working. “American labs are conducting those tests. I also asked the office of drug control policy to validate that we have the proper procedures in place as well as the independent panels to validate those procedures,” said Peters.

Calvin Scovell, III, Inspector General of the US Department of Transportation, was less confident about the safety of the Mexican Truck Demonstration Program and shared his concerns with the Committee in his opening statements.

“Recent fatal highway incidents highlight the need for the Department to focus on ensuring the safety of the Nation’s surface transportation infrastructure,” said Scovell.

He continued, “Additionally, the recent decision to permit some Mexican carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones along the border underscores the need for the Department to provide vigilant oversight to ensure the safety of the Nation’s highways.”

On September 6, 2007, Scovell’s office issued an audit report, and it was that same day the FMCSA responded to Congress regarding the report and also initiated a 1-year demonstration project to permit up to 100 Mexican carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones.

It was that same day that Rep. DeFazio, (D-OR), said, “This is a sad day for America. Mexican trucks pose a serious threat to the safety of our highways and the security of our country. This Administration is hell-bent on opening up our borders but has failed to require that Mexican drivers and trucks meet the same safety and security standards as US drivers and trucks. That’s simply unacceptable. The Administration is essentially adopting a faith-based paper system without adequate protections for public safety.”

Explaining the audit report to the Committee, Scovell said, “Our report called on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to address the need for coordinated, site-specific plans for checking trucks and drivers participating in the demonstration project each time they cross the border into the United States.”

“Assuming that future funding for the demonstration project is approved and the project continues, FMCSA will need to coordinate with the states and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to carry out the plans for these checks. These checks must ensure that all Mexican drivers participating in the demonstration project are properly licensed and all trucks display a decal denoting a recent safety inspection.”

The future of the program is in doubt however. Congress must meet in Conference Committee to discuss the Transportation Funding bill (S 1789 / HR 3074). Both versions of the bill contain identical amendments to prohibit the use of funds for the demonstration program. As of this writing the House has yet to name its conferees.

Senator Dorgan (D-ND), sponsor of the Senate Amendment, said, “”Because my amendment is identical to language already included in the House-passed version of this bill, I expect this provision will not be altered in the House-Senate conference committee and that we have, effectively, stopped this pilot program.”

View The Story as Published on PolitiTruck.com

Defending The Trucks

Michael Howe — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 05:06:00 GMT

Bush officials team with Mexico to defend trucks
But Congress members opposed to vehicles on U.S. roads won't budge

Posted: October 18, 2007, 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Michael Howe (email Mike)
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Bush administration officials held a news conference with Mexico's transportation secretary yesterday to respond to criticism of a program allowing Mexican trucks on U.S. roads, but critics in Congress who helped pass counter-legislation are unmoved.

"It is difficult to understand how a program that opens our roadways to virtually unregulated cross-border vehicle traffic can be safely regulated," said Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter's spokesman, Joe Kasper, in a WND interview.

Mexican Transportation Secretary Luis Tellez teamed with his counterpart U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Mary Peters and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez to call on Congress to reconsider its pending prohibition of the program and let the trucking demonstration program proceed.

Barry Piatt, spokesman for Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., in a conversation with WND prior to the press conference, characterized the media event as obscene and irrelevant.

By overwhelming margins, the Senate and the House adopted identical amendments into the Transportation/HUD Appropriations bill that would cut off federal funds for the truck project. The House passed the measure 411-3 while the Senate voted 75-23. The bill awaits consideration by a Joint Conference Committee.

Peters urged, "With the change of just a few words, Congress can show that we can trade with the world, keep our highways safe, and our companies competitive at the same time."

The secretary illustrated the point by inviting a Maryland state trooper to conduct a comprehensive safety inspection of two trucks participating in the cross-border demonstration, one a U.S. truck and the other the first Mexican truck to make a U.S. delivery. The trucks are virtually identical, Peters said, because both must meet the same strict U.S. safety standards.

"We want to demonstrate to Congress that tough safety standards and rigorous inspections work and that trucks participating in this program will have the same features, the same upkeep and the same commitment to safety that any U.S. truck has," Peters said.

