The Great White Fathers By Sandy Long When the United States first conquered the American Indians, they first used military tactics to do so, then they used ‘paternalism’ to totally subjugate them. What is paternalism; freedictionary.com defines it as “the attitude or policy of a government or other authority that manages the affairs of a country, company, community, etc., in the manner of a father, especially in usurping individual responsibility and the liberty of choice.”
Using paternalistic tactics, the United States government herded the Indians into reservations, took away the Indian’s means of farming or hunting to provide for themselves, forced the children into government run schools to be Americanized and provided the food for the Indians on the reservations. This demoralized the Indian people and made them completely dependent on the Great White Fathers in Washington to survive. It was also the testing ground of tactics for the government to use against the rest of the American population if necessary to exert control over them.
Up to around 1870, America was still primarily an agricultural society, but with the technological age coming to the fore, people had more leisure time to become aware of what the government was doing thru increased media exposure, more and more people started to protest what the government was doing. In addition, more people were living in cities where overcrowding, lack of jobs, racial tensions and political graft were prevalent leading to rioting. The government, by the early 1900s had to do something; the nanny state was born.
The first real nanny law was enacted in 1920 when the Prohibition Act was put in force. Banning the sale and use of alcohol was the focus of this law, but it was also thought to enhance morals. During the length of this law until its repeal in 1933, the exact opposite occurred. Many young women raised their skirt hems, cut their hair and became sexually active without the benefit of marriage. Criminal activity increased substantially with the growth of liquor drinking, smuggling and manufacturing in secret; this led to the growth of gangster activity culminating during the depression when bank robbing increased exponentially. The Volstead Act was said by Herbert Hoover, "the great social and economic experiment, noble in motive and far reaching in purpose did not work.” The government looked at how they had enacted the Volstead Act and learned from their mistakes. If something were completely banned, people would actually increase their usage or finds ways to get around the ban. The government realized that instead of banning a specific habit or action, for the supposed good of the population, it was better to indoctrinate people to the so-called risks of said habits or actions. The government started using false studies and sensationalism and then passed laws incrementally to change behavior to benefit the government and control the population, of course always saying that the government only has the best interests of the people in mind.
This became standard procedure and perfected as seen in the smoking issue. Tobacco use started in the Americas and spread throughout the world during the 1700s. Tobacco farming was a staple in the Midwestern/central east coast agricultural economy for two hundred years. In the late 1950’s, it was noticed that there was an increase in lung disease in people who smoked. Other factors at the time were not considered and the government started out with a notice on cigarettes that they might be hazardous to one’s health. Then the government started their anti-smoking campaign recognizing that revenue could be generated from smokers through increased taxes on the product. Study after study was done, paid for by the government and special interest groups, and lawyers fought in court intensifying the sensationalistic attention given to the issue culminating in turning many people against people who smoke; this even to the extent that children turned against their parents over smoking.
The government now has their tactics down pat. American citizens would fall for anything if promoted and sensationalized right. Law after law has now been passed ‘for the good of the people’ when in actuality the people’s rights and freedoms have been eroded. From the All AmericanBlogger.com “Do you see how one law, written for our own good, can lead to others written for our own good that, instead of protecting our rights, infringe on our rights? Again, going back to the comment from…, he shows how one law leads to another. We already have seat belt laws, so why not have helmet laws? We already have laws against trans-fat, so why not outlaw fried food? We already have laws against pot, so why not alcohol?”
This quote found at AllAmericanBlogger.com says it all, “…when the law, by means of its necessary agent, force, imposes upon men a regulation of labor, a method or a subject of education, a religious faith or creed ”then the law is no longer negative; it acts positively upon people. It substitutes the will of the legislators for their own wills, the initiative of the legislator for their own initiatives. When this happens, the people no longer need to discuss, to compare, and to plan ahead, the law does all this for them. Intelligence becomes a useless prop for the people; they cease to be men; they lose their personality, their liberty, their property…anonymous.”
Therein lays the rub, the removal of Americans’ liberty and freedom. As the Indians found to their dismay, The Great White Fathers in Washington D.C. are abusive parents and do not have the people’s best interests at heart. Instead, they only have their own agendas at heart, the removal of freedom and the control and of the American People. The Great White Fathers speak with forked tongue.
