July, 21 2009, 01:47pm EDT

As Congress Debates Transportation Bill, New Study on Port Trucking Shows Need For New Regulations For Clean Air, Worker Safety, And Economic Stability
WASHINGTON
As the United States Congress considers the Surface Transportation
Authorization Act of 2009, which aims to establish national regulatory
reforms for American ground transportation, a newly published study
details the widespread failures of port trucking deregulation. Port Trucking Down the Low Road: A Sad Story of Deregulation,
published by Demos, a national public policy research center,
chronicles the industry's downslide since the Federal Motor Carrier Act
of 1980.
The report's release arrives on the eve of the Oakland Port
Commission1s vote on a resolution calling on Congress to modernize
transportation policy so that America's Port Commissions have the legal
authority to set and enforce trucking industry standards to make goods
movement sustainable for local communities and workers. The resolution
aims to allow ports to emulate the success of the LA Clean Trucks
Program, which has already reduced diesel emissions by removing
thousands of dirty trucks from service, replacing them with
clean-burning and alternative fuel vehicles.
Port Trucking Down the Low Road, authored for Demos' Project on Regulation
by David Bensman, Professor of Labor Studies and Employer Relations at
Rutgers University, provides vast evidence of the dangerous
consequences of port trucking deregulation, highlighting the need for
broad industry reform and a new set of regulatory protections for
workers, the environment, public health and the economy.
"Port trucking carries 80 percent of shipping containers
between ports, warehouses and distribution centers. It is an essential
cog in the global trade system that, because of deregulation, now
suffers from excessive and destructive competition that has taken its
toll," said Bensman. "Because of deregulation, the national freight
moving industry is broken: Highway travel is more hazardous,
contributes to our environmental crisis, degrades the quality of port
truck driver jobs, shifts enormous costs onto the public, and creates,
overall, a highly inefficient logistics and goods movement system."
Robert Kuttner, a Distinguished Fellow at Demos who also directs the Demos Project on Regulation stated,
"With public support from members of the U.S. Congress,
coalitions of trade unionists, community groups, environmentalists, and
progressive local mayors have reached consensus on viable solutions and
are taking steps to reduce emissions in ports throughout the country.
Because ports play a central role in implementing national security
goals and trucking deregulation was legislated nationally, fully
reversing three decades of damage will require an act of Congress."
Key findings of the report include:
- Highway travel has become more hazardous since port trucking
deregulation: 77.8 percent of New Jersey port truck drivers reported
receiving an unsafe chassis in the last 12 months; on average, 40
percent of containers at Miami's port were overweight in 2006, and in
some weeks that figure reached 70 percent. - The port trucking system has not kept pace with advances in clean
truck technologies, creating an increasing environmental crisis: Diesel
emissions, especially from older trucks, cause significant harmful
health impacts, releasing particles into the air that are carcinogenic
and dangerous to the environment and the health of nearby residents. - The quality of jobs for port truck drivers has decreased
substantially: Drivers are on the job five days a week, from 10 to 12
hours a day, earning an average annual income of $28,000 in 2008. As
"independent contractors", they do not receive health care or any
contributions to a retirement fund and are responsible for all
collateral maintenance, taxes, insurance and other costs. - Deregulation has shifted significant costs to the public, costs
previously shouldered by the shipping industry: Diesel emissions cause
significant harmful health impacts, estimated by one study to cost the
state of California $20 billion annually. More than 25 percent of New
Jersey port drivers surveyed rely on public clinics or emergency rooms
for health care. - The goods movement system in the U.S. has become increasingly
inefficient. Business logistics expenses for the port trucking industry
increased for a fourth straight year in 2007, by $91 billion over the
2006 total. The system does not incentivize warehouse companies to
build facilities closer to ports or distribution centers, and a poor
communications infrastructure hinders incoming and outgoing container
movement. - The failure of the deregulated port trucking system has also been
recognized by three separate North American port agencies that have
taken some action to mitigate the problems caused by the Federal Motor
Carrier Act of 1980.
