Hello! Wakeup Call!
Just what we need! A brand new 4,000-mile, $184 billion transportation highway splitting the country in two. With oil over $75 a barrel and gasoline topping $3.00 a gallon, a host of federal and state agencies are stealthily working to construct a gigantic, 10-lane superhighway right through the middle of the United States, from the Mexican border north to Canada, in an effort to promote trade under NAFTA.
The corridors would have up to six lanes for cars and four lanes for trucks, and, in addition, accommodate railroads, energy pipelines, utility lines, and broadband cables. The brand-new vertical ribbon of concrete, in addition to bisecting, would heighten air pollution and dramatically increase truck and car traffic.
Doesn't anyone in Washington have qualms about promoting yet greater usage of fossil fuels and their consequent greenhouse gas emissions? About creating another segment of our infrastructure that makes us ever more dependent on Middle East oil producers and the terrorists financed by the dollars we send to the cartel and its acolytes? Must our government continue to pave their way -- literally, in this case -- with harebrained schemes like this planned new superhighway?
Has any thought been give to the potential geo- political and social consequences of so symbolically bifurcating the nation with a brand new vertical ribbon of concrete at a time of dangerously deteriorating political discourse and civility throughout the land?
The unpleasant odor of "oiligopoly" hangs all over this project. Ask yourself who has a vested interest in building thousands of miles of new roads to carry millions more gas-guzzling trucks and cars between Mexico and Canada? Then, too, history has shown that building more highways contributes to ever more congestion and ex-urban sprawl (if you build it, they will drive on it), which forces more and more Americans into ever longer, fuel-swilling commutes.
If you think I'm off base, ask yourself why this enormous undertaking is rolling along without any legislation directly authorizing it. And why has our deeply oil vested administration keptthis program out of the public spotlight, and why has President George W. Bush not made one speech alerting the American public to the administration's plans.
There has been virtually no robust national debate on the issue. Plans for the project are largely hidden from public view even though the Department of Transportation has helped fund the project by extending multimillion dollar grants to NASCO (the North American Super Corridor Coalition Inc.), an organization describing itself in the following mouthful, "a non profit organization dedicated to developing the world's first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America."
The question arises, whose lives are going to be improved? Certainly not the many thousands of homes and farms that will have become easy pickings for condemnation under the Supreme Court's notorious "Kelo" decision, or as Texas Gubernatorial Candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn has put it, a "land grab" of historic proportions.
According to Human Events, various government agencies, scores of private NGOs have all been working behind the scenes to create the NAFTA Superhighway. The lack of transparency reaches the point whereby the contractors for the first leg of the project -- that is from the Mexican border to Oklahoma -- have successfully kept the terms of their agreements secret and far from public scrutiny. The contractors are a United States and Spanish consortium, Cintra-Zachry. What we do know is that they propose receiving $7.2 billion for the first segment and in return, would operate that portion of the superhighway and collect tolls for years to come.
If we are going to promote NAFTA and trilateral trade, I believe it makes a lot more sense to look to transportation methods that could lessen our dependence on gas guzzling trucks and cars with their consequent impact on greenhouse gases and our oil dependency. The plans on the drawing board for the NAFTA superhighway include passenger and freight rail lines running alongside oil and natural gas pipelines. So why not scrap the concrete corridor altogether and funnel the freed-up billions of dollars to new mass transportation projects and to enhancing our existing rail and inland waterway freight-hauling systems? Both methods of transportation are vastly more energy efficient and less polluting than trucks. An extended rail or barge waterway link -- think Erie Canal -- makes good sense, perhaps even great sense.
Times have changed -- our dependence on foreign oil is a genuine threat to our national security and our gluttonous consumption of fossil fuels and their consequent impact on greenhouse gases must be drastically curtailed. America must adjust its thinking accordingly. It is madness now, with all that we know, to initiate policies that fly in the face of these urgent priorities.
Raymond J. Learsy is author of Over A Barrel: Breaking the Middle East Oil Cartel and a veteran commodities trader.
To join the discussion on leadership, click the button below! 


Comments: 16
But as long as Congress backed by the environmental lobby prevents us from developing over 80% of our oil and gas resources, our dependence will only grow.
Congress has caused a considerable increase in the price of energy by these actions and in some cases caused energy dependent companies to move production facilties overseas. It is getting far too expensive to do business in the U.S. for many companies.
Best regards, Ben
Author "Leading People to be Highly Motivated and Committed"
I have driven many hundreds of miles on those ribbons of concrete out west, and have observed hundreds of miles of emptiness and desolation on both sides. That seems to be a lot of evidence against your theory that highways lead inevitably to sprawl, etc.
