Some states are considering it to be required to speak and read the English language in order to take the CDL test. Although I can hear a bunch of equal rights activists and aliens screaming this isn't fair I have to applaud these states. The ability to speak our native language should be required to work and live in this country. You are suppose to be able to communicate effectively in English to get citizenship in this country.
In honesty I don't have a problem with someone retaining their native language, but when you are dealing with the American public you need to be able to speak, write, read and understand the language of our country.
If I had a desire to go down to Mexico or perhaps over to Italy in order to work and live I would only consider it proper to learn the native language in order to properly communicate with the people of that country.
All states should pass a English only CDL exam. And I don't believe anyone should be grandfathered in just because they already have one.
Last 10 Posts
English required to take CDL.
Category: General
Posted on Sat, Jan 26 2008 @ 11:04 AM [CST]
[Permalink] [Comments - 2] [Send Article] [Improper]Transportation Panel screams for more money to waste
In order to make it sound good "Would you pay an extra 66 cents a day for less traffic, better public transit and fewer people dying on highways?"
Yea right. The transportation panel is urging a 40 cent per gallon tax increase over 5 years to "fix the aging infrastructure".
Now they claim the avg motorist would only pay 41-66 cents a day more. What they won't say is that the avg truck will pay 8.20-13.20 more a day.
Yea.. I know you people are screaming so what. Thats a small price to pay for the roads you tear up. But, guess what. We already pay 12,000.00 plus every year in taxes for the highways.
Granted republicans are saying that this "don't stand a snowballs chance in hell of passing" but with the dumocrats in control of congress I won't hold my breath. I personally think they would have more money if they just controlled spending on what they get instead of raising a tax to acquire more money to waste on some other crappy social program. Cause lets face it. How much money that is raised for the highway system actually gets spent on the highway system? 65% of it gets eaten up with all the red tape crap already. Then I would guess another 30% gets transfered to pay for some gay a$$ social program that some dumocrat thought up to get more votes. And the 3% of whats left goes into the pocket of whom ever offers the biggest bribe to grant them the contract so they can overcharge the government by 80% to collect the other 2%, then fix the road just well enough that they need to be re approved the next year to fix it again. Anyone else see the problem with this whole scenario?
So what is a solution to our highway system?
It really isn't that difficult to figure out. Put the money collected for the highway system into the highway system. Hire companies that build a road to last more then 10 minutes. Perhaps call some engineers from Germany to teach them how to build a road. Don't see the Autobahn needing repair every other day. So yes you spend a little more for it up front. But you aren't pouring another 20 million into it the following year at a higher price then it was the year before.
Suddenly you have a infrastructure that will last. You didn't raise taxes because you took the money you were giving to Bertha to have her 15 bastard children and eat steak while feeding their 6 dogs ground chuck (food stamps don't buy dog food) and living in an apartment that is subsidized so she only pays 50 dollars a month for a 13 room house while the government picks up the rest of the 1500.00 a month tab. But lets keep in mind that the dumocrat that promised her all this free ride is still getting her vote. Okay I have digressed. Sorry.
Back on topic, if they eliminate the waste and red tape I am sure there is plenty of funds. If it wasn't for all that the roads wouldn't be in the shape they are in.
Of course in their report (this commission has to be comprised of dumocrats) they claim that not passing the "Gas tax" risks "tens of thousands of highway casualties each year". Hey want to reduce that? jam cell phones in cars so they don't work! But the evidence of dumocrat influence is all over this. Comments like "We don't want to see the transportation system to see the same fate of the New Orleans Levees." "A failure to act will be catastrophic to this nation". etc. Scare tactics again and again.
However on a positive note there appears to be some reason in this commission. The commissions chairwoman Mary Peters criticized the proposal saying it would send millions of dollars to Washington to end up (with the rest of the highway funds) as political pork. Good for her! However she is also supporting the privatization of highways and toll roads. Which on new roads I don't care. But on exisiting highways I think they should be off limits to privatization.
I guess we shall have to wait and see. Either way I am sure the dumocrats will find a way to raise our expenses which is as Rep. Charles Grassley put it a "fast lane to a recession".
Yea right. The transportation panel is urging a 40 cent per gallon tax increase over 5 years to "fix the aging infrastructure".
Now they claim the avg motorist would only pay 41-66 cents a day more. What they won't say is that the avg truck will pay 8.20-13.20 more a day.
