Thread: They're HEEEERE !

Santa Cruz Sentinel, Santa Cruz, CA

Cops and Courts: April 30, 2008
-
Article Launched: 04/30/2008 01:33:13 AM PDT

Semi sideswipes two cars on 129

An El Mexicano semi heading east on Highway 129 sideswiped a Ford Mustang and a Dodge Shadow about 7 p.m. Tuesday, blocking both lanes of traffic for an hour and sending one person to the hospital.

The truck ended up partially down an embankment with the Mustang in the eastbound lane and the Dodge on the shoulder of the westbound lane near Thompson Road.

The driver of the Mustang was taken to Watsonville Community Hospital with minor injuries, according to the California Highway Patrol.

CHP officer Seth Nelson said a car in front of the semi tried to make a left turn causing traffic to slow.

"It looks like he was going too fast and locked up his brakes," Nelson said of the driver of the semi, which then veered into oncoming traffic.

Luis A. Bravo, the uninjured driver of the Dodge, said the truck lost control and sideswiped both cars.

Bravo, who said he was "lucky," was working in the lettuce fields in Huron and was on his way home after his last day.

Nelson said it didn't appear that the semi driver, who was not injured, was impaired.

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_9103886?IADID

Thanks good catch.

Do you have a source link to the story?

We need it in order to keep this [very important] article posted.

alleycat - I found the correct one (I think) and edited it into your post.
All done

We need to send this article to our congressmen. Was this truck part of Bush's Mexican pilot program?

Hope a drug dog 'visits' this truck.

I will send to Senator Dorgan, He is the one who held the Mary Peters hearings.....it should also go to Sessions and Vitters

Great catch alleycat....we need these storys bad and need them to go to congress...you can bet Mary Peters is not telling about these

Thanks guys/gals.

Here's a list of the demo trucking companies:

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/cross-border/c ... rriers.htm

I DID NOT see the named one in the story in the official list (don't know what that might mean - or if it is just not listed for some reason).

Thanks SOSAD - I'll send that along too. He's been all over this story along with the Teamsters.

FYI - for those not familiar with CA, Watsonville is in the extreme southern Bay area (inland 10 miles or so from Santa Cruz) - FAR from the US-Mexico border. So, the question about whether or not it's technically part of the demo project is indeed a good one.

Re:

Nelson said it didn't appear that the semi driver, who was not injured, was impaired.

I don't care what it SEEMED like, I want to know want the results of the toxicology tests produced... assuming, of course, that they actually completed such thing. If not, then why not?!?!?!

Thank you for the url listing the companies participating in Bush's pilot truck project PhredE.

I wanted to send the teamsters a copy of the truck accident. Googled teamsters and Mary Peters and found this pro-Mexican trucker blog:

http://www.blogtoplist.com/rss/teamsters.html

Here is an example of an article:

Mexico Trucker Online
Setting the record straight about Mexican Trucking Issues
Cross Border Trucking - The inmates finally control the asylum!
P.M. Corn on January 7th, 2008
My little web-bots have been busy bringing to our attention the stupidity spewing from the mouths of the opponents of the Mexican Cross Border Program, and it continues to amaze me that folks actually believe this stuff. But then, America, long ago, forgot how to think for itself.

So what’s been happening since before Christmas when the Bush Administration chose to follow the law, as it is written, and abide by an agreement that we made in 1992, where we agreed to allow Mexican carriers equal access to our highways? Let’s take a look.

International Brotherhood of Teamsters

It was reported today that The Teamsters have filed a 28(j) letter in 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in an attempt to obtain another injunction against the program and FMCSA. The hearing wil be held February 12 in San Francisco.



Among the claims the Teamster’s are making;

Trucks from Mexico can break federal highway safety laws requiring vehicles
to be certified by the manufacturer that they meet U.S. safety standards.
A 2002 law forbids trucks from Mexico beyond the border until the states
can enforce their violations of federal highway safety laws; five states have
said they cannot do so, according to the Transportation Department inspector
general report on Sept. 6, 2007.
A 2007 law forbids FMCSA from letting trucks from Mexico on our highways
until the inspector general certifies that the agency has met all conditions
set forth by Congress. The inspector general reported on Aug. 6, 2007 that
FMCSA has not met those conditions.
Let’s examine this example of grasping at straws when they have nothing to support their position.

This refers to a small sticker placed somewhere on the body of every vehicle sold in the United States, without regard to it’s country of manufacture. certifying that the vehicle was built to US safety standards. Trucks used by Mexican carriers are identical to trucks being used in the United States and Canada. Indeed, many of the trucks used by American and Canadian fleets are built in Mexico. The manufacturing facilities in Mexico do not have separate assembly lines to manufacture trucks for the US and sub standard trucks to be sold in Mexico. This is simply another pathetic attempt to confuse the issue.
In 2002, perhaps there were 5 States that felt they were unable to enforce Federal laws. But as this is written, one would think they are saying that 5 States could not enforce Federal law where it concerned Mexican trucks! Hogwash! The law is the law. For Mexican, American and Canadian trucks. One could read this another way also. That the 2007 OIG report stated that in 2002, 5 States could not enforce the law, with no mention of the ability in 2007, when the report was issued.
This objection pertains to the audit required by Section 350. The failings noted by the OIG were not critical nor did the OIG demand the deficiencies be corrected prior to the start of the program. They are here, for the original audit and here for the followup. And what are these two minor items? One is concerning the quality of data concerning the LDIS database and the other, Ensuring adequate capacity to inspect buses. What in the hell do buses have to do with the Cross Border Program we’re debating? Absolutely nothing! The OIG also offered this statement which you will not see referenced nor reported by the opponents of this program.
Our current work also found that FMCSA took the actions it agreed to in response to our nine January 2005 report recommendations. FMCSA continues to work with the states and others to resolve prior report issues that its actions did not fully resolve. FMCSA’s completed actions include (1) ensuring that five states, which had not yet done so, adopted a rule that requires enforcement action against Mexican motor carriers or others operating without proper authority from FMCSA

What! Wait a damned minute! Does the OIG’s own words, from a report that the Teamster’s are using to pursue this bogus legal action, contradict what the Teamster’s are claiming in item 1? That appears to be the case to me.

Public Citizen and Joan Claybrook

Of course, Joan Claybrook, the person who claims only to have the best interest of America’s truckers in mind, took credit for the 28(j) letter, when in reality, it appears it was filed on behalf of the Sierra Club, lead plaintiffs in the case.

Claybrook goes on to issue this statement, which as usual, warps and embellishes the facts with words meant to strike fear into the minds of the uninformed.

The appropriations provision prohibits using any funds to “establishâ€

This is just the beginning, I'm afraid.

It didn't take very long did it!!