No Hablo Ingles
[Guest post by DRJ]
There’s been ample discussion in the media on the pilot program allowing Mexican truckers to drive on US roads, including the Teamsters/Sierra Club lawsuit seeking to stop that program and the Ninth Circuit decision authorizing it to proceed.
Most of the coverage has focused on the environmental and economic effects of the pilot program, with some coverage of the safety issues such as requirements that truckers complete criminal background and drug and alcohol tests and that trucks must pass vehicle safety and emissions inspections.
There is also a pre-existing requirement that truckers in the US speak English:
“Interstate truck and bus drivers across America may find themselves pulled off the highway if state troopers or vehicle inspectors find they can’t speak English. The requirement has been on the books for decades, but enforcement has begun before Mexican trucks are allowed in the U.S. interior as of Sept. 6. “We have found people in violation of this for a number of years and we’re working feverishly to correct it,” said John Hill, head of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
Since 1971, federal law has said that commercial drivers must read and speak English “sufficiently to understand highway traffic signs and signals and directions given in English and to respond to official inquiries.”
The US government is concerned that “further delays in the project will strain the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico.”
It seems Mexican truckers have also had enough of these requirements:
Mexican truckers, meanwhile, said they were prepared to leave merchandise in Mexican warehouses if U.S. authorities insisted on fines for not knowing English in the border zone.
“We have been talking with U.S. authorities,” said Luis Moreno Sesma, president of Mexico’s national chamber of cargo haulers. “The law says that the operators should know English to cross the border, but we have said they should have special consideration for the border guys.”
Apparently it’s common for border zone truckers to not speak English but it’s not a problem since many Americans in the border zone are bilingual. I’m still surprised at how intense the resistance to learning English is turning out to be. One might even say I’m speechless.
This is just another “requirement” that will never ever be enforced. Are the cops going to pull people over and give them an English test?
Patricia (4117a9) — 9/1/2007 @ 6:42 pmNo language proficiency test will be given at the time of the roadside stop, but if other circumstances warrant an arrest, then a test will be mandated.
This (incidentally) is the same for US truckers who choose to carry loads into Mexico, though few will do so at first.
As a third-generation Spanish-speaking American, I place no stock in this program. It only exists because many of the transport carriers (obviously) see an opportunity for cost reduction. It will be harmful to American society, to Americans on the road, and to American truckers.
Note how little comment this issue has received until the very moment it goes into effect? The Teamsters had put this into their constituents ears since the very beginning, but it made no impression whatsoever in either the mainstream or the alternative media.
I would hate to be living in California, Arizona, New Mexico, or Texas in the next year or so as the inevitable calamities of this program are enacted.
Tenoch Ramirez-Anderson (8aa866) — 9/2/2007 @ 12:17 amJorge Bush is one step closer to his dream of erasing the border and starting the North American Union.
We are becomming a place where laws are not enforced, politicians are paid off, political correctness is out of control, in short, we are becomming more like Mexico. Ain’t that grand?
Decade after decade, Mexico can’t improve itself because of it’s statist economy and silly ethnic chauvenism (machismo) and now they have a US president who is obsessed with raising their standard of living, when his job is to work for the American people.
The Mexicans will win, by sheer weight of numbers, they will populate whole states before long, then petition to leave the US and join Mexico. There are enough wimpy, naive Americans who will allow it.
Jay (f6cafd) — 9/2/2007 @ 3:35 amJay wrote:
Actually, I think that would a great idea: annex Mexico, and get their oil, and annex Canada and its natural resources. It’s not like we’re keeping the Mexicans out anyway, and think how much better what is now Mexico would be run if it were a colony of the United States!
Treat the Mexican states as we treated the western territories before they became states, allowing them to earn statehood.
Why do we have Mexicans coming to the United States? They come here to work, and work they do, working a lot harder than Americans in my experience; the Mexicans are the hardest working people on the planet! Just think what could be done with all of those hard-working people in an economy stripped of Mexican-government corruption and stupidity.
Dana (556f76) — 9/2/2007 @ 4:08 amDana – are you an American? Have you no understanding of what our country is? We’re a COUNTRY – not just an economic region where people from around the world come to work.