But Dorgan insisted the inspection "means nothing."

"The information we need to ensure the safety of American drivers on American highways is not available," he said. "That includes vehicle inspection and drivers' records and accidents reports. None of that information is available. An 'inspection' of a hand-picked Mexican truck at a press conference doesn't change that."

Dorgan said Congress "has spoken loud and clear in its opposition to allowing long-haul Mexican trucks to enter the United States, based on concerns that included a lack of access to Mexican driver and vehicle safety records."

"Instead of responding to those concerns, the administration rushed its pilot program into implementation and is now presenting a fancy press conference in Washington, D.C., that features the 'inspection' of one, hand picked Mexican truck," he said.

Hunter spokesman Kasper told WND the truck project presents long-term safety and security challenges that cannot be casually addressed.

"Congress put in place very specific guidelines that guaranteed Mexican truckers would be regulated by the same rules as their American counterparts," Kasper said. "Rather than working with Congress to address the concerns that have been raised about the program, DOT announced that Mexican truckers were in compliance for some time and quickly moved to implement the program."

As of this writing, the website of the Federal Motor Carrier Administration, or FMCSA, indicates that there are five Mexican carriers authorized to participate in the program, and three U.S. carriers. The website has not been updated since September, however.

Since announcement of program's commencement, the FMCSA has said trucks will be tracked via satellite in a joint effort between Mexico and the U.S.

Questions remain about what happens to the program if the appropriations amendment passes in tact. A Sept. 14 WND article offered information from the FMCSA that a demonstration program is not required at all, and perhaps they can just continue without the funding.

View The Story as Published in World Net Daily

Markey, S-CHIP, Immoral Acts

Michael Howe — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:00:37 GMT

What a wonderful show we had this week. I only wish it was longer than one hour, and more than just one day.

We began the show with a discussion of the S-CHIP legislation that President Bush vetoed. The focus of our conversation was related to the pressure being placed on Republican Congressmen to override that veto. I doubt it is likely – and I hope it is not.

The featured guest this week was Ms. Betsy Markey, the Democrat challenger to Republican Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave. Here is the synopsis:

She expressed her full support of S-CHIP, suggestin g that it is a good investment in our kids. She also challenged Musgrave’s vote against it because of the claim that it is a tax increase on the lower class, and that it would make it easier for children of illegal immigrants to receive health care benefits. She suggested Musgrave is actually protecting Tobacco companies with her vote.

Immigration – Markey seems committed to securing the southern border, but generally emphasized the need to secure the ports. A few of her quotes: “We need to do lots of different things. We need to secure borders and more port security emphasis. I would certainly be for increased border security. People wouldn’t be crossing the border if there weren’t jobs available. We need to do more to make sure we have a better way for employers to make sure they know if people are here illegally, and fine those that knowingly violate this.”

She also suggested that the visa system is broken, specifically in that the quota number for people to come work in the US is artificially low. She did say that employers are trying to do the right thing, but because of the overwhelming paperwork the current system just contributes to illegal immigration.

Southern Fence – “I support building the fence and other measures such as a virtual fence.” She also suggested that we will never be able to secure the border entirely with a fence, but should really focus on the key areas of crossing. “It’s more than just the southern border though – ports are important too and need to be secured so we know what is coming into the country.”

For those that follow my writings, this portion of the podcast is a MUST LISTEN - this is where we discuss free trade agreements, and the comments here are very telling and very alarming in my opinion.

Free trade agreements. Time into the Podcast 25:25 to 29:40 (so, feel free to fast forward to that point, but definately listen to this 5 minute segment).

I asked: What are your opinions of the free trade agreements?
Markey Said: I think we need to take a real close look and see what the impacts have been. A lot of people think that one of the results of NAFTA in place is that it has put a lot of smaller farmers in Mexico and Central America out of work, and they cannot compete with large corporate farming as a result of NAFTA – that is increasing our immigration issue here because some of those people are out of work and looking for jobs in our country.
I then inquired: So you are concerned about the implications of the Mexican farmer?
Markey said: “Well, I have ….I am concerned about the farmers in both Mexico and Central America. I would like to see how these free trade agreements have impacted those people in smaller industries. Let’s take a look at that.”
Geoff asked: Are you familiar with the impacts on the farmers here in NE Colorado?
Markey was uncertain about impacts on the American farmers and asked us to elaborate on that a little bit. She seemed very unclear.

