Nafta SuperHighway

[sonoma1993]

[/QNafta Super Highway

Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.

Once complete, the new road will allow containers from the Far East to enter the United States through the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas, bypassing the Longshoreman?s Union in the process. The Mexican trucks, without the involvement of the Teamsters Union, will drive on what will be the nation?s most modern highway straight into the heart of America. The Mexican trucks will cross border in FAST lanes, checked only electronically by the new ?SENTRI? system. The first customs stop will be a Mexican customs office in Kansas City, their new Smart Port complex, a facility being built for Mexico at a cost of $3 million to the U.S. taxpayers in Kansas City.

As incredible as this plan may seem to some readers, the first Trans-Texas Corridor segment of the NAFTA Super Highway is ready to begin construction next year. Various U.S. government agencies, dozens of state agencies, and scores of private NGOs (non-governmental organizations) have been working behind the scenes to create the NAFTA Super Highway, despite the lack of comment on the plan by President Bush. The American public is largely asleep to this key piece of the coming ?North American Union? that government planners in the new trilateral region of United States, Canada and Mexico are about to drive into reality.

I think this could be a good idea. It'll bring much need jobs to our country. i assume this super highway would take what a good 5,6 years to build maybe longer, or maybe shorter.

I was reading about this article on my local forum website, some of the user there are posting some odd stuff about this thing

tyronne posted =i sure hope it's not true and just a bunch of lib BS

psycoglock posted
It sure does look like a Liberal tactic to bring good honest hard working patriotic americans to their sick, dark twisted world of lies, hatred and corruption

What I meant is that Life is the battle between good and evil. Liberalism is the EVIL in the world and they won't stop anything to put a spin on a topic, misplace blame in order to turn true americans against others in society. Liberalism is today's modern Communists, which won't hold back to beef the ranks of their unwanted views and their tax and spend mentality.I can get technical if you like but this is as clear and concise as I can put it.

 

[Engineer]

Last weeks locked topic on the same subject.

 

[MadRat]

Nafta Superhighway

This is a highly charged topic.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Hot Taco Expressway

 

[ScudRunner]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Last weeks locked topic on the same subject.

I can't see why it was locked?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: ScudRunner

Originally posted by: Engineer
Last weeks locked topic on the same subject.

I can't see why it was locked?

To be honest, I didn't either.

 

[Rainsford]

You do realize that "Human Events" is not a real news source, don't you? While I'm sure there is something tangentially related going on, I'm pretty sure they got most of it wrong...if only because they have no sources and the article reads like something that would be rejected by your local college newspaper.

 

[Rainsford]

Also, some quick back of the envelope math suggests to me that a highway that wide would have AT LEAST 25 lanes in each direction. Doesn't that seem like quite a lot for the alleged purpose? Shipping to coastal US ports would still be much more efficient for destinations on the coasts themselves, and much of our population does in fact live in coastal areas near ports. So the only real use I could see of something like this would be to supply the Midwest and other central areas...something I don't think would require such a huge highway.

Geez, if you're going to have a fake story, at least make sure your fake facts make sense.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Also, some quick back of the envelope math suggests to me that a highway that wide would have AT LEAST 25 lanes in each direction. Doesn't that seem like quite a lot for the alleged purpose? Shipping to coastal US ports would still be much more efficient for destinations on the coasts themselves, and much of our population does in fact live in coastal areas near ports. So the only real use I could see of something like this would be to supply the Midwest and other central areas...something I don't think would require such a huge highway.

Geez, if you're going to have a fake story, at least make sure your fake facts make sense.

It also includes space for rail, telecom and pipelines. All in all this seems like a very smart thing to do.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Also, some quick back of the envelope math suggests to me that a highway that wide would have AT LEAST 25 lanes in each direction. Doesn't that seem like quite a lot for the alleged purpose? Shipping to coastal US ports would still be much more efficient for destinations on the coasts themselves, and much of our population does in fact live in coastal areas near ports. So the only real use I could see of something like this would be to supply the Midwest and other central areas...something I don't think would require such a huge highway.

Geez, if you're going to have a fake story, at least make sure your fake facts make sense.

It also includes space for rail, telecom and pipelines. All in all this seems like a very smart thing to do.

Why?

