• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Who's paying to upgrade Mex. trucks to US safety standards

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Mon, 04/11/2011 - 3:23pm

In the latest effort to accommodate its cherished trade partner in the south, the U.S. government is paying to upgrade outdated Mexican trucks that hemorrhage illegal amounts of exhaust on their trips north to deliver merchandise.

The Mexican trucks enter the U.S. under a 17-year-old international trade pact known as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and they’ve created an air pollution crisis. The air quality in border towns has been especially impacted by the exorbitant levels of exhaust released by the Mexican trucks, which also fail to meet American safety standards.

Since the Mexican truckers have no intention of fixing the problem, Uncle Sam has stepped in to save the environment. U.S. taxpayers have picked up the cost to replace old mufflers on dozens of trucks and many more are scheduled to be upgraded by the middle of this year. The unbelievable story was reported this week by an Arizona newspaper that says replacing the old mufflers with new catalytic converters will reduce harmful diesel emissions by up to 30%.

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality is running the operation but the money is actually coming from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the same bloated federal agency that’s dedicated millions to “environmental justice” programs that help minorities get green. Under that brilliant EPA project, leftwing groups get federal dollars to teach black, Latino and indigenous folks how to recycle, reduce carbon emissions and participate in “green jobs” training.

In this genius case, EPA grants have upgraded 55 Mexican trucks and many more will be enhanced this year. Each truck costs U.S. taxpayers about $1,600. The feds justify the expenditure by claiming that it will improve air quality on both sides of the border, especially in towns that are helpless due to lack of resources. The director of Arizona’s Department of Environmental Quality says it’s all about establishing a “relationship on environmental issues.”

U.S. truck drivers are required to have the type of converters that Mexicans are getting from the American government, though they must pay for theirs. For years, the idea of Mexican trucks entering the U.S. under NAFTA has been a contentious issue because they follow the notoriously dismal safety standards of a third-world country.

In fact, a few years ago the Department of Transportation’s Inspector General determined that Mexican trucks that regularly travel throughout American highways are rarely checked for safety by U.S. authorities despite a provision requiring it. Rules requiring that every Mexican truck undergo a thorough safety compliance check and that every driver has a valid license and is proficient in English have been virtually ignored, according to the IG’s findings.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2011/apr/u-s-pays-upgrade-mexican-trucks
 

Silver

Well-known member
I agree that Uncle Sam should not be equipping foreign vehicles in order to get them to pass muster, but as far as Mexican truck in the US being safe, I think it has been shown that Mexican trucks have lower out of service rates than do American trucks. After doing some reading on this, I'm starting to wonder why Canada and Mexico continue allow American trucks within their borders.
Hate to paste a link, but I can't copy from google docs.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:B1fDHH_ZT2EJ:journals.library.oregonstate.edu/trforum/article/view/1136/1031+study+indicates+mexican+trucks+safer&hl=en&gl=ca&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShGeJiYtC4Gjy6gPj8kevyBNJbKmqnaN5Ai_V6gUTi8UWkajJUzlAkOH3tg9dJj6NLMvc48nINAW_wSJTMF1cyTbBe4FQJGB-9L3n7zBq2oBJBu0YMbeJmOAYAOf5FR0nwiko27&sig=AHIEtbQ33UxHC1TETeV6O8x2aZl3sIfW4A
 

Steve

Well-known member
I think it has been shown that Mexican trucks have lower out of service rates than do American trucks.

1. if I have a truck and it needs brakes, I would take it out of service for a few days and rectify the problem...

2. if I use the interval mileage factor, I would more then likely take it out of service before it ever needed brakes, and replace them anyways..

example 2 is better safety wise. but over time the truck would have a higher out of service rate..

but it doesn't end there..

3. if I had a truck and it needed brakes and I waited until a safety/service inspection, I might even be able to stretch the in-service interval.

then there is

4. I use the truck until the brakes fail,

sure it would finally kill my in service rate, (and maybe a few people).. but my prior in-service rate would be stellar..
 