Mexican Trucking
Markey said, “I’m very concerned about that. We need to take a real close look at it. More for security reasons. We need to know exactly who is coming in and what they are bringing in.” She then asked me for additional information.

Farm Bill
She said it is critical that we pass the Farm Bill. Pointed out that Musgrave voted against it.

Iraq War
She suggested that we need to get out; she indicated she will work with colleagues in Congress to find a solution that makes sense. "I would advocate, after talking to the military, to find a way to make sure our troops get out safely, and our equipment too. We may need to keep a small contingent there with UN troops though."

Feature Interview Concluded.....

When it came time to 'Cruise through the News,' we touched on several issues:

California Governor Schwarzenneger vetoed a Gay Marriage Bill. I found this to be very consistent and reasonable based on the previous vote by the people of California.

Senator Craig – Idaho Hall of Fame
My comment: “I understand they set up a special stall to honor his fame…..”

Virginia Republican Party – holding a convention instead of a primary.

Colorado State Representative Debbie Stafford Switches to the Democrat Party from Republican
My comment: “I think this is fraudulent and immoral;”

New Security at the Colorado Capital Building – “I think it is too much…”

My final thoughts.....I was completely taken aback by the fact that Ms. Markey is more concerned with the impacts of Free Trade Agreements on Mexican and Central American farmers and small businessmen than she is with the impacts on Americans in the very Congressional District she hopes to represent. Hopefully she will re-examine this in the near future.

Mexican Trucking - What's The Status?

Michael Howe — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:17:06 GMT

Status - Largely Unknown?
Special Thanks to Polititruck.com

Have you wondered what’s happened with the NAFTA initiated Mexican Trucking Demonstration Program lately? Me Too!

Unfortunately, there isn’t much new to report on this subject because the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has not been updating its web site and is apparently reluctant to respond to inquiries on the subject. However, they do appear committed to implementing the program as a part of NAFTA.

Here’s a basic overview of where things are and have been:

At the time of this writing, the FMCSA Web Site, indicates that there are 5 Mexican Carriers authorized to roll into the heart of the US, and 3 US carriers to roll into Mexico.
Interestingly, on August 6th, I received an update from the FMCSA indicating that 36 Mexican carriers had passed the PASA (this is the equivalent of a DOT Audit), 13 failed and 82 withdrew. Those 36 carriers have approximately 170 vehicles total.
One question I have asked of the FMCSA, without response, is how the carriers go from passing PASA to being authorized to actually start rolling. I, and others, are left to wonder.
In September the US Senate followed the lead of the US House and overwhelmingly passed an amendment to the Transportation Appropriations Bill that would de-fund the program.
The FMCSA Administrator John H. Hill offered the following comment in reaction to this, “Tonight’s decision by the Senate is a sad victory for the politics of fear and protectionism and a disappointing defeat for U.S. consumers and U.S. truck drivers. This decision robs consumers of significant new savings, deprives drivers of new opportunities to compete in Mexico and squanders millions in taxpayer dollars Congress has spent to put in place a sophisticated safety network for border crossings.”
In reaction to safety concerns, the FMCSA and Mexican government announced they would work jointly to track the trucks in this program via satellite.
The House and Senate now have until mid November to get together in a Joint Conference Committee to pass the Transportation and HUD Appropriations Bill (S. 1789 / H.R. 3074). As of this writing the committee is not yet scheduled to meet because the House has not named its conferees.

So, what does this mean?

It means that the NAFTA initiated Mexican Truck Demonstration (or Pilot) Program continues to move forward.

Where we stand right now is very unclear though because the FMCSA declines to comment on the simplest of inquiries.

Why do you think this is?