Port Trucking Down the Low Road includes a series of reforms and policy recommendations, including:
- Improve quality of trucking jobs by cracking down on employer abuse
of misclassifying port truck drivers as independent contractors in
order to avoid compliance with employment laws; - Improve air quality and reduce public health hazards and associated
costs by establishing stricter federal diesel emission standards; - Protect the driving public by enforcing highway safety standards,
including weight restrictions and the new 2008 chassis standards for
container trucks.
"As Bensman demonstrates, re-regulating the terms of port
trucking could reverse the vicious circle. Raising standards and
certifying only carriers that met them could turn the drivers back into
regular employees and create incentives for carriers to modernize their
equipment," said Kuttner.
David Bensman added that "as Congress and the Obama Administration
debate the timing and contours of updating our nation's laws and
policies governing goods movement, this new study identifies key areas
in desperate need of regulatory reform to ensure we create a modern,
efficient, sustainable, and equitable freight transportation system for
the 21st century."
Demos is a think tank that powers the movement for a just, inclusive, multiracial democracy. Through cutting-edge policy research, inspiring litigation, and deep relationships with grassroots organizations, Demos champions solutions that will create a democracy and economy rooted in racial equity.
LATEST NEWS
Senate Tosses 'Dangerous Provision' Preventing State-Level AI Regulation From GOP Megabill
"From the start, this provision had Big Tech's money and lobbyists all over it. This is a major victory for the American people over the AI industry," said one advocate.
Jul 01, 2025
With a 99-1 vote early Tuesday, the Republican-controlled Senate decided to remove a controversial provision that would have prevented state-level regulation on artificial intelligence for 10 years from U.S. President Donald Trump's massive tax and spending bill that is currently being debated in Congress.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) was the lone lawmaker who voted to keep the moratorium in the bill.
While far from the only controversial part of the reconciliation package, the provision drew opposition from an ideologically diverse group that included Democratic and Republican state attorneys general; over 140 groups working to support children's online safety, consumer protections, and responsible innovation; and faith leaders.
Senators struck Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) AI measure from the megabill by adopting an amendment introduced by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.). They voted on Blackburn's amendment during a session known as a vote-a-rama. Blackburn introduced the amendment after considering an agreement that would have watered down the provision.
According to The Verge, the measure that was rejected on Tuesday required states to avoid regulation AI and "automated decision systems" if they wanted to get funding for their broadband programs.
The provision would have been a major win for Big Tech, which has made the case that state laws around AI are obstructing their ability to do business.
Advocates and Democratic lawmakers cheered the decision to strip the provision.
"From the start, this provision had Big Tech's money and lobbyists all over it. This is a major victory for the American people over the AI industry. It shows that Americans are aware of the proliferation of AI harms in real time," said J.B. Branch, Big Tech accountability advocate at the watchdog group Public Citizen.
Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) said Tuesday that "early this morning, the Senate overwhelmingly voted to reject a dangerous provision to block states from regulating artificial intelligence, including protecting kids online. This 99-1 vote sent a clear message that Congress will not sell out our kids and local communities in order to pad the pockets of Big Tech billionaires."
In addition to concerns focused on Big Tech, experts recently told The Guardian that in the absence of state-level AI regulation, untrammeled growth of AI would take a toll on the world's "dangerously overheating climate."
Sacha Haworth, the executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, credited the "massive" defeat of Cruz's provision to the "incredible mobilizing by advocates to beat back Big Tech lobbying and last-minute bullying."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Shred JD Vance as He Shrugs Off Millions of Americans Losing Medicaid as 'Minutiae'
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Jul 01, 2025
Vice President J.D. Vance took heat from critics this week when he downplayed legislation that would result in millions of Americans losing Medicaid coverage as mere "minutiae."
Writing on X, Vance defended the budget megabill that's currently being pushed through the United States Senate by arguing that it will massively increase funding to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which he deemed to be a necessary component of carrying out the Trump administration's mass deportation operation.
"The thing that will bankrupt this country more than any other policy is flooding the country with illegal immigration and then giving those migrants generous benefits," wrote Vance. "The [One Big Beautiful Bill] fixes this problem. And therefore it must pass."
He then added that "everything else—the CBO score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy—is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions."
It was this line that drew the ire of many critics, as the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the Senate version of the budget bill would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period, which would result in more than 10 million people losing their coverage. Additionally, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) has proposed an amendment that would roll back the expansion of Medicaid under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which would likely kick millions more off of the program.