Steve

Well-known member
Mexico is an export oriented economy.

in 2005, Mexico alone exported US $213.7 billion,

By 2009 Mexico exported US $230 billion

close to 90% of Mexican exports and 50% of its imports are traded with the United States and Canada.

Mexico exported US$198.3 billion worth of merchandise to the United States in 2006, up 16.5% from 2005 and up 47.3% in just 4 years.

Mexican imports from the U.S. rose 11.5% to $134.2 billion in 2006, up 37.6% since 2002.
http://www.suite101.com/content/mexicos-top-exports-imports-a25194

looks to me like Nafta is benefiting Mexico to the tune of about 60 billion a year and we are fixing their trucks ????

I am in favor of free trade,.. but at a certain point getting screwed isn't worth the business...
 

Silver

Well-known member
The way I read the report was by "out of service" they meant the trucks actually taken out of service by vehicle inspectors on the highway. As in, if you decide to drive your truck with no brakes and get inspected, you will become an "out of service" statistic. Did I read it wrong?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Silver said:
The way I read the report was by "out of service" they meant the trucks actually taken out of service by vehicle inspectors on the highway. As in, if you decide to drive your truck with no brakes and get inspected, you will become an "out of service" statistic. Did I read it wrong?

not sure, I didn't read the whole report. but since Mexico seldom inspects trucks, let alone takes them of the road. it could be correct..

for example:

in New Jersey ,they have mobile commercial truck inspection stations.. and they are brutal.. they will find something.. I had one trailer taken off the road for a cracked marker light.. and another for an uneven tire wear pattern..

another state may have few or none. naturally the NJ rate would be much higher.. but then your comparing a lack of inspection region, with an aggressive inspection region..

which would you assume is safer?
 

Silver

Well-known member
Steve said:
Silver said:
The way I read the report was by "out of service" they meant the trucks actually taken out of service by vehicle inspectors on the highway. As in, if you decide to drive your truck with no brakes and get inspected, you will become an "out of service" statistic. Did I read it wrong?

not sure, I didn't read the whole report. but since Mexico seldom inspects trucks, let alone takes them of the road. it could be correct..

for example:

in New Jersey ,they have mobile commercial truck inspection stations.. and they are brutal.. they will find something.. I had one trailer taken off the road for a cracked marker light.. and another for an uneven tire wear pattern..

another state may have few or none. naturally the NJ rate would be much higher.. but then your comparing a lack of inspection region, with an aggressive inspection region..

which would you assume is safer?

The report, if you take the time to read it, lays out that these statistics are for trucks inspected in the US
 

Steve

Well-known member
2010 trade imbalance.. US to Mexico, 163,320.8 Mexico to US 229,654.6 or -66,333.9

In 2009, Canada’s bilateral merchandise trade with Mexico totalled $21.3 billion, consisting of $4.8 billion in Canadian exports to, and $16.5 billion in imports from, Mexico.

I am not sure why we didn't make a better agreement with Canada and just not made an agreement at all with Mexico?
 

Silver

Well-known member
Steve said:
2010 trade imbalance.. US to Mexico, 163,320.8 Mexico to US 229,654.6 or -66,333.9

In 2009, Canada’s bilateral merchandise trade with Mexico totalled $21.3 billion, consisting of $4.8 billion in Canadian exports to, and $16.5 billion in imports from, Mexico.

I am not sure why we didn't make a better agreement with Canada and just not made an agreement at all with Mexico?


I don't pretend to be an economist, but it appears to me that free trade agreements between countries of similar standards of living should (if actually fair) be far more equitable than those agreements between countries which are dissimilar in this regard.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Silver said:
Steve said:
Silver said:
The way I read the report was by "out of service" they meant the trucks actually taken out of service by vehicle inspectors on the highway. As in, if you decide to drive your truck with no brakes and get inspected, you will become an "out of service" statistic. Did I read it wrong?

not sure, I didn't read the whole report. but since Mexico seldom inspects trucks, let alone takes them of the road. it could be correct..

for example:

in New Jersey ,they have mobile commercial truck inspection stations.. and they are brutal.. they will find something.. I had one trailer taken off the road for a cracked marker light.. and another for an uneven tire wear pattern..

another state may have few or none. naturally the NJ rate would be much higher.. but then your comparing a lack of inspection region, with an aggressive inspection region..

which would you assume is safer?