For additional information on the Mexican Trucking Program read my other postings.

Howe on the G. Gordon Liddy Show

Michael Howe — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:16:29 GMT

Michael Howe appeared on the G. Gordon Liddy Show Thursday, October 11th for about an hour.

Mike discussed the ramifications of NAFTA, and the increasing loss of American sovereignty due to that agreement as well as other agreements such as CAFTA. The NAFTA ordered Mexican truck demonstration program, according to Mike, is ill conceived and does not consider the broader implications of safety, security, and sovereignty.

He also discussed an earlier article he had written about NAFTA Superhighways and the call to move toward a North American Union. Several listeners called in to discuss NAFTA and the key issues as well.

It is a humorous listen at times as Mr. Liddy builds up Mike's resume some....

Take a Listen!

Schlafly On AIr, Columbus Day, Socialized Medicine

Michael Howe — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 04:46:01 GMT

What an honor it was to have Ms. Phyllis Schlafly on the show Monday.

Ms. Schlafly spend about 20-25 minutes with us during the second half of the show and discussed many issues near and dear to my heart - Mexican Trucking, the North American Union, and more. She expressed disappointment with the current Administration and how they have handled theses issues, and how their actions have continued to threaten American sovereignty. She also provided meaningful ideas for addressing national security and education issues. Truly, a great guest. Read more of Ms. Schlafly's Bio. She also heads up the Eagle Forum.

Also on "In The Booth," Geoff and I debated the merits of the S-CHIP program, which I argue takes another step towards socialized medicine, and Geoff argued the other side. Is socialized medicine really the direction the US wants to go? I certainly hope not. We also discussed the Iraq War and our continued involvement in the war.

Finally, we agreed that the protesters of the Columbus Day Parade in Denver had gone overboard, so much so that they essentially inhibited the First Amendment rights of those putting on the parade. It's just too bad that the Mayor of Denver failed to make sure the laws were fully enforced.

"In The Booth" airs every Monday from 4-5 PM Mountain (6-7pm Eastern) on 1400 AM, KFTM, out of Fort Morgan, Colorado. You can listen to the show live via streaming audio on the station's web site.

Amazon.com Widgets

Obama Campaign, Senator Craig and Bathroom Stalls, and More....

Michael Howe — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:56:59 GMT

"In The Booth," Monday, October 1st

What an interesting radio show we had this week.

The show started with the very important discussion of bathroom stalls as we discussed Senator Craig and events since his trip into the restroom of the Minneapolis Airport. Then, today, I see that the judge he had appealed to indicated Sen. Craig's original plea of guilty could not be withdrawn.......because you are guilty Senator! He has, of course, withdrawn his offer to resign on September 30th so that he can continue serving in the Senate, raking in the nice pay and benefits, and so he can clear his good name - sounds like taxpayer money well spent again.

This week's guest was former Mayor of Denver (and former Secretary of Transportation and Secretary of Energy) Frederico Pena. Wow, he was a great interview. Very well informed and very well spoken. He came on the show to campaign for Senator Obama. I remain disappointed that Obama is willing to negotiate with terrorists like Iranian President Ahmadinejad, as this simply legitimizes them as world leaders. We need to avoid anything that will elevate these terrorists. Mr. Pena also suggested that Obama has plenty of experience to be in the White House, even though he has served less than one term in the Senate. He argues that little DC experience is actually good - could be I guess, but I remain weary of Obama as a candidate.

You can listen to Michael Howe and Geoff Baumgartner every Monday from 4-5pm MST on KFTM 1400 AM radio in Fort Morgan, Colorado, as they 'cuss and discuss' the hot political issues of the day and interview local and national leaders. Their show, "In The Booth," is also streamed live over the internet at www.kftm.net.

Costa Rican's Fear Loss of Sovereignty with CAFTA

Michael Howe — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 07:38:31 GMT

Costa Ricans fear trade deal threatens sovereignty
Referendum on proposal scheduled Oct. 7

Posted: October 4, 2007, 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Michael Howe (email Mike)
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Costan Ricans fear a trade deal similar to the North American Free Trade Agreement could threaten their nation's sovereignty and the issue has been put up for a referendum on Oct. 7.