That's the problem I'm having with this whole concept, it doesn't seem to make economic sense. Our current port system is well developed and has a LOT of setup behind it, and as far as I'm aware, it works pretty well. Fundamentally changing the flow of goods into our country JUST so we can use cheap Mexican dock workers and drivers doesn't seem like a good payoff from my perspective. It's just not this imaginary highway that would have to be built (and I stand behind my use of the word imaginary, even with rail, telcome and pipelines, there is no way it would need to be 400 yards wide), it's all the infrastructure to support it and branch off of it. Not to mention modernizing and improving what I'm sure are less than stellar Mexican ports. What possible reason is there to do any of this?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Also, some quick back of the envelope math suggests to me that a highway that wide would have AT LEAST 25 lanes in each direction. Doesn't that seem like quite a lot for the alleged purpose? Shipping to coastal US ports would still be much more efficient for destinations on the coasts themselves, and much of our population does in fact live in coastal areas near ports. So the only real use I could see of something like this would be to supply the Midwest and other central areas...something I don't think would require such a huge highway.

Geez, if you're going to have a fake story, at least make sure your fake facts make sense.

It also includes space for rail, telecom and pipelines. All in all this seems like a very smart thing to do.

Why?

That's the problem I'm having with this whole concept, it doesn't seem to make economic sense. Our current port system is well developed and has a LOT of setup behind it, and as far as I'm aware, it works pretty well. Fundamentally changing the flow of goods into our country JUST so we can use cheap Mexican dock workers and drivers doesn't seem like a good payoff from my perspective. It's just not this imaginary highway that would have to be built (and I stand behind my use of the word imaginary, even with rail, telcome and pipelines, there is no way it would need to be 400 yards wide), it's all the infrastructure to support it and branch off of it. Not to mention modernizing and improving what I'm sure are less than stellar Mexican ports. What possible reason is there to do any of this?

THis is not just about cheap dockworkers, but it is a factor. Lets face it Canada and Mexico are our largest trade partners. THey are also large suppliers of oil and gas to ths country. Frankly I dont see a problem with an express lane that connects Canada and Mexico. I think it would be easy to argue the case for such new infrastructure connecting the east and west of this country as well.

And 400 yerds wide is not that wide as you would want distance between your pipelines, railines and highways.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Also, some quick back of the envelope math suggests to me that a highway that wide would have AT LEAST 25 lanes in each direction. Doesn't that seem like quite a lot for the alleged purpose? Shipping to coastal US ports would still be much more efficient for destinations on the coasts themselves, and much of our population does in fact live in coastal areas near ports. So the only real use I could see of something like this would be to supply the Midwest and other central areas...something I don't think would require such a huge highway.

Geez, if you're going to have a fake story, at least make sure your fake facts make sense.

It also includes space for rail, telecom and pipelines. All in all this seems like a very smart thing to do.

Why?

That's the problem I'm having with this whole concept, it doesn't seem to make economic sense. Our current port system is well developed and has a LOT of setup behind it, and as far as I'm aware, it works pretty well. Fundamentally changing the flow of goods into our country JUST so we can use cheap Mexican dock workers and drivers doesn't seem like a good payoff from my perspective. It's just not this imaginary highway that would have to be built (and I stand behind my use of the word imaginary, even with rail, telcome and pipelines, there is no way it would need to be 400 yards wide), it's all the infrastructure to support it and branch off of it. Not to mention modernizing and improving what I'm sure are less than stellar Mexican ports. What possible reason is there to do any of this?

THis is not just about cheap dockworkers, but it is a factor. Lets face it Canada and Mexico are our largest trade partners. THey are also large suppliers of oil and gas to ths country. Frankly I dont see a problem with an express lane that connects Canada and Mexico. I think it would be easy to argue the case for such new infrastructure connecting the east and west of this country as well.

And 400 yerds wide is not that wide as you would want distance between your pipelines, railines and highways.

Sure, but is there a problem with what we've got right now? You say you could argue the case for something similar connecting east and west in this country...and again I ask why. Is there something lacking with what we've got now?

 

[1prophet]

And the amount of eminent domain that would be required would cause a national uproar if not a civil war.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: 1prophet
And the amount of eminent domain that would be required would cause a national uproar if not a civil war.

Yes, but we also managed to build the interstate highway system without those issues stopping it.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: 1prophet
And the amount of eminent domain that would be required would cause a national uproar if not a civil war.

Yes, but we also managed to build the interstate highway system without those issues stopping it.

How close are you to this beast???

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: 1prophet
And the amount of eminent domain that would be required would cause a national uproar if not a civil war.

Yes, but we also managed to build the interstate highway system without those issues stopping it.

