Compromises lead to tentative highway bill deal

TeamCaffee

Administrator
Staff member
Owner/Operator
June 27, 2012 6:01 PM

Breaking News Headlines: Business, Entertainment & World News - CBS News

Compromises lead to tentative highway bill deal


WASHINGTON — Compromises on sticky environmental and safety issues enabled House and Senate negotiators to reach a tentative agreement Wednesday on a two-year bill to overhaul federal highway and transit programs.

Congressional aides were still writing the agreement into legislative language late Wednesday, as lawmakers faced a tight deadline. The government's ability to pay for transportation programs, and its power to levy federal gasoline and diesel taxes, expires on Saturday.

Details of the agreement have not been released, but House and Senate aides, speaking on condition of anonymity because the deal wasn't final, described key compromises. They include:

— House Republicans agreed to drop insistence that the government approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline and to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating ash generated by coal-fired power plants. Republicans said the pipeline, which would transport oil from Canada's tar sands to Port Arthur, Texas, would create jobs and lower U.S. gas prices. Opponents said it would have no impact on gas prices, and most of the oil will be shipped overseas.

Coal ash is used as an ingredient in some types of cement. It also contains a variety of toxic substances. Republicans wanted to let states decide how it should be regulated. Opponents of the proposal said a national standard is needed.

— The Senate agreed to House GOP demands that federal requirements for environmental impact studies of highway and transit construction projects be revised to speed up the time it takes to complete projects. Republicans argued that the 15 years on average that it takes to complete a major transportation project is too long. The compromise is aimed at cutting that time in half.

— The Senate agreed to effectively reduce money available for bike paths, pedestrian safety projects and other "transportation enhancements" by making them compete with other transportation programs for the same pool of funds. Republicans derided the program as wasting money on planting flowers. Supporters said that while highway landscaping was one project category eligible for funds, more than half the money is used for sidewalks, crosswalks, medians, bike lanes and other safety-related improvements. Cutting funding for biking and pedestrian projects was a high priority for House GOP freshmen, who said the money would be better spent on roads and bridges.

— The agreement includes language directing 80 percent of the Clean Water Act fines from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill to restoration of communities in gulf states hard hit by the spill. But the Senate agreed to the House GOP's demand that $1.4 billion for general land and water conservation be stripped from the measure.

— At the insistence of House Republicans, the Senate dropped a safety provision that would have required commercial trucks to be equipped with devices that keep track of how many hours drivers spend behind the wheel. The purpose of the devices is to keep drivers who haven't had enough rest off the road. The provision was supported by large commercial truck companies, safety advocates and labor unions, but opposed by drivers who own their trucks.

— Also in response to a House GOP demand, the Senate dropped a provision that would have required automakers to equip cars with computer programs that record and save details of the vehicle's operation immediately before and after an accident. Safety advocates said the "event data recorders" would help accident investigators and improve safety. GOP lawmakers expressed concern the "black boxes" would be an invasion of motorists' privacy.

Joe Rajkovacz
Director of Governmental Affairs &
Communications

Western Trucking Alliance
An interstate conference of the CCTA

334 N. Euclid Avenue
Upland, California. 91786

909-982-9898
909-985-2348 (fax)
 
Last edited:

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
They dropped the mandate, but the battle continues, courtesy of the FMCSA. It will be decided & appealed a lot more times before it's over, count on it.
I like the Republican's stance, except for the crack about "wasting money planting flowers". Planting flowers is NOT wasting money!
;)
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
There is a LOT wrong with this bill. They tacked on the student loan thing and several things for defense spending. LOTS of pork. 100% of this money should go on federal roads and bridges, not bus subsides. bike paths, sidewalks OR flowers. Just another boondoggle forced on us by a corrupt government.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Transit & transportation include buses and bike paths, and are included in federal funding because the money is parceled out to states & cities..
The flowers are generally supplied & planted by local Garden Clubs, not the federal government, FYI.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Transit & transportation include buses and bike paths, and are included in federal funding because the money is parceled out to states & cities..
The flowers are generally supplied & planted by local Garden Clubs, not the federal government, FYI.