I want us to be a nation, not an employment service for inept, corrupt 3rd world nations like Mexico.
They work hard? What a crock! LOL Oh yeah, I probably would work harder too if I didn’t have to pay income tax, had a fake or stolen social security number, didn’t have to pay driver licenses, registration or auto insurance. Wake up, it’s a scam. All of it. We’re subsidizing the peasants of Mexico. On average, they are 6th grade educated, they come here illegally, work illegally and have lots of babies who they raise not to speak English.
Illegal immigration is a taxpayer funded subsidy for business. Nothing else. The American taxpayer foots the bill for the education and healthcare of illegals and their children.
Futhermore, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Illegal latinos only make up a small percentage of any occupation – outside of crop picking and even in that one, there a fewer and fewer and finally the farmers who used illegal labor are forced to mechanize as the inflow of illegals has gone down slightly in the past year.
The illegals have flooded into other occupations and just like the rule of economics says, an increase in the amount of labor reduces wages in that field and that’s what the business lobby with their mouthpiece Jorge Bush want.
You’re a fool and a traitor to your country, you no doubt must be a business ownwer who enjoys his indentured servants earning him a higher profit.
Jay (f6cafd) — 9/2/2007 @ 4:43 amDana and Jay, the first generation of Mexican illegals may work hard because of the fear of deportation and the contrast with previous conditions in Mexico. The second generation, now American citizens, is not so prone to exploitation. This leads to a constant thirst for new recruits “fresh off the boat,” as it were. This is a chain-letter game, and so is untenable in the long run. The novel The Jungle (1906) by Upton Sinclair relates some striking historical parallels of this sort of thing. In that case, Europeans were recruited to work here and depress the prevailing wages in meat-packing plants.
dchamil (3e01c5) — 9/2/2007 @ 5:11 amYou are right DChamil, new arrivals often work hard because they are dirt poor Mexican-Indians who know nothing else, they have been systematically discriminated against in their native Mexico by the elites – the descendants of the Spanish.
Even Jorge Bush admitted back in late 2005, in a speech on the border that about 20% of everyone crossing the southern border is a serious criminal. 20% – that’s a huge number of criminals we’re allowing in our nation and these wimpy politicans and ethnic grivance groups like La Raza won’t admit it or do the right thing – deport them because under the skin, they are all liberals. They feel that everyone in the world has a right to “migrate” to the US, with or without permission (called a visa). Every country in the world strictly enforces it’s borders and immigration laws, especially Mexico, yet Americans are called racists for wanting the same for our nation. What a joke.
Jay (f6cafd) — 9/2/2007 @ 6:30 amOh, is that/i> why we went from traffic signs with messages (like “Slippery when wet”) to ones with pictographs on them? It was ’cause of the Mexicans?
I’d be more impressed with requiring Americans to be able to read English!
Dana (556f76) — 9/2/2007 @ 9:46 amDag nab it, fouled up in closing a tag.
Dana (556f76) — 9/2/2007 @ 9:46 amWhy, thank you, Jay, for your polite comments!
But if you think that illegals make up only a small percentage of the labor force in any industry other than harvesting the crops, I invite you to come to the Mid-Atlantic region, and take a look at the construction industry. Other than in some rural areas, it’s virtually impossible to buy a house that was constructed within the last ten years that didn’t have immigrants doing the foundation, the framing, the interior drywall, the exterior siding, the painting, the roofing, the concrete or the landscaping. Electrical, finish carpentry, HVAC and plumbing are the only trades that don’t have major immigrant workforces involved.
We’re a country? Why, yes, that’s true — but we were also a country in 1787; should we not have taken in those lands to the west, which were inhabited by non-English Europeans and Indians at the time? Texas was an independent country, which had only recently separated itself from Mexico; how on earth could we have assimilated that? How about California, a Spanish and then Mexican colony?