Yea.. I know you people are screaming so what. Thats a small price to pay for the roads you tear up. But, guess what. We already pay 12,000.00 plus every year in taxes for the highways.
Granted republicans are saying that this "don't stand a snowballs chance in hell of passing" but with the dumocrats in control of congress I won't hold my breath. I personally think they would have more money if they just controlled spending on what they get instead of raising a tax to acquire more money to waste on some other crappy social program. Cause lets face it. How much money that is raised for the highway system actually gets spent on the highway system? 65% of it gets eaten up with all the red tape crap already. Then I would guess another 30% gets transfered to pay for some gay a$$ social program that some dumocrat thought up to get more votes. And the 3% of whats left goes into the pocket of whom ever offers the biggest bribe to grant them the contract so they can overcharge the government by 80% to collect the other 2%, then fix the road just well enough that they need to be re approved the next year to fix it again. Anyone else see the problem with this whole scenario?
So what is a solution to our highway system?
It really isn't that difficult to figure out. Put the money collected for the highway system into the highway system. Hire companies that build a road to last more then 10 minutes. Perhaps call some engineers from Germany to teach them how to build a road. Don't see the Autobahn needing repair every other day. So yes you spend a little more for it up front. But you aren't pouring another 20 million into it the following year at a higher price then it was the year before.
Suddenly you have a infrastructure that will last. You didn't raise taxes because you took the money you were giving to Bertha to have her 15 bastard children and eat steak while feeding their 6 dogs ground chuck (food stamps don't buy dog food) and living in an apartment that is subsidized so she only pays 50 dollars a month for a 13 room house while the government picks up the rest of the 1500.00 a month tab. But lets keep in mind that the dumocrat that promised her all this free ride is still getting her vote. Okay I have digressed. Sorry.
Back on topic, if they eliminate the waste and red tape I am sure there is plenty of funds. If it wasn't for all that the roads wouldn't be in the shape they are in.
Of course in their report (this commission has to be comprised of dumocrats) they claim that not passing the "Gas tax" risks "tens of thousands of highway casualties each year". Hey want to reduce that? jam cell phones in cars so they don't work! But the evidence of dumocrat influence is all over this. Comments like "We don't want to see the transportation system to see the same fate of the New Orleans Levees." "A failure to act will be catastrophic to this nation". etc. Scare tactics again and again.
However on a positive note there appears to be some reason in this commission. The commissions chairwoman Mary Peters criticized the proposal saying it would send millions of dollars to Washington to end up (with the rest of the highway funds) as political pork. Good for her! However she is also supporting the privatization of highways and toll roads. Which on new roads I don't care. But on exisiting highways I think they should be off limits to privatization.
I guess we shall have to wait and see. Either way I am sure the dumocrats will find a way to raise our expenses which is as Rep. Charles Grassley put it a "fast lane to a recession".
Category: General
Posted on Sat, Jan 26 2008 @ 10:55 AM [CST]
[Permalink] [Comments - 0] [Send Article] [Improper]Missouri Lawmaker attempting to make state even worse!
A Missouri state lawmaker, Paul LeVota, Dumocrat from Independence introduced a bill in that would limit the amount of hours drivers can spend behind the wheel in the state.
Trucks would be limited to 9 hours of driving time within the state of Missouri, which in most cases wouldn't effect the standard OTR driver, as most of us are either passing through the state or if we deliver are not driving the whole time. But it is still a law that would in effect over-ride the federal regulations allowing us to drive 11 hours. (Law requires drivers to obey which ever law is the more stringent.)
This same lawmaker is also pushing for split speed limits in the state for trucks. Requiring trucks to run 10 mph slower then all other traffic. This is a state that people already think they are race car drivers in? The limits would drop trucks traveling on Interstate highways currently marked at 70mph to run 60mph thus causing more passing problems and clogging up traffic more then it is already congested. On state highways that are marked at 65 trucks would be dropped to 55 and 60 mph posted 2 lane roads dropped to 50mph. This would cause all kinds of problems there as cars would be struggling to get around at all times dramatically increasing the chances of accidents.
On top of this LeVota is wanting to slow trucks down to 45 in the major cities such as Kansas City and St. Louis. Cities that are already plagued with traffic problems. Slowing trucks down would only serve to increase these problems since the trucks would have 2 lanes completely plugged up.