Buses should be run by private industry, not the government. People who ride bicycles should pay for their own paths. People who hunt realized that funds were needed for habitat protection, biologists etc. SO, we ASKED for a tax on our equipment, the Pittman/Robinson tax to fund it. Bike people should do the same.

Federal fuel tax SHOULD be used ONLY on federal ROADS and BRIDGES. I am aware of who plants MOST of the flowers. There should, however, not be ONE PENNY of federal fuel tax money spent on them.

The idea that government should be taking over, or competing with, private industry, like bus or train service is a very fascist/socialist/communist idea. Very similar to what you see in the socialist states in Europe.
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
FYI, per OOIDA today on Nemo show, EOBR requirement is in the bill and will be passed by both houses of Congress and on the Presidents desk by Saturday and he will sign the bill into law.

OOIDA, spin on there loss in Congress now is it will not be a rule for years to come, even thou Congress says 1 year to make a rule and also FMCSA is working on a EOBR rule right now. I expect a rule within the year and 3 years to have everyone with a EOBR.

If I needed to log then I would get one now since I'm watched by my Qcomm now. Why wait and have prices go up when they become mandatory.
 

moose

Veteran Expediter
Well Beachbum, i have to give it to you. you won!
Congratz.
enjoy your freedom .
it will be short lived.
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I didn't win anything and you didn't lose anything. The only ones that lost are the ones who violate the 11/14 to make a living.

I've read and heard enough to see the writing on the wall. Heck on the BCO forum people were complaining that if they had to have a EOBR they couldn't make their deliveries on time, that just means they have to violate the rules to make the deliveries.

Heard enough people on the radio, complaining that once they went to EOBR's they had to change their appointment times, seems to me cheating to make deliveries.

You see a level playing field comes down to everyone running on the same set of rules when it comes to HOS
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
What I think is so funny all these OOIDA members here have not wrote one thing about the OOIDA defeat on the EOBR issue on their own forum. They have their heads in the sand over there. Now their trying to get funding taken away even thou FMCSA is working on the EOBR without this new law.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I didn't win anything and you didn't lose anything. The only ones that lost are the ones who violate the 11/14 to make a living.

I've read and heard enough to see the writing on the wall. Heck on the BCO forum people were complaining that if they had to have a EOBR they couldn't make their deliveries on time, that just means they have to violate the rules to make the deliveries.

Heard enough people on the radio, complaining that once they went to EOBR's they had to change their appointment times, seems to me cheating to make deliveries.

You see a level playing field comes down to everyone running on the same set of rules when it comes to HOS

EOBR's do NOT level the playing field. Most of us have to pay for ours, company drivers and Mexican trucks do not. Shoot, U.S. taxpayers are paying for the EOBR's in the Mexican trucks, yep, level.
 

moose

Veteran Expediter
Please do correct me if i'm wrong, but you are making a living driving an Expedite van right?
if so then you are indeed on the losing side, as highly trained experienced professional truckers WILL flood the van expedite market in years to come.
IF any VAN drivers reading this lines, i hope you will get your business & personal belonging well paid for in advanced, as IF this becomes the law of the roads, professional drivers will flood the market in search of a compliance shelter. this phenomena will not be the good o'l revolving door, they will come to expedite to stay, and they are very good and well funded in what they do.
you (no you...you/you...o'h heck...) can expect low...VERY low rates and loads availability for a real long time !!!
good luck.
 

xmudman

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Moose, I'm not 100% convinced about this. Truckers leaving big rigs in droves just to avoid EOBRs?

They'll have to adapt to being much more confined in a van than they ever were in a truck-with-sleeper, and they'll have to get used to not moving for days at a time. Plus, they will still have to compete for freight with straight trucks, not to mention LTL companies.