Dana (556f76) — 9/2/2007 @ 9:57 amWe all know that the TEAMSTERS is one of the nations most corupt of the labor unions and the SIERRA CLUB is as bad as they come SCREW CARL POPE
krazy kagu (fb44c4) — 9/2/2007 @ 10:52 amAs a Southern Californian already fed up to here with the fed’s pandering and appeasement to Mexico, this will no doubt contribute to more pollutants, more congestion, and most definitely it will be another big step in establishing the North American Union.
This situation with the truckers begs the obvious question: if you are driving say in California, are you not required by law to have a valid Calfornia drivers license, auto insurance and know that little book the DMV provides inside and out as evidenced by passing both the written and driving tests that all citizens are required to pass before being allowed to drive?
Oh. Wait. Citizens…. my mistake.
I see this as yet one more enormous concession to those who are not citizens. And this makes the slap in the face sting even more.
Dana (0f5732) — 9/2/2007 @ 11:07 amp.s. truckers in California are also required to have a Class A or Class B license…but why should that matter when we have morphed from a country of laws to a country of exceptions to the law….for a protected group of people….
Dana (0f5732) — 9/2/2007 @ 11:09 amElectrical, finish carpentry, HVAC and plumbing are the only trades that don’t have major immigrant workforces involved.
Mid-Atlantic, maybe. I AM a carpenter (framing), and in our mid-sized SoCal framing company of about 100 workers, I am one of maybe 35-40 US born citizens. And six of those are foremen. That is not a angry or frustrated rant. It is just offered to describe something most all of you only read about from questionable sources, or merely conjecture up from whatever political stance you entertain. I see it because I work in it. Thought you might appreciate some on the jobsite reality in this discussion…
And on the most recent condo job I just finished up with another company, I was the only carpenter except for the foreman and his son that spoke English as my primary language. But the main point is that ALL the different trades here in SoCal construction are predominantly Spanish speaking, both legal and illegal. I will say that the sheetmetal guys might be closer to 50/50.
However, it’s getting interesting as my industry has dwindled to about 1/4th of the last 4 or 5 years. Lots of layoffs. And jobs are as scarce as I’ve seen in the last 2 downturns of the early 80’s and 90’s. I expect there will some major changes as the guys I work with can’t afford to live here much longer.
allan (e3242b) — 9/2/2007 @ 11:35 amDana- those aren’t my figures about the percentage of illegals working in certain fields. They were published last spring by the Heritage Foundation, who fought against Jorge’s amnesty/guest worker scam. I follow this issue closely since the late 90’s, when I saw my field (computer software) being flooded with foreigners here in H-1B visas, for the so-called “shortage” of software developers. Another scam in order to lower salaries.
Those who think that illegal Latinos “do all the hard work” must live in areas flooded with them because in areas of the country with few illegals, young and low-skilled Americans do the “hard work”.
I don’t follow your argument about history Dana but I don’t think it’s very relevant. Every nation in the world “stole” land from more primitive cultures: the Chinese, the Italians, the Russians, the French, everyone. It’s a moot point to argue that line of reasoning.
Today, we fail to enforce our borders and interior immigration laws, as well as fail to insist on declaring an offical language (for govt. and public purposes), we fail to “gently force” immigrant children to learn English in school, thus we are becomming “North Latin America”. It’s a failure of will. Bleeding heart liberalism.
Jay (f6cafd) — 9/2/2007 @ 11:54 amThe US government is concerned that “further delays in the project will strain the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico.”
That has been the problem for the past 20 years, the US government is concerned about Mexicans, not Americans. At least the American truckers that will lose their jobs can always start mowing lawns, picking lettuce or working in poultry plants – oh wait.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 9/2/2007 @ 12:29 pmAllan,
I appreciate the information you provided in your comment. Who do you think will be the people that leave if/when your market downturns – the US citizens or the immigrants? What choices will you make if that happens?
DRJ (bfe07e) — 9/2/2007 @ 12:38 pmRe: comment #3 –
“Decade after decade, Mexico can’t improve itself because of its statist economy..”
You might want to visit Wikipedia and read up on Mexico’s economy and the effects of NAFTA.
