REMARKS FOR
THE HONORABLE MARY PETERS
SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION
SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE
CROSS-BORDER TRUCK HEARING
MARCH 11, 2008
2:30 PM
Chairman Lautenberg, thank you for this opportunity to testify about the
Department’s Cross Border Trucking Demonstration Project. It is entirely fitting
that we are having this conversation at a time when some have begun to question
the equity and benefits of our existing trade relationships.
This Demonstration Project should serve as an example of how trade can be used
to create new opportunity, new revenue and new success for U.S. workers and U.S.
companies. That is because the project was designed to right a decades-old wrong
that has prevented American drivers and trucking businesses from earning a
single cent off of the hundreds of billions of dollars worth of goods that are
shipped by truck across the U.S.-Mexico border every year.
Mexican trucking companies currently have the ability – separate and apart from
the Demonstration Project – to operate within our borders. Since 1982, trucks
from Mexico have been allowed to operate within the U.S. in commercial zones
that include cities such as Brownsville, El Paso, Nogales and San Diego.
An additional 800 trucking companies from Mexico continue to have the right that
was granted to them by the Interstate Commerce Commission and DOT to operate to
anywhere within the United States.
In comparison, U.S. trucks have never had the authority from the Mexican federal
government to operate south of the border. This means that, before the start of
this Demonstration Project, not one single American driver has profited from a
cross-border trade valued at over $260 billion every year.
This means not one single U.S. trucking company has reaped the rewards of a vast
and fast growing surface trade with one of our biggest and closest trading
partners.
And this means that the United States, the world’s most aggressive proponent of
breaking down trade barriers as the best way to improve domestic and
international prosperity, has been locked out of one of the few markets where
our truckers actually have a real opportunity to compete and succeed.
It was this imbalance that Presidents George H.W. Bush and Clinton sought to end
when they negotiated NAFTA’s trucking provisions. It was this inequity that
Congress so boldly voted to end when it passed NAFTA. And it was this one-sided
market that this Administration pledged to end with the establishment last
September of our Cross-Border Trucking Demonstration Project.
So when an employee of El Paso-based Stagecoach Cartage and Distribution became
the first-ever U.S. driver to haul goods into Mexico last September, he did more
than turn a profit. He made history and signaled the start of a new era in which
our drivers, our trucks and our businesses can actually share in the profits
that exist in cross-border trade.
That driver may have been the first, but he was hardly the last. Indeed, U.S.
truckers are now taking advantage of this project at a rate of more than two to
one compared to truckers from Mexico. As of March 3rd, U.S. drivers have made
over 680 trips into Mexico. Meanwhile, drivers from Mexico have made fewer than
325 trips beyond the commercial zones as part of this project.
We are achieving this remarkable advantage in trade while maintaining the
absolute safety of our highways. Our on-site audits in Mexico, our rigorous
standards for admission into this program, and our commitment to inspecting
every truck every time have delivered a safety performance record that is
without compare. To date, the out-of-service rate for trucks in this program,
for example, is less than half that of the U.S. trucking fleet. And we have yet
to experience a single safety incident.
In short, this project supports fairer trade. This project levels the playing
field for U.S. workers. This project allows American businesses to benefit from
our trade relationships. And this project, I respectfully submit, maintains the
safety of our highways.
Yet there are those who reason that cross-border trucking will hurt the domestic
shipping industry. How a return to the days when U.S. trucks were prohibited
from moving a single dollar’s worth of goods across the U.S.-Mexico border would
serve American companies better is beyond comprehension.
There also are those who argue that this project is somehow unsafe. Yet, the
safety record of the participating trucks is actually better than the record of
the U.S. trucking fleet. And our self-imposed requirement that trucks be
equipped with GPS monitoring devices allows us to monitor the location and
duration of every participating vehicle’s trip.
Others have suggested that this project might compromise our homeland security.
Given the fact that thousands of Mexican trucks safely enter our country every
day outside of this project, the implication must be that the U.S. trucks now
using our border crossings will engage in unsavory activities. Needless to say,
I don’t agree.
And some have suggested that we are not following the law of the land. They
argue that, because last December Congress told us not to establish a
cross-border trucking demonstration project, we should have dismantled an
existing program that is working significantly in favor of U.S. truckers.
Now I know that Congress understands that “to establish” means to set up or
create something new. That is why, when it sought to end an existing
Departmental program designed to require local communities to pay a small
portion of the cost of essential air service, it used the phrase “to establish
or implement.” And that is why, when the Congress sought to end an existing rule
that allowed Chinese poultry products into the U.S., it used the phrase “to
establish or implement.”
When Congress chose instead to use narrower language last December, and rejected
the use of the words “to implement,” we heeded its wish. We will not establish a
new demonstration project. Yet we also know that this body would never knowingly
shut the door on U.S. workers’ access to business opportunities and profits,
including an Ohio trucking company that just last week received authority to
operate south of the border.
So as we engage in today’s conversation, I ask that you consider the following
questions. Do you think the best way to help our workers is to deny them access
to new markets? Do you think our truckers should sit idle while other country’s
companies profit from our thriving cross-border trade? Do you think our trade
relationship with Mexico should be balanced against us?
Or do you feel that U.S. drivers should have an opportunity to succeed in other
markets? Do you think this country should fulfill its international obligations,
especially when there are as many potential benefits for our economy?
I know where I stand on these issues. While I appreciate and respect that some
of you may not agree, I proudly support safer roads, more opportunity for our
workers, more earnings for our businesses, and more success for our economy. And
I am pleased to report, many others do too.
Thank you, Chairman Lautenberg, for offering me the chance to testify before you
today. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
# # #
Briefing
Room