The bill also slows trucks down an additional 10mph in construction zones which isn't really a bad thing. I think to many trucks drive to fast through construction zones already and those guys are just out there trying to make a living. Slowing down the trucks in these zones would slow cars down as well creating a little safer place for the workers.
These laws would make MO. almost as bad as Calif. This is strictly about money! This dumocrat is looking for a way to generate more revenue to help pay for the states struggling finances since it is over burdened with social programs. As all states that need money the first place they want to turn is the trucking industry. After all whom better to get money from then the companies that have millions of dollars to buy all these trucks.
Forget the fact that a lot of the trucks out there are owned by glorified company drivers (owner/ops leasing equipment or running for so much per mile based on what a dispatcher tells them to do) and Owner Operators who with high fuel costs are already having a tough time making ends meet. All they see is the Weenie Wagons, Swifts and JB's.
We need to step up and make a voice heard that this would be a bad idea. Nothing good can come of this! If MO. gets a law like this passed what is to stop other states from jumping on the band wagon. There is already a bill out in front of the CVSA and FMCSA that wants to force all trucks manufactured after 1990 to be equipped with governors limiting top end to 68mph.
Okay perhaps Cletus does need a little control on him to keep his whoop whoop drive down to a safe level, but it isn't the job of the state or feds to control that. The company he is working for should... As far as the glorified Owner/Op Cletus.. no problem , sucking all the fuel will eventually take care of him financially so the bank will take him off the road.
Which isn't a bad thing since eventually I will want to trade in for another truck and his repo might be just what I am looking for.
Trucks would be limited to 9 hours of driving time within the state of Missouri, which in most cases wouldn't effect the standard OTR driver, as most of us are either passing through the state or if we deliver are not driving the whole time. But it is still a law that would in effect over-ride the federal regulations allowing us to drive 11 hours. (Law requires drivers to obey which ever law is the more stringent.)
This same lawmaker is also pushing for split speed limits in the state for trucks. Requiring trucks to run 10 mph slower then all other traffic. This is a state that people already think they are race car drivers in? The limits would drop trucks traveling on Interstate highways currently marked at 70mph to run 60mph thus causing more passing problems and clogging up traffic more then it is already congested. On state highways that are marked at 65 trucks would be dropped to 55 and 60 mph posted 2 lane roads dropped to 50mph. This would cause all kinds of problems there as cars would be struggling to get around at all times dramatically increasing the chances of accidents.
On top of this LeVota is wanting to slow trucks down to 45 in the major cities such as Kansas City and St. Louis. Cities that are already plagued with traffic problems. Slowing trucks down would only serve to increase these problems since the trucks would have 2 lanes completely plugged up.
The bill also slows trucks down an additional 10mph in construction zones which isn't really a bad thing. I think to many trucks drive to fast through construction zones already and those guys are just out there trying to make a living. Slowing down the trucks in these zones would slow cars down as well creating a little safer place for the workers.
These laws would make MO. almost as bad as Calif. This is strictly about money! This dumocrat is looking for a way to generate more revenue to help pay for the states struggling finances since it is over burdened with social programs. As all states that need money the first place they want to turn is the trucking industry. After all whom better to get money from then the companies that have millions of dollars to buy all these trucks.
Forget the fact that a lot of the trucks out there are owned by glorified company drivers (owner/ops leasing equipment or running for so much per mile based on what a dispatcher tells them to do) and Owner Operators who with high fuel costs are already having a tough time making ends meet. All they see is the Weenie Wagons, Swifts and JB's.
We need to step up and make a voice heard that this would be a bad idea. Nothing good can come of this! If MO. gets a law like this passed what is to stop other states from jumping on the band wagon. There is already a bill out in front of the CVSA and FMCSA that wants to force all trucks manufactured after 1990 to be equipped with governors limiting top end to 68mph.
Okay perhaps Cletus does need a little control on him to keep his whoop whoop drive down to a safe level, but it isn't the job of the state or feds to control that. The company he is working for should... As far as the glorified Owner/Op Cletus.. no problem , sucking all the fuel will eventually take care of him financially so the bank will take him off the road.
Which isn't a bad thing since eventually I will want to trade in for another truck and his repo might be just what I am looking for.
Category: General
Posted on Sat, Jan 26 2008 @ 10:53 AM [CST]
[Permalink] [Comments - 0] [Send Article] [Improper]
