NAFTA Trucking Safety Act of 2007

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1773) to limit the authority of the Secretary of Transportation to grant authority to motor carriers domiciled in Mexico to operate beyond United States municipalities and commercial zones on the United States-Mexico border, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1773.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we have before us very important legislation. It is bad enough that NAFTA has caused the United States to hemorrhage more than 1 million jobs; but now the administration with the NAFTA trucks proposal would add insult to injury. Not only would it put in jeopardy more American jobs, those of American truck drivers, but it would also jeopardize the safety of the traveling public on America's highways.

I want to congratulate Representative Boyda for bringing such an important issue to the Congress so early in her congressional career and Representative Hunter on the other side of the aisle for his contributions to this issue and to this legislation.

We have here what is called a SAP. It is a statement of administration policy. They take us for saps if they believe we will believe the information they have conveyed to us in this letter.

They say that the safety standards, including hours of service, driver medical standards, financial responsibility, and drug and alcohol testing, will all be remedied by their program. There is and are no hours of service regulations in Mexico. We have heard anecdotal evidence from Mexican truck drivers that they are often forced, as they are exploited down there working for relatively low wages compared to truck drivers in the U.S., to drive for 48 to 72 hours at a stretch. How do they do that? They laugh and they say ``dust.'' What is dust? Drugs, uppers. They are commonly used in Mexico. There are no meaningful hours of service regulation. There is no drug testing in Mexico, and illegal substances are frequently used for these extended trips.

But the administration would have us believe that by signing a piece of paper and waving a magic wand and having in place paper provisions on drug and alcohol testing or hours of service, that these things will happen meaningfully. Suddenly, there will be a tremendous change in the culture of the American trucking industry.

They go on to say there will be an in-depth safety inspection before they are allowed to operate in the United States. Well, that is interesting because in testimony before my committee recently, the administration admitted that when a new bus carrier, and we are having a problem with illegally run bus service, what is called ``curb service'' here in the Northeast, it takes them up to 18 months to get out and certify that company actually exists and look at the papers in a filing cabinet. They never go out and look at the buses. Never.

We have the same thing going on with the American trucking industry. Only a tiny fraction of trucks are inspected on an annual basis. But somehow, magically, an agency that is totally overwhelmed by the volume of traffic is going to inspect each and every truck meaningfully in Mexico, inspect the credentials of the Mexican truck drivers in depth, certify the nonexistent drug testing programs, and certify tracking of the nonexistent hours of service in Mexico. And then they say that this will all be made available to the American public.

Here is the form in which it is made available. It is right here in the Federal Register. They are saying we are requiring publication, and they say it would be redundant to have all of the safety audits in detail published in the Federal Register because they put up this page. It has a date. That is good. That is a good start. It is up for 7 days, by the way.

And in order to access this page, you have to know the MX docket number. You have to know the particular docket number of that Mexican carrier. You have to know specifics to get nonspecific information that will only be posted for 7 days. And if you get through that maze and you happen to hit the 7-day window, because it goes down after 7 days, I guess they don't have enough memory capacity down there at DOT to leave it up longer for the public to review to, you get this, a form that has the applicant information, business address, and status. Quote: ``Provisional authority issued.''

That is the in-depth information that FMCSA is going to put up for the American public to review to understand that these audits are being conducted and these carriers are safe.

We need this legislation so we can be assured that we are protecting the safety of the American public.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

(Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Kansas (Mrs. Boyda), the author of the legislation, who's made an extraordinary commitment so early in her career.

Mr. Speaker, could I ask the time remaining please.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the chairman of the Transportation Committee, Mr. Oberstar, for 5\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

My good friend from Florida, the ranking Republican member of the committee, made a point that NAFTA was promoted by and passed during the Clinton administration. That's true, and I have continually castigated that administration and that President for that act.

However, he does need to remember that the agreement was negotiated by the first Bush administration, adopted by the Clinton administration, unfortunately, and to the discredit of the Clinton administration, and passed the House of Representatives with a large majority of Republican votes. Yes, it was a Democratic House, but a very substantial majority of the Democrats opposed the legislation.