Far less population back then and people trusted the government more when they told them it was for the good of the country.. All someone who is opposed to this has to say is they now not only will take your job for cheaper, lower prices but now they want your house too.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Also, some quick back of the envelope math suggests to me that a highway that wide would have AT LEAST 25 lanes in each direction. Doesn't that seem like quite a lot for the alleged purpose? Shipping to coastal US ports would still be much more efficient for destinations on the coasts themselves, and much of our population does in fact live in coastal areas near ports. So the only real use I could see of something like this would be to supply the Midwest and other central areas...something I don't think would require such a huge highway.

Geez, if you're going to have a fake story, at least make sure your fake facts make sense.

It also includes space for rail, telecom and pipelines. All in all this seems like a very smart thing to do.

Why?

That's the problem I'm having with this whole concept, it doesn't seem to make economic sense. Our current port system is well developed and has a LOT of setup behind it, and as far as I'm aware, it works pretty well. Fundamentally changing the flow of goods into our country JUST so we can use cheap Mexican dock workers and drivers doesn't seem like a good payoff from my perspective. It's just not this imaginary highway that would have to be built (and I stand behind my use of the word imaginary, even with rail, telcome and pipelines, there is no way it would need to be 400 yards wide), it's all the infrastructure to support it and branch off of it. Not to mention modernizing and improving what I'm sure are less than stellar Mexican ports. What possible reason is there to do any of this?

THis is not just about cheap dockworkers, but it is a factor. Lets face it Canada and Mexico are our largest trade partners. THey are also large suppliers of oil and gas to ths country. Frankly I dont see a problem with an express lane that connects Canada and Mexico. I think it would be easy to argue the case for such new infrastructure connecting the east and west of this country as well.

And 400 yerds wide is not that wide as you would want distance between your pipelines, railines and highways.

Sure, but is there a problem with what we've got right now? You say you could argue the case for something similar connecting east and west in this country...and again I ask why. Is there something lacking with what we've got now?

Railways are clogged with rail traffic.
Highway are clogged with semi traffic. I personaly would not minding seperating freight and commuter traffic as much as possible.
As far as pipelines, look what happened last summer with katrina. I guess you like having one major distribution point for gas and oil. Would also make it easier to refinaries farther inland.

Minus the property rights issues that will arise, I really dont see why this should be a problem at all.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: 1prophet
And the amount of eminent domain that would be required would cause a national uproar if not a civil war.

Yes, but we also managed to build the interstate highway system without those issues stopping it.

How close are you to this beast???

Not too close.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: ScudRunner

Originally posted by: Engineer
Last weeks locked topic on the same subject.

I can't see why it was locked?

To be honest, I didn't either.

Hijacked? I realized that I was contributing to it - others may have continued the mis-direction

 

[ECUHITMAN]

I am not sure if This is a real news source, but if you type NAFTA Superhighway into Google News search it does come back with quite a few similar articles (or maybe exactly the same pasted onto a different website).

The above linked article has a few things in it that might make it more credible:

The current plan for the NAFTA Super Corridor calls for the construction of a 12-lane highway (six lanes in each direction) along Interstate 35. The Kansas City SmartPort is designed to be the central hub in the planned NAFTA north-south superhighway cutting through the heart of the United States.

and

To speed the crossing at Laredo, Texas, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America working groups within the U.S. Department of Commerce will allow Mexican trucks to be equipped with electronic FAST technology so the trucks can cross the border in express lanes.

Assuming this is true, I kind of think it is a good thing. The more jobs it creates in other countries (Mexico) the better the overall global (or at least the continent) economy will be.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Trans Texas Corridor
is very real.

The TTC

Privatley owned, controlled by foriegn investors, and a toll road to the general public.

What is Cintra-Zachry and what is its role?

Cintra-Zachry represents a coalition of Texas, national and international transportation experts with decades of experience in constructing, operating and managing major public and private roadway systems.

The team includes Ferrovial-Agroman, Earth Tech Inc.; PriceWaterhouseCooper LLP; JP Morgan Securities Inc.; Pate Engineers Inc.; Rodriguez Transportation Group; and Bracewell and Patterson.

Cintra is headquartered in Madrid, Spain, and is one of the world's largest private-sector developers of transport infrastructure.

Zachry is headquartered in San Antonio. The company provides a variety of services including construction, project development and construction management.

Cintra-Zachry is in the beginning stages of developing a master plan and building the first section of the corridor.



The gift that you get to keep paying for.

How will the TTC-35 be funded?

The Cintra-Zachry contract includes an investment of $6 billion to fully design, construct and operate a four-lane, 316-mi. toll road between Dallas and SanAntonio as the initial segment of TTC-35.

The contract also includes a payment to the state of $1.2 billion for operating the initial segment as a toll facility, which the state may use to fund improvements or high-speed and commuter rail projects along the Interstate 35 corridor.