The report, if you take the time to read it, lays out that these statistics are for trucks inspected in the US

if it only accounts for trucks "Inspected in the US".. then my argument holds true..

if you inspected every truck in the US but only inspected Mexican trucks that enter the US.. then our rate is bound to be higher..

I no longer support Nafta.. didn't ever really think it was such a great deal..


while I didn't read the whole report, I just read most of it..

if you read the bottom of page 101 and the top of page 102, you will see that they did not compare state or national out of service rates to Mexican rates overall because Mexican trucks are older and could not be directly compared to the US modern long haul trucks, so they limited their data set to get a report that supported their conclusion.

your argument seems to try to imply that all US trucks have a higher out of service rate then Mexican trucks..

but the report limited the scope of it's research to only "older drayage companies"

it also didn't not separate out log book violations.. (page 113) Mexican trucks are not required to have log books in the 100 mile zone,

the out of service rate on Mexican trucks was 10.5% verses 10.9% for US trucks in the border crossing area..

so first off your report is misleading and limited in it's scope and your original comment was off based and insulting..

next time before you try to imply that US trucks are not as safe as Mexican trucks at least have the decency to read the damn report you are using to make your mis-informed assumption..
 

Silver

Well-known member
Back off Steve. If you are insulted go sit in the corner and suck on your thumb. You are obviously reading the report yourself to find the conclusions YOU want to find. I simply laid out some points as I found it interesting that many folks automatically assume that Mexican trucks are unsafe by definition without ever looking in to it. Looks like they have improved dramatically over the last decade.
So wipe your snotty nose and get over it.

if you inspected every truck in the US but only inspected Mexican trucks that enter the US.. then our rate is bound to be higher..

This is about trucks in the US
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
I was wondering what the data was for U.S. trucks traveling across the border to Mexico vs the Mexican trucks traveling across the border. Since it is your conclusion that U.S. trucks traveling out of the U.S. are unsafe, It would be a more even comparison.

Also, have you personally seen the vehicles? I have and cannot believe that anyone would believe this study. I'm pretty certain that the numbers would be more similar if unregulated farm trucks were compared.

I was told by an individual that runs a trucking company in the oild field, that the average cost of EPA regulations on new trucks is around $35,000 per truck. Steve might be able to speak to that.

If this is true, that is an uneven playing field to start with. And I am not sure how $1,600 would even the gap.

Along what Steve has touched on, I have listened to a lot of trucker radio(as it is the only radio station that comes in on my tractor's radio). There are segments about ask the law, etc... It is amazing the number of infractions that are written up for the purpose of just making a write up in all states throughout the U.S.

One non-out of service story that quickly comes to mind, a gentleman was cited for using a frayed strap. The issue, is that the guy had the legal number of straps already on the load, but decided to increase the security of the load by adding an additional strap over an area of possible concern. Because the extra strap was frayed, he was cited. He was considered legal by removing it.

The stories ike this are numerous.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
okfarmer said:
I was wondering what the data was for U.S. trucks traveling across the border to Mexico vs the Mexican trucks traveling across the border. Since it is your conclusion that U.S. trucks traveling out of the U.S. are unsafe, It would be a more even comparison.

Also, have you personally seen the vehicles? I have and cannot believe that anyone would believe this study. I'm pretty certain that the numbers would be more similar if unregulated farm trucks were compared.

I was told by an individual that runs a trucking company in the oild field, that the average cost of EPA regulations on new trucks is around $35,000 per truck. Steve might be able to speak to that.

If this is true, that is an uneven playing field to start with. And I am not sure how $1,600 would even the gap.