So this is truly a bipartisan problem. But if he wants to attribute blame, the Republican Members of the House would bear that, and not the Democratic Members, although we were in the majority. He also talked about unfair portions of the agreement.

Well, the President has the authority to give 6 months' notice at any time that we are going to withdraw in order to require renegotiation of provisions of the agreement. So if this President felt any of the provisions were unfair, or they felt they were under duress to allow the Mexican trucks into this country, they have the tools to renegotiate that agreement. I wish they would use those tools. But they won't because this administration is all about killing off American jobs and American labor. That's what this is ultimately intended to do.

You can get a Mexican truck driver to work for a heck of a lot less than a Teamster in the United States. You can get a Mexican dock worker to work for a heck of a lot less than a longshoreman in the United States.

That's what this ultimately is designed to do. The dream of the NAFTA proponents is that the goods, all the goods, the things we don't make in America anymore, will be imported from China to a port in Mexico, avoiding the U.S. ports, the U.S. longshoremen, and loaded on Mexican trucks, avoiding U.S. trucking companies and U.S. drivers and brought up into America's heartland.

This bill is about protecting the safety of the American traveling public. That's what's before us today. I would love to renegotiate and revisit NAFTA any day of the week, but today we are all about the safety of the American public. That's what we are ensuring with this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his splendid leadership of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, this portion of the session holding intensive hearings charting the future course for transportation as we move into the second half of the authorization of the SAFETEA-LU bill, and laying the groundwork for the future transportation of America. The gentleman has done a superb job.

I congratulate the Congresswoman, Mrs. Boyda of Kansas, for recognizing the threat of Mexican trucks admitted unabashedly, without restraint, into the United States, or very minimal restraint that the Department proposed.

I also express my great appreciation to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) for participating throughout the shaping of this legislation and working constructively for a reasonable counter to the administration's plan. The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) with his ever-judicial manner has helped us shape a very good balance to the allowing of Mexican trucks into the United States.

This cross-border pilot program the administration launched is not just a little initiative, something to let pass, it's a major shift in transportation policy. They were intent on opening the border with minimum public notification and at great cost to safety.

Despite serious concerns raised by the Congress, by safety advocates in the private sector, by nonprofit organizations, by States who were concerned about Mexican-domiciled trucks coming into the United States, this legislation limits the authority of the Secretary to open the U.S.-Mexican border to trucks coming into the United States.

It will not allow a 1-year pilot program as simply a gimmick, a ruse, under which they can allow the border to be opened unilaterally under terms and conditions that the Department or the administration might choose. Instead, we have a strict set of prerequisites, a strict set of conditions. A pilot program of 3 years, 100 motor carriers for Mexico, 1,000 trucks, does not provide blanket authority for 3 years. If the Secretary fails to comply with any provision of the act, the program terminates.

We also require the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation, concurrently, while the program is under way, to review and report back to the public, to the Congress, to the Department where there are failures and deviations, if there are any, from the program that we have set in place, especially if Mexican carriers do not meet strict Federal safety requirements.

This is not a run, operate, and evaluate. It is operate and concurrently evaluate what the Department is doing, what the Mexican trucks are doing. Are they, in Mexico, requiring fundamental elements of highway safety that U.S. drivers are required to submit to? Do they have hours of service requirements comparable to those in the United States?

Mexico does not have a single certified lab to test drivers for drug and alcohol compliance, as our drivers are required to be subjected to. The Inspector General has to verify that every requirement of section 350 of Public Law 107-87, the basic authority under which they propose to operate, has sufficient mechanisms in place to ensure safety, to enforce safety.

DOT has to also, under this legislation, provide the public with an opportunity to comment on issues of safety and cabotage, that the trucks that come into the United States and deliver goods to a destination point and carry goods back to Mexico aren't moving goods from one U.S. city to another U.S. city in violation of our cabotage laws. We don't allow it in aviation; we are not going to allow it in trucking.

We are living up to our commitments under NAFTA, but we have put in place requirements that are vigorous, protections that are important to protect travelers on our U.S. roads from failures in Mexico.

Now, the Department of Transportation has sent up their letter, their statement of policy, in which in one place there is a complaint that this legislation gives the agency ``only 5 days to take action necessary to address adverse findings or terminate the program.''