The outcome will have an impact on how the United States does business in that Latin American country, where an estimated 30,000-50,000 U.S. citizens live and another 700,000 visit annually, and perhaps other nearby nations as well.

The Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement has been approved by all involved countries, including the United States, with the exception of Costa Rica, where opponents say they fear an influx of cheap imports and an affront to the nation's sovereignty.

Opposition has been so strong – an estimated 100,000 Costa Ricans protested the DR-CAFTA in an event on Sept. 30 – that the issue has been put to a national referendum.

Costa Rican President Oscar Arias Sanchez has been campaigning for the passage of the referendum and the ultimate ratification of DR-CAFTA.

"October 7th is a key date for our small country," he said during a recent address, according to government documents.

He suggested that the citizens have an opportunity to decide if Costa Rica will remain as is, hoping for a better day that may never come, or to endorse the plan and make that better day come.

Ambassador John Veroneau, a deputy U.S. trade representative, said, "We respect the right of the people of Costa Rica to decide what is in their best interest. Obviously, the United States reached this trade agreement out of a strong belief that it serves the interests of both countries."

If citizens of Costa Rica do not approve the agreement, Verneau said, "The truth is that no one can say for sure what the impact would be since Congress has never been asked to extend preferential benefits to a country that has rejected a bilateral trade agreement.

"Hopefully, the referendum will be decided on the merits of the agreement itself," he said.

U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, a candidate for the GOP nomination for president, continues to have concerns about DR-CAFTA though. Spokesman Joe Kasper said Hunter's concerns are both general about free trade agreements as well as this specific proposal.

"Aside from the situation in Costa Rica, Congressman Hunter would welcome the opportunity to reconsider DR-CAFTA, as well as other free trade deals, primarily based on the impact these agreements are having on the productivity and competitiveness of American manufacturers," Kasper said.

According to a September poll by Unimer published in "La Nacion," 56 percent of respondents would vote "Yes" in the referendum to ratify the DR-CAFTA. These numbers are similar to a Demoscopia poll for the newspaper "Al Dia" in August showing 54.5 percent of people would vote to ratify the agreement.

DR-CAFTA, like other free trade agreements such as NAFTA, technically is not a treaty, therefore it only required a simple majority in the House and Senate for approval.

U.S. State Department documents show the U.S. is Costa Rica's most important trading partner, accounting for almost half of the nation's exports, imports and tourism, and more than two-thirds of its foreign investment.

When CAFTA reached Congress two years ago, the Senate approved the plan 54-45, but critics maintained that it would draw American manufacturing jobs south of the border.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, said at the time that he was in opposition.

"I oppose CAFTA for a very simple reason: It is unconstitutional. The Constitution clearly grants Congress alone the authority to regulate international trade. The plain text of Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 is incontrovertible. Neither Congress nor the president can give this authority away by treaty, any more than they can repeal the First Amendment by treaty," he said.

View The Story as Published in World Net Daily

Mike on the Radio

Michael Howe — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:25:57 GMT

I spent a wonderful hour or so on the air with Michael Corbin. Michael hosts A Closer Look, on KHNC 1360 AM The Lion (Johnston, Colorado).

During the show we discussed the North American Union, NAFTA, CAFTA, Mexican Trucking, Superhighways, the Ports to Plains Corridor, and much more. We also came to the conclusion that Americans need to become informed and educated on these issues, and that this will likely take individual effort. Once informed, grassroots efforts to inform others and affect change will be most effective in protecting the sovereignty of the US.

Super Highways - A Reflection on the Great Plains International Conference

Michael Howe — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:56:30 GMT

This is a podcast with my good friend the Trucker Doc (Sheryl Youngblood) and myself. Sheryl and I discuss the Great Plains International Conference, which I attended in September 2007 as a member of the press -- one of the very few invited. Although this conference was funded by taxpayers, it was a private conference to rally those who support of the NAFTA Superhighways. Sheryl asks probing questions to get my thoughts on the conference. Take a listen for yourself and determine how you feel when you hear that attendees were laughing about the devaluation of the dollar against the Canadian currency.