Along what Steve has touched on, I have listened to a lot of trucker radio(as it is the only radio station that comes in on my tractor's radio). There are segments about ask the law, etc... It is amazing the number of infractions that are written up for the purpose of just making a write up in all states throughout the U.S.

One non-out of service story that quickly comes to mind, a gentleman was cited for using a frayed strap. The issue, is that the guy had the legal number of straps already on the load, but decided to increase the security of the load by adding an additional strap over an area of possible concern. Because the extra strap was frayed, he was cited. He was considered legal by removing it.

The stories ike this are numerous.


The $1600 does not include the EOBR (electronic on-board recorder), that will cost the taxpayer $3000/truck
 

Silver

Well-known member
It is not MY conclusion that American trucks are unsafe. That's putting words in my mouth. As I said, read the report, it's interesting.

And our little buddy Steve is not the only one that knows a thing or two about trucks.
 

okfarmer

Well-known member
Silver said:
It is not MY conclusion that American trucks are unsafe. That's putting words in my mouth. As I said, read the report, it's interesting.

And our little buddy Steve is not the only one that knows a thing or two about trucks.

Your right, you didn't say it was your conclusion. I thought since you were posting it, you believed it.

And I was not intending to limit the discusion on who knows what. I assumed if he personally purchased the rigs, he would know.

I would be interested in hearing if anyone can refute that the end cost of EPA regulations on new trucks are in that range.
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Silver there are a few who "know" about trucks and the "out of service" rule first hand.
No I am not going to read the report just to get in a debate with you about how bad US trucks are.
How about I let shoer debate you ... I will bring this thread up tomorrow and let him decide if he wants to debate your stance.
Me I know I will get offended since your attacking his job and I know how well he takes care of his truck.
 

Silver

Well-known member
MsSage said:
Silver there are a few who "know" about trucks and the "out of service" rule first hand.
No I am not going to read the report just to get in a debate with you about how bad US trucks are.
How about I let shoer debate you ... I will bring this thread up tomorrow and let him decide if he wants to debate your stance.
Me I know I will get offended since your attacking his job and I know how well he takes care of his truck.

Why would you assume I am attacking anything? I saw a report that is in conflict with the original post on this thread, and because I am objective and like to play the devil's advocate in an attempt to spread a bit of objectivity around here, a bunch of people fly off the handle. It could have been an interesting discussion, but nope, as usual it flies out of control at the first corner.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Silver said:
MsSage said:
Silver there are a few who "know" about trucks and the "out of service" rule first hand.
No I am not going to read the report just to get in a debate with you about how bad US trucks are.
How about I let shoer debate you ... I will bring this thread up tomorrow and let him decide if he wants to debate your stance.
Me I know I will get offended since your attacking his job and I know how well he takes care of his truck.

Why would you assume I am attacking anything? I saw a report that is in conflict with the original post on this thread, and because I am objective and like to play the devil's advocate in an attempt to spread a bit of objectivity around here, a bunch of people fly off the handle. It could have been an interesting discussion, but nope, as usual it flies out of control at the first corner.

Past history perhaps????????
 

Steve

Well-known member
Silver said:
but as far as Mexican truck in the US being safe, I think it has been shown that Mexican trucks have lower out of service rates than do American trucks. {b]After doing some reading on this, I'm starting to wonder why Canada and Mexico continue allow American trucks within their borders.[/b]

Silver said:
It is not MY conclusion that American trucks are unsafe. That's putting words in my mouth. As I said, read the report, it's interesting.

And our little buddy Steve is not the only one that knows a thing or two about trucks.

your Insinuation that US trucks are not safe is what brought me into the conversation..

and now you want to claim you didn't make a comment disparaging American truckers...

I read the report last night.. it is a biased piece of crap. it takes a minuscule part of our trucking industry, "border drayage", a US industry that is in serious decline due to unfair Mexican practices making it unprofitable and You attempt to paint our entire trucking industry as unsafe....

and then have the gall to say I don't know anything about trucking.. maybe i don't,,, but at least before I insulted an entire industry, I would have the decency to check my facts...
 
Top