Maybe the highway is part of Pres Bush's immigration policy: get the illegals to keep going north to Canada.
How is a mass transportation project going to help distribute the goods that travel daily in a million 18-wheelers on those ribbons of concrete? Improved & expanded use of rail transport would help some, but you can't run a rail spur to every warehouse, factory and assembly plant. And economic development cannot be limited to places served by a marine port. So what's a viable alternative to expanded interstate ribbons of concrete?
The nature of this proposed highway makes many assumptions of political stability in Mexico and Central America. It would be a convenient artery for any assault: economic, social or military. It dooms the American worker to 3rd world wages, which would destroy the middle class and temporarily divide America into haves and have-nots. It would also run right past the world headquarters of WalMart.
The current oil fiasco is politically induced phenomena and will evaporate in the same way. Once the lapdogs are ejected from Congress, regulations will be reinstated on the futures market, transparency forced upon the refineries, several politicians jailed for collusion in oil market manipulation, significant fines leveled against the oil moguls and the price structure crashed thru the oil reserve. The consumer confidence boost by oil at $35 per barrel and the subsequent savings throughout the world will ease the deficit, strengthen the dollar and cool off the Middle East. We the People will reassert control of the oil industry and not be vassals under the thrall of this despotic regime. Sell your oil stocks now while you got a chance.
How many motor cars tomorrow?
A 1940's look at the future of automobiles and how they affect the road construction and maintenance industry.
More than 30,000,000 motor vehicles wheel over the roads of America. How many more will the nation be able to absorb? Are we reaching some kind of limit?
The answer is of utmost importance to roadbuilders, who must depend for the major share of their income upon motor-vehicle registration fees and gasoline taxes. The Public Roads Administration has referred to 1960 as a date by which we may hope to rebuild the nation's primary system to acceptable standards. No accurate estimate of the amount of money available for such a program is possible, however, without knowing how many motor vehicles there will be to produce this money, or to use the new transportation facilities created.
This from :"Passenger vehicles in the United States "
wikipedia.org
According to the Federal Highway Administration there were an estimated 196 million licensed drivers in the United States in the year 2003. Considering the slightly lower number of motor vehicles for 2003 there were an estimated 1.17 motor vehicles per licensed driver, meaning that there are more vehicles than drivers in the US, with vehicles outnumbering drivers 1.2 to one.
From : "Total number of vehicles" also wikipedia.org
According to the US Bureau of Transit Statistics there are 243,023,485 registered passenger vehicles in the US. Out of these roughly 243 million vehicles, 136,430,651 (56.13%) were classified as cars, while 91,845,327 (37.79%) were classified as "Other 2 axle, 4 tire vehicles," presumably SUVs and pick-up trucks. Yet another 6,161,028 (2.53%) were classified as vehicles with 2 axles and 6 tires and 2,010,335 (0.82%) were classified as "Truck, combination." There were approximately 5,780,870 motorcycles in the US in 2004, which accounts for 2.37% of all registered passenger vehicles.
From Me:
The building of more roads isn't as insane as the number of drivers and vehicles that will be on them. Whether we import our oil or drill our own, there has to be a better answer. Is the glass one and a half times full, or one and a half times empty ?
Thanks for bringing this to our attention; I had no idea this was being plotted and I share your concern. But I'm going to agree more with George, because as long as we continue to urge population expansion, we will see only more chaos and more conflict over resources that can only be stretched so far. Our culture is based upon increasing consumption of resources to create more and more wealth, and we can't consume enough to satisfy the system without more and more people. Sadly, I don't hear many people talking about the issue, but I'm glad George referred to it.
US should be making more stuff like that and less bombs
And it sounds like they are talking about rail lines and pipelines, both of which make sense for the appropriate goods and distances.
Also, mass transit systems are great if we have mass travel from point to point. otherwise they appear to be very effective white elephants. Isn't the answer to oil issues just to charge the right amount for it (including the true cost of the damage it causes as well as the marginal cost or producing it), rather than trying to artificially improve one inefficient mode of transportation over another?
Of course, we could just invade Venezuela (just kidding).
As for highways, Boston is experiencing a dramatic rebirth now that the Central Artery has been torn down. For years the artery seperated downtown from the North End and the harbor like a sickly green auto-carrying Berlin Wall. Now it's gone, and the city is breathing again. It's a lesson in civil engineering that Robert Moses never grasped in New York...and one that every other municipality in the country would do well to observe.