Be sure to join the Trucker Doc and listen to her KnightTime Radio Show every Friday Evening from 8:00 to 9:00 pm E.S.T. on the short-wave radio station WWCR, 5.070, Transmitter #3. It's eclectic mixture of political, legal, consumer, religious and specialty programming attracts and maintains a wide and diverse listening audience from continents around the world. You don't have a short-wave radio? You can also hear the show LIVE on WWCR's simultaneous webcast. Just visit the Trucker Doc

US to Track Mexican Trucks with Satellite

Michael Howe — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 08:20:13 GMT

"Satellite tracking mandated for Mexican trucks"
Critic: 'This really accomplished nothing. It's like putting earrings on a pig'

Posted: October 1, 2007, 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Michael Howe
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

Federal officials, bowing to safety concerns over Mexican trucks on U.S. highways, announced last week trucks participating in the ongoing cross-border demonstration project will be required to submit to monitoring by a satellite-based vehicle tracking system – a move one critic dismissed as an "ornament" that "fails to address the real issues of driver safety."

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration issued a statement Thursday saying the tracking plan jointly developed by FMCSA and Mexico's Secretaria de Communicaciones y Transportes applies to both U.S. and Mexican trucks in the program.

"This will give us the ability to monitor every vehicle from Mexico and ensure all companies are following our strict safety requirements, including those governing hours of service and sabotage," said John Hill, FMCSA administrator.

Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association, isn't buying FMCSA's claims of enhanced safety.

"This really accomplishes nothing. It's like putting earrings on a pig," he told WND.

"The FMCSA just proceeds with the program, placing more and more ornaments on it, but fails to address the real issues of driver safety."

Spencer pointed to the last line of the FMCSA statement to make his point.

"Vehicles will be tracked by vehicle number and company – no driver information will be collected or tracked," it reads.

"The issues are driver issues. There are no real hours of service regulations in Mexico, there is no effective way of checking driving or criminal records, and the Mexican CDL (commercial driver's license) does not measure up to the U.S. license," said Spencer.

"Tracking trucks and trailers tells us nothing about the drivers. The net effect of this announcement on safety is zero."

The FMCSA initiative comes despite efforts in Congress to completely halt the Mexican truck demonstration program through identical amendments in House and Senate versions of the Transportation and Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill. That bill (HR3074/S1789) is currently awaiting conference committee action but may not go into effect until November or later.

"We think the amendments will remain in the final bill," Barry Piatt, spokesman for Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., sponsor of the Senate amendment, told WND. But, he added, the demonstration program could continue until the bill becomes law.

"The fact that they continue this program despite the wishes of Congress is in line with the arrogant approach they have taken all along. Under the defunding of a pilot program those carriers that are or will be approved will need to stop at that point," said Piatt.

"The FMCSA has maintained all along that they do not have to manage a pilot program. The administration is simply thumbing its nose at the wishes of Congress and those concerned about true safety on American roads," Spencer told WND.

To date, four Mexican carriers have been authorized to operate in the U.S., and 2 U.S. carriers have been authorized to operate in Mexico.

View The Story as Published in World Net Daily

Be sure to read the related stories on MichaelHowe.net - and, subscribe for frequent updates (simply enter your email address in the left side bar and click subscribe).

On The Air In San Diego

Michael Howe — Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:53:25 GMT

In case you missed it.......I was on the air Monday, October 1st in San Diego as a guest of the Roger Hedgecock Show on KOGO 600 AM. We discussed Mexican Trucks. Why does the program continue, and why have so few been authorized to run in the US? Listen to find out!

I also want to congratulate Roger on the recent announcement that his show will go national. The Radio Mayor of San Diego has formed a joint venture with Bob Carey’s Syndicated Solutions to launch a national talk show in November. The plans for Roger include a 9 a.m. to noon Saturday show. Also, Roger will send a daily 60-second “Hedgecock Report.” Starting next year, the plans also include the launch of a three-hour daily Monday-Friday show.