That's a requirement on safety. If you find an unsafe condition, how much longer than 5 days do you want to allow it to go? How much longer do you want to have an unsafe condition existing on our roads? That's just dead wrong.

Then, in another provision, they complain that we, their language says, purporting to require the Secretary of Transportation to submit legislative recommendations to Congress. They submit legislative recommendations to Congress, every executive branch agency. Whether we want them or not, they submit legislative recommendations. We are saying the Secretary may submit. If there are some things they want changed, we invite them to submit their recommendations to the Congress.

I simply don't buy that. I think they are sort of a half-hearted statement.

This is good legislation, good sound policy. It protects U.S. drivers and allows us to keep commitments under NAFTA, and we will protect American roadways.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to voice my support for H.R. 1773, the Safe American Roads Act of 2007, which passed the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee by unanimous vote, 100 percent support by both Democrats and Republicans.

In order to comply with NAFTA, the Department of Transportation has taken steps to fully open the Mexican border to truck traffic. To start this process, DOT has announced a cross-border demonstration program. The bill we are considering today specifies requirements that DOT must meet when implementing this program.

But compliance with NAFTA does not mean we have to or even that we should open the border without any scrutiny of the process. It is a priority for our committee and for this Congress to stay engaged on this issue and ensure that the border opening for trucks is handled properly with the safety of American motorists as our top priority.

A major theme of the bill we are considering today is constant review of the program as it is implemented by the Department of Transportation.

The bill requires DOT to ensure the trucks crossing into the U.S. not only understand our safety regulations for motor carriers, but that they are fully compliant with them as well. This bill also requires DOT to maintain an active review of the demonstration project. DOT must respond to the Inspector General's periodic reviews and provide comments and suggestions to make the program better. And when we mean better, we mean safer.

I want to say that this bill is an excellent example of bipartisanship. Concern over Mexican trucks does not fall on one side of the aisle or the other. Many Republicans and Democrats both feel strongly about this issue. It impacts the entire country.

Two bills were recently introduced that address this issue, one by our colleague, Mrs. Boyda from Kansas, and one by Mr. Hunter from California, on which I was an original cosponsor. While Mrs. Boyda's bill is the base bill and we certainly want to commend her, the bill we are considering today has many aspects from Mr. Hunter's bill as well, combined together to create the bill we are voting on today. I believe H.R. 1773 was made stronger by taking the best attributes from both the Boyda bill and the Hunter bill.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we need reciprocity. I said at a hearing on this legislation that we should not approve more Mexican trucking companies than American trucking companies that are approved to go into Mexico. We need reciprocity, and we need fairness for American trucking companies and American workers. Again, though, I will voice my support for this bill, H.R. 1773, and I urge my colleagues to support it as well.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to our colleague, Mrs. Miller

of Michigan, who has been one of the most active members of our committee on this particular legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to our colleague from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson).

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on our side?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the ranking Republican on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, a man who has been a leader on this legislation and on many others, Mr. Mica.

Mr. Speaker, I will close on our side.

I will simply say that no matter how much we want to have good relations and trade with our friends in Mexico, and we all certainly want that, the first obligation of the U.S. Congress is to the American people.

This bill is important for the safety of American roads, it's important to our American trucking companies, our small businesses, and to our truck drivers. It's legislation that all of our colleagues can support, and I urge our colleagues to do so.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

I appreciate the gentleman yielding time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of H.R. 1773, the Safe American Roads Act. This legislation sets out very, very stringent, quantifiable safety standards which the Department of Transportation must meet before permitting Mexican-based trucks to operate through the United States.

Before coming to Congress, I had the pleasure of serving for 8 years as the Michigan Secretary of State with a principal responsibility of being that State's chief motor vehicle administrator. I was also the chairman of the Traffic Safety Commission of my State, and so I had the responsibility for all licensing, commercial drivers licenses as well as hazardous material endorsements. So I had immediate concerns about how the DOT pilot program might compromise the safety of our roads. Here in the United States, we have reciprocity amongst the States so we can share driving records across State lines.