Many congressional Democrats were quick to pounce on Vance for what they said were callous comments about a vital government program.
"So if the only thing that matters is immigration... why didn't you support the bipartisan Lankford-Murphy bill that tackled immigration far better than your Ugly Bill?" asked Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-N.Y.). "And it didn't have 'minutiae' that will kick 12m+ Americans off healthcare or raise the debt by $4tn."
"What happened to you J.D. Vance—author of Hillbilly Elegy—now shrugging off Medicaid cuts that will close rural hospitals and kick millions off healthcare as 'minutiae?'" asked Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
Veteran healthcare reporter Jonathan Cohn put some numbers behind the policies that are being minimized by the vice president.
"11.8M projected to lose health insurance," he wrote. "Clinics and hospitals taking a hit, especially in rural areas. Low-income seniors facing higher costs. 'Minutiae.'"
Activist Leah Greenberg, the co-chair of progressive organizing group Indivisible, zeroed in on Vance's emphasis on ramping up ICE's funding as particularly problematic.
"They are just coming right out and saying they want an exponential increase in $$$ so they can build their own personal Gestapo," she warned.
Washington Post global affairs columnist Ishaan Tharoor also found himself disturbed by the sheer size of the funding increase for ICE that Vance is demanding and he observed that "nothing matters more apparently than giving ICE a bigger budget than the militaries of virtually every European country."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Heinrich Should Be Ashamed': Lone Senate Dem Helps GOP Deliver Big Pharma Win
The provision, part of the Senate budget bill, was described as "a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars."
Jul 01, 2025
The deep-pocketed and powerful pharmaceutical industry notched a significant victory on Monday when the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a bill described by critics as a handout to drug corporations can be included in the Republican reconciliation package, which could become law as soon as this week.
The legislation, titled the Optimizing Research Progress Hope and New (ORPHAN) Cures Act, would exempt drugs that treat more than one rare disease from Medicare's drug-price negotiation program, allowing pharmaceutical companies to charge exorbitant prices for life-saving medications in a purported effort to encourage innovation. (Medications developed to treat rare diseases are known as "orphan drugs.")
The consumer advocacy group Public Citizen observed that if the legislation were already in effect, Medicare "would have been barred from negotiating lower prices for important treatments like cancer drugs Imbruvica, Calquence, and Pomalyst."
Among the bill's leading supporters is Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), whose spokesperson announced the parliamentarian's decision to allow the measure in the reconciliation package after previously advising that it be excluded. Heinrich is listed as the legislation's only co-sponsor in the Senate, alongside lead sponsor Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
"Sen. Heinrich should be ashamed of prioritizing drug corporation profits over lower medicine prices for seniors and people with disabilities," Steve Knievel, access to medicines advocate at Public Citizen, said in a statement Monday. "Patients and consumers breathed a sigh of relief when the Senate parliamentarian stripped the proposal from Republicans' Big Ugly Betrayal, so it comes as a gut punch to hear that Sen. Heinrich welcomed the reversal and continued to champion a proposal that will transfer billions from taxpayers to Big Pharma."
"People across the country are demanding lower drug prices and for Medicare drug price negotiations to be expanded, not restricted," Knievel added. "Sen. Heinrich should apologize to his constituents and start listening to them instead of drug corporation lobbyists."
The Biotechnology Innovation Organization, a lobbying group whose members include pharmaceutical companies, has publicly endorsed and promoted the legislation, urging lawmakers to pass it "as soon as possible."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients."
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the ORPHAN Cures Act would cost U.S. taxpayers around $5 billion over the next decade.
Merith Basey, executive director of Patients For Affordable Drugs Now, said that "patients are infuriated to see the Senate cave to Big Pharma by reviving the ORPHAN Cures Act at the eleventh hour."
"This is a blatant giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that would keep drug prices high for patients while draining $5 billion in taxpayer dollars," said Basey. "We call on lawmakers to remove this unnecessary provision immediately and stand with an overwhelming majority of Americans who want the Medicare Negotiation program to go further. Medicare negotiation will deliver huge savings for seniors and taxpayers; this bill would undermine that progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular