Special-Interest Stalling
The Teamsters vs. the public: Guess who wins in the House.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007; A14

IT'S HARD to argue against a bill entitled the Safe American Roads Act of 2007; indeed, only three lawmakers in the House had the temerity to vote against it last week. But the legislation is in reality a prime example of misguided and protectionist anti-NAFTAism.

More than a decade ago, the United States promised to give Mexican trucks access to U.S. roads by 2000. A series of lawsuits and lobbying by the Teamsters and other special interests repeatedly pushed that date back. So this year President Bush proposed a year-long pilot project for 100 Mexican carriers to operate on U.S. highways. At the conclusion of a successful pilot, all Mexican truckers would be free to enter.

But last week the House rejected even that overly cautious approach, voting to lengthen the pilot to three years and to place a number of unnecessary conditions on its inauguration, no doubt aimed to put off implementation still further. The Transportation Department would have to convene a three-person review panel and certify that the truck companies had met a series of time-consuming requirements ostensibly designed to enhance road safety. Even without these requirements, however, Mexican trucks on U.S. roads would be subject to the same safety standards as U.S. carriers. Enforcing these is enough to keep roads safe, as it is in San Diego and elsewhere along the border, where Mexican trucks are currently allowed to travel. The bill would also require additional legislation to make the program permanent at the conclusion of the already lengthy pilot program.

With action seven years overdue, will U.S. policymakers ever follow through on this country's clear treaty obligations? Doing so would drive prices down on a range of goods without endangering anyone.