In Mexico, licensing requirements are very poor, and it's well-known that fraud in their system runs rampant. In fact, the Transportation Committee heard in testimony from the DOT's Inspector General that one in five Mexican driving records contained an error of some type. Mr. Speaker, if we had a 20 percent error rate in the United States we would consider it a crisis, and I actually believe that was a very low estimate.

There are also concerns about the insurance provisions of this program. American truckers must carry very expensive insurance policies in the event that they are in an accident. What if it happens that a Mexican truck has an accident somewhere in the United States? Good luck to the victims of that accident who will try to collect on damages from a Mexican company.

I believe that if we let these Mexican truckers into our country with questionable identification and insurance, it exposes American drivers to more dangerous conditions on our roadways.

First of all, because the Mexican drivers are allowed to work far longer hours than our truckers; and secondly, it is well-known that there's widespread drug use in this profession, as the chairman of our subcommittee has already articulated. Presently, there is no system under which secure testing could take place. In fact, it's been said that there is a not a single testing lab in Mexico to ensure that the drivers coming into our country are drug free.

The numbers I think are the easiest way to tell whether or not this proposal is a fair deal for the United States. As soon as this pilot program was announced, 800 Mexican trucking companies lined up to come into the United States. By contrast, only two American companies desired to deliver into Mexico. I think those numbers are very indicative of whether or not this is a fair agreement for the United States.

Because of all of these problems, groups like the Teamsters, as well as the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, also the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety have all come out in opposition to this proposal.

Mr. Speaker, we need to ensure the program can only take place once these trucks and drivers from Mexico can meet the same standards that American trucks and drivers do. Trucks participating in the pilot program will be subject to rigorous safety inspections limited to a total of 1,000. Their drivers must also demonstrate clean driving records and have a proficiency in English.

This legislation as well would require extensive oversight and review of the pilot program from an independent review panel.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Thank you, Chairman DeFazio. I certainly appreciate your support.

This is a tremendously huge issue in my district. People want to know that Congress is out there making our roads safe. I have two children and went back and forth on I-70 between Kansas City and St. Louis for years with two little kids. The truck traffic is amazingly dense. We spent years encouraging truck safety and spending billions of

dollars on safety and environmental standards, and it just does not make any sense to now watch that be reversed.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Transportation has unveiled a pilot program that will permit poorly regulated Mexican traffic onto American highways. In its present form, the DOT proposal exhibits reckless disregard for America's road safety, not to mention our border security and our economic interests.

Under current law, trucks registered in Mexico can drive only within a narrow border zone in the United States before cargos are transferred to an American vehicle. This system not only protects U.S. highways from unsafe Mexican traffic, but it prevents drug smuggling and illegal immigration, and it safeguards American transportation jobs.

But the DOT intends to halt this very sensible system. Under their pilot program, Mexican-domiciled trucks could penetrate far into the American heartland. The traditional safety standards required for vehicles on American roads, such as frequent safety inspections, limits on the number of hours driven in a day, drug testing and criminal background checks for drivers hauling hazardous materials, either would not be applied or would be weakly enforced.

Mexico certainly does not have a system right now for keeping these kinds of records in place. It's ridiculous for us to consider that they will be able to enforce these regulations in any way that comes up to our standards.

Again, let me say that our trucking industry has spent so much money getting our trucks, making them safer and so much to bring them up to environmental standards, it's just crazy to now say that we are going to bring in trucks that do not have to meet those same standards.

If the DOT pilot program proceeds as planned, drivers in Kansas and all across America will soon share their roads with unsafe Mexican trucks. The flood of foreign traffic will inevitably rise, result in collisions, injuries and even fatalities.

I introduced the bill now under consideration, the Safe American Roads Act of 2007, to rein in the Department of Transportation. The bill requires the cross-border pilot program to comply with 22 specific strict safety criteria. It creates an independent review panel to monitor and evaluate the pilot program after it launches, and it provides that the program can be terminated at any point if the Secretary of Transportation does not comply with all of these provisions.

By decisively approving the Safe American Roads Act, Congress can protect the millions of American families who drive our highways every day. I'd also like to thank Chairman Oberstar and Chairman DeFazio for their assistance and support, and I certainly urge my colleagues to support this important bill.