I’m getting really tired of all the prejudice in this country against Mexico and its citizens. It’s a beautiful country, with wonderfully friendly people. Their economy is growing robustly, poverty is on decline, education levels are increasing, and in general they have become one of America’s largest trading partners, and a staunch supporter. Get your fact straight, then hopfully you and people people like you will stop spouting your irrational and intolerant bunk.
Jim (094554) — 9/2/2007 @ 1:07 pmJim: the reason for the ‘irrational and intolerant bunk’ is because no matter what wikipedia says about Mexico, millions of its citizens are in this country ILLEGALLY because they need work.
If Mexico is doing as good as the almighty wiki states, then why hasn’t the exodus slowed?
Lord Nazh© (899dce) — 9/2/2007 @ 3:59 pmAllan: I did say that the framing around here is heavily immigrant; it’s the finish carpentry that’s still mostly American. That might be the next to go, as there are more and more immigrants getting in on countertop installation, which puts kitchen cabinetry next in line.
Dana (c36902) — 9/2/2007 @ 7:36 pmBy the way, I’ve been in ready-mixed concrete supply for over twenty years; that’s the perspective from which I see it.
Dana (c36902) — 9/2/2007 @ 7:38 pmJim – you might wanna learn what Wikipedia is made up of – essentially amatuer(layman)- written entries.
Listen closely, Mexico has made some progress in the past ten years but the facts speak for themselves. People vote with their feet. Mexico is number one, say again, number one in the world for people exiting the country. That’s pathetic.
Mexico is the number one source of illegal aliens and illegal drugs into the USA. Mexico has had the advantage and the example of living next to the USA for centuries and yet, it has a pathetically poor performing economy and ranks among the most corrupt governments in the world.
Mexico’s plan is to send 30-40 million of their peasants into our country on top of the 15-20 million already here. The question is do we Americans want that? I don’t think many Americans are totally against immigration but what this involves can hardly be called normal immigration. It’s essentially a program to import 2nd class “citizens” to do labor. Too uncomfortably close to a 18th and 19th century program they had in the South of this nation.
Jay (f6cafd) — 9/3/2007 @ 2:45 amThing is, Jay, that’s a pretty crappy plan. The Mexicans who come to the United States are the ones who are willing to take the greatest risks and work the hardest: the methods they use to get here and migrate to Philadelphia aren’t exactly easy.
If Mexico is to ever get on its feet, it needs the toughest, hardest-working people more than anyone else — but those are precisely the ones who are leaving!
Dana (c36902) — 9/3/2007 @ 7:37 amDana #4, an historical note:
At the conclusion of the Mexican-American War in the 1840’s, the conditions of peace were caught up in the domestic debate over slavery due to the conditions of the Missouri Compromise. There was a great deal of feeling that Mexico should be treated just as another vanquished state, and her territory appropriated for inclusion into the USA.
This line of thought was especially strong in the South, as Southern pol’s thought that new States derived from Mexican territory would come into the Union as Slave States.
This was resisted by the Abolitionists and others in New England and the Mid-Atlantic states.
It is argueable as to the effect that territorial acquisition would have had on the lives and future of the people of Mexico, post 1850.
Personally, I don’t see how they could have been any the worse off.
Another Drew (a28ef4) — 9/3/2007 @ 10:55 amAddendum…
As to traffic signs utilyzing symbols instead of words, this was done to bring the US into harmony with EU practice, and was an encouragement to increased European travel within the US at a time when EU wealth was becoming a factor in international travel.
And, Yes, if you are driving for a living in the US, you should be required to be fluent in English. And the reciprocal is true for driving professionals in other countries (when going to Canada, be sure to add a tag “Eh!” on most statements – except in Quebec).
Another Drew (a28ef4) — 9/3/2007 @ 11:03 amI appreciate the information you provided in your comment. Who do you think will be the people that leave if/when your market downturns – the US citizens or the immigrants? What choices will you make if that happens?
Comment by DRJ — 9/2/2007 @ 12:38 pm
Oh, the immigrants have already begun returning to Mexico. That’s what I hear from the people I work with. Most are still hanging on with a little here, little there. They can exist on very, very little. The piece workers go first. They are single skilled workers who rely on volume building. That’s done for at least 3-5 years in my estimation. I’ve not seen this many empty units since I began back in 1973. And these are a lot of 4-5,000 sq ft, jumbo loan type products in the 1-2 million category. Condos will be easier to work off because of the relatively lower cost and lease potential.