The agreement authorizes Cintra-Zachry to begin the master development and financial plan. This plan will guide the development of a new system of roads, rail and utilities. The cost of the planning effort is estimated at $3.5 million and will take approximately 12 to 15 months to complete.

Cintra-Zachry's package also includes funding options for a route connecting southeast San Antonio to State Highway 130, a $1.5 billion project that is currently under way and is the largest single highway project in the state's history. TxDOT is partnering on the new tollway with a private consortium known as Lone Star Infrastructure to build the 49-mi., Austin to San Antonio corridor.

While SH 130 is not officially part of the TTC-35, it could become an element of it or stand alone. There have been discussions in both arenas. Indications from a variety of sources are that SH 130 is the first leg of the Trans-Texas Corridor.

But TxDOT cautions that it will not know that until the environmental work for TTC-35 has been completed.

 

[TheTony]

I don't generally post in P&N, but saw a topic in OT before it was moved.

Call me a skeptic; while this may already be in the early stages, I don't think it (in its entirety) will be completed. Interstate 35W and 35E in Minnesota go through the hearts of Minneapolis and Saint Paul, respectively. The amount of right-of-way needed to create that wide of an expressway is staggering, just in this one metropolitan area.

I'm also skeptical on how it improves "quality of life" for anyone but those directly invested in or using the expressway, but nowhere near as much as the logistics and legal nightmare construction would represent.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: sonoma1993
[/QNafta Super Highway

Quietly but systematically, the Bush Administration is advancing the plan to build a huge NAFTA Super Highway, four football-fields-wide, through the heart of the U.S. along Interstate 35, from the Mexican border at Laredo, Tex., to the Canadian border north of Duluth, Minn.

Once complete, the new road will allow containers from the Far East to enter the United States through the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas, bypassing the Longshoreman?s Union in the process. The Mexican trucks, without the involvement of the Teamsters Union, will drive on what will be the nation?s most modern highway straight into the heart of America. The Mexican trucks will cross border in FAST lanes, checked only electronically by the new ?SENTRI? system. The first customs stop will be a Mexican customs office in Kansas City, their new Smart Port complex, a facility being built for Mexico at a cost of $3 million to the U.S. taxpayers in Kansas City.

As incredible as this plan may seem to some readers, the first Trans-Texas Corridor segment of the NAFTA Super Highway is ready to begin construction next year. Various U.S. government agencies, dozens of state agencies, and scores of private NGOs (non-governmental organizations) have been working behind the scenes to create the NAFTA Super Highway, despite the lack of comment on the plan by President Bush. The American public is largely asleep to this key piece of the coming ?North American Union? that government planners in the new trilateral region of United States, Canada and Mexico are about to drive into reality.

I think this could be a good idea. It'll bring much need jobs to our country. i assume this super highway would take what a good 5,6 years to build maybe longer, or maybe shorter.

I was reading about this article on my local forum website, some of the user there are posting some odd stuff about this thing

tyronne posted =i sure hope it's not true and just a bunch of lib BS

psycoglock posted
It sure does look like a Liberal tactic to bring good honest hard working patriotic americans to their sick, dark twisted world of lies, hatred and corruption

What I meant is that Life is the battle between good and evil. Liberalism is the EVIL in the world and they won't stop anything to put a spin on a topic, misplace blame in order to turn true americans against others in society. Liberalism is today's modern Communists, which won't hold back to beef the ranks of their unwanted views and their tax and spend mentality.I can get technical if you like but this is as clear and concise as I can put it.

It's going to kill a lot of union jobs in our cities ports though. I'm not one to normally post anything pro-union but I think this would have quite a huge negative impact on our port cities.

Also, what kind of security risks are there with this plan? Huge containers coming into Mexico and rushing right across our borders? Anyone see any potential problems with this?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus


Also, what kind of security risks are there with this plan? Huge containers coming into Mexico and rushing right across our borders? Anyone see any potential problems with this?

Not if the UAE runs it.

 

[Stunt]

I was on business in Philly 2 weeks ago and had to cross at Detroit/Windsor and had to wait over 2hours to get across...absolutely ridiculous.

I needed a passport, documentation and answer questions. Such a waste of time and effort, border security is such an incredible waste from all perspectives. One thing that was interesting is the $5 in AND out fee in the US, but $1.50 enter fee exclusively for Canada.

We NEED improved infrastructure for our growing economies and heavily integrated trade networks. Over $300B in Canadian Exports to US and over $175B in US Exports to Canada.