We shall see, I guess; you may end up being absolutely right...
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Mexican trucks only have theirs paid for till they get permanent rights at that time they turn those units into the DOT, then they don't have to have a EOBR just like we don't have to have one.
You also missed the point if you listen to most OOIDA members or OOIDA, when it come to the data from those units,the data belongs to FMCSA and the FMCSA can and does track the vehicles. I

I guess you want the FMCSA to follow you all the time if you want them to pay for the units.

As for paying for them there not as high dollar as OOIDA wants you to believe, You can get one from Rand NcNally for 800 bucks log book and tracking service for about 40 to 50 bucks a month. Heck I believe OOIDA will get involved with their own units when they see a profit in the service.

EOBR's do NOT level the playing field. Most of us have to pay for ours, company drivers and Mexican trucks do not. Shoot, U.S. taxpayers are paying for the EOBR's in the Mexican trucks, yep, level.
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Moose, I'm not 100% convinced about this. Truckers leaving big rigs in droves just to avoid EOBRs?

They'll have to adapt to being much more confined in a van than they ever were in a truck-with-sleeper, and they'll have to get used to not moving for days at a time. Plus, they will still have to compete for freight with straight trucks, not to mention LTL companies.

We shall see, I guess; you may end up being absolutely right...

I have to agree with you on this one. Even at LEAM they have said most who try Vanning go right back to big trucks because they cannot get used to sitting for days on end between loads.
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I don't worry about my rates because I get good rates now even thou the van devision in expediting is flooded now. I made my plans on how much I'll gross this year from the min to the max depending on how much I want to work. Which isn't much.

Plus I'm never on the losing side of anything I do, because I adapt to change. Make me log I can adapt to that by either staying in the van or purchasing a straight truck. Have a EOBR no big deal just have to run legal, no more 900 mile days.

I have 4.5 years till I semi retire, therefore no worried. Was also thinking about working local in Ca driving a straight truck once I move back there in Aug...





Please do correct me if i'm wrong, but you are making a living driving an Expedite van right?
if so then you are indeed on the losing side, as highly trained experienced professional truckers WILL flood the van expedite market in years to come.
IF any VAN drivers reading this lines, i hope you will get your business & personal belonging well paid for in advanced, as IF this becomes the law of the roads, professional drivers will flood the market in search of a compliance shelter. this phenomena will not be the good o'l revolving door, they will come to expedite to stay, and they are very good and well funded in what they do.
you (no you...you/you...o'h heck...) can expect low...VERY low rates and loads availability for a real long time !!!
good luck.
 
Last edited:

Brisco

Expert Expediter
Latest News............

TheTrucker.com - America's Trucking Newspaper

The EOBR ammendment/requirement did not make it this session...............

They killed it by simply saying......using my best "Soup Nazi" voice here..... "No Funds For You"!

Hopefully the next administration that comes into the Whitehouse this January will tell the Unions and such to stick it you know where with this ridiculous requirement and kills all future talks about it once and for all.
 

beachbum

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Sorry, but the amendment to strip funding is in another bill that the Senate wont tak up till next year and that doesn't mean it will make the final cut there. Plus, I could be wrong, if the Senate doesn't take the bill up till next year then the bill that this amendment has to be revoted on in the HOR.


Latest News............

TheTrucker.com - America's Trucking Newspaper

The EOBR ammendment/requirement did not make it this session...............

They killed it by simply saying......using my best "Soup Nazi" voice here..... "No Funds For You"!

Hopefully the next administration that comes into the Whitehouse this January will tell the Unions and such to stick it you know where with this ridiculous requirement and kills all future talks about it once and for all.
 
Last edited:

moose

Veteran Expediter
. Was also thinking about working local in Ca driving a straight truck once I move back there in Aug...
Then you have to look into secured airfreight that goes into passenger aircraft.
heard of one trucker that do just that, in a day cab str8.
mostly over night short runs from a secured terminal into Ontario,LAX & Orange.
all bunch of hoops, but very good money.
 
Top