To Dana: I didn’t mean to imply you were wrong about what you were describing in NC, just that out here it’s even more lop-sided than there. And much of our finish carpentry is broken into piece work…you know how that works.
DRJ, on a personal level, I’m just about finished at my age. I saw the light during the 80’s recession and began saving like a maniac. Quit buying new trucks, the whole shot. Learned how to trade stocks and options, and have a nice margin account and IRA fund that I actively trade. But, lord, do I love the smell of doug fir freshly cut and the feel of a nail gun in my hand. Strange combo, but I bet some of you guys have some strange deals going, too.
allan (f3d0e7) — 9/3/2007 @ 1:51 pmAllan, you’ve got to let that Douglas fir get to moisture equilibrium before you start putting nails in it!
Dana (d671ab) — 9/3/2007 @ 3:48 pmHah…I’m getting this from a guy who makes a living from mud. If I get my hands on it, it’s too late. Let the straight edge guys worry about it. Unless, I’m the straight edge guy.
Bet all this went right over the head of all the courtroom folks. Of course, I only get about 6% of what they’re talking about…
allan (f3d0e7) — 9/3/2007 @ 6:07 pmAllan,
I understand your #26 (and thanks for responding) but you’re right about #28. It went right over my head unless you’re talking about drywall.
DRJ (bfe07e) — 9/3/2007 @ 6:13 pmI got it. Forget it, Dana. You’re not going to get wood that won’t warp these days unless you’ve salvaged it from a 70-year old building that’s been torn down. I replicated the side entrance in my house with tongue-in-groove fir (like the original which somebody had glued asbestos tiles on) and come the first winter I had 1/8″ gaps.
nk (a6ecc6) — 9/3/2007 @ 6:30 pmnk, if you do any siding in the future, I highly recommend you look into what we call hardy board (it has a real name which I can’t bring into consciousness) which is a special cement product much like very thin backer board that they use as tile underlayment. You can get shingles or various kinds of traditional looking siding. The wood texture paints up fairly nice. And that stuff is tuff. But if you don’t straightedge your wall beforehand, uggggg-ly.
allan (f3d0e7) — 9/3/2007 @ 7:22 pmif you are driving say in California, are you not required by law to have a valid Calfornia drivers license, auto insurance and know that little book the DMV provides inside and out as evidenced by passing both the written and driving tests that all citizens are required to pass before being allowed to drive?
1. No! If you reside in Arizona and drive through California, you don’t have to have a California DL; a valid Arizona DL will do. So, too, if you are driving trucks cross country; as long as you have a valid license in your home state, and insurance, that should be sufficient.
2. We’ve attempted several times to provide a way for illegal immigrants to get a valid license and auto insurance and prove they know the DMV book; it’s been shot down by angry conservative opposition.
3. I don’t know enough to have a strong opinion on this. My general feeling is that the rules should be fair: if US licensed drivers are allowed to drive on Mexican roads, Mexican drivers should be allowed to drive on US roads. If US drivers are required to prove they can speak Spanish, Mexican drivers should be required to prove they can speak English, etc. I can’t see through the noise to tell if that’s the case here.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 9/3/2007 @ 8:03 pmAccording to the linked article, this is a reciprocal agreement and US truckers driving in Mexico are required to speak Spanish.
DRJ (bfe07e) — 9/3/2007 @ 8:07 pmHere’s an article discussing the availability of auto insurance to illegal immigrants. Some insurers do not require that their insured have a valid drivers license.
DRJ (bfe07e) — 9/3/2007 @ 8:13 pmDRJ, wrt #33: in that case, it’s perfectly reasonable for us to expect Mexican drivers driving here to speak English, and there isn’t a good reason to waive the rule.
WRT #34: I didn’t know that; my information is a few years old (from the fight we had in California over this four years ago). Thank you for the link!
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 9/3/2007 @ 8:27 pm