Who Needs a Level Playing Field? By Sandy Long-OTR driver and freelance writer Facebook/Trucker Against More Regulations In article after article, large carriers and their associations are quoted as saying EOBRs and speed limiters are necessary to create a ‘level playing field’ for them to be successful in the trucking industry. They cite competition from companies who’s trucks go faster than theirs do and who may not be as tight in HOS monitoring. Looking at this logically, there are holes in their theory big enough to drive a semi through easily. The large carriers have, thru competition, cut rates and promised everything under the sun to retain their customer base. Many are training companies for new entry-level truck drivers, causing their accident rates to go up. These two factors caused the carriers to lower their truck’s governed speed for both fuel cost savings and for safety for those new drivers. Furthermore, as reported in TruckingInfo.com, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., introduced legislation to address the detention time, HR 756 that would limit the number of hours a driver can be detained and the FMCSA was looking at doing the same. “In a letter to FMCSA administrator Anne Ferro, David Parker, chairman of the MCSAC, said the agency should seek legal authority over entities that contribute to FMCSA safety violations. According to Parker, an undue detainment can cause drivers to violate hours of service rules.” The move towards regulation is also supported by OOIDA who has always contended that detention time was the most common cause of loss of revenue and violation of HOS regulations by drivers. Descent from the ATA was strong; the ATA board of directors voted not to support the measures. "ATA and its members value the time of our drivers," ATA President and CEO Bill Graves said following the board's decision. "However, federal intervention into this area would have significant impacts on the contractual agreements between carriers and shippers." "No carrier wants to see our drivers' time wasted," ATA first vice chairman Dan England, chairman and president of C.R. England said. "However, this is not an issue that can be handled with a 'one-size, fits all' regulation and as a result is best addressed in contractual agreements between carriers and shippers." "The ability of carriers to negotiate rates, routes and service with our shippers is very important to us," said ATA Chairman Barbara Windsor, president and CEO of Hahn Transportation. "Federal regulation in this area would directly affect shipping rates and would significantly change the playing field for carriers and shippers." Wait! ATA vice Chairman England says that “this is not an issue that can be handled with a 'one-size, fits all' regulation” and Chairman Windsor says that it would “significantly change the playing field for carriers and shippers." Uh, folks, isn’t that exactly what you are wanting to do in your support of EOBRs and speed limiters, develop one-size, fits all regulations; change the playing field for those carriers who do not have access to your discounts and shipper base to your levels of operation? There is nothing ‘level’ about them and further regulation will ‘level’ them alright, in the large carriers direction. In the trucking industry, it is always wise to look for the money trail in any sort of proposed regulation supported by the mega carriers. In an article dated April 2012 on the ATA website it states, “After a year of quarterly increases, the turnover rate for truck drivers at large truckload fleets unexpectedly dipped one percentage point to an annualized rate of 88% American Trucking Associations Chief Economist Bob Costello…” The article continues, “Turnover among large truckload fleets had risen to 89% in the third quarter of 2011 after bottoming out at 39% in the first quarter of 2010. For all of 2011, the large truckload turnover rate averaged 83% - the highest average since 2007 when churn averaged 117%. At small truckload firms, with less than $30 million in annual revenue, the turnover rate dipped to 55% from 57% in the previous quarter. The fourth quarter turnover rate for less-than-truckload fleets fell to just 7% from 10% in the third quarter.” An all time average of 117% and a today’s rate of 88% for large fleets perhaps provide one money trail found. The Intermodel Insurance Company reports that Noel Perry, managing director at consultant FTR Associates, Nashville, Ind., whose latest driver supply report gauged the shortage at 125,000 in the third quarter said, “We are almost certainly going to see an increase (in driver shortage).” Furthermore, in the same article, USA Truck noted the scarcity of drivers. They reported a “$4.3 million loss; said 10% of its fleet of more than 2,200 trucks don’t have drivers.” Other carriers that have driver-related issues are Heartland Express and Knight Transportation among others. Driver retention is a large factor at any company as shown, as is a ‘driver shortage’ is at larger carriers, though driver shortage may be another way of saying driver retention in this case. It is a well known fact that many entry level drivers, who have little choice outside of the large carrier training companies, leave after their initial year. They tire of the micromanagement, the governed slower speeds found at the larger carriers, the impersonality of communication and the lack of adequate hometime. This fact is supported by Tim Brady’s article at Trucker.com. Brady states, “Driver turnover usually occurs within the first year of employment. A company may have an overall turnover rate of 60%, but the ‘newbie flight’ (those first-year hires) can far exceed that—as much as 180% to 240% plus. We’ll define this as driver “churning,” i.e., drivers leaving one carrier and being hired by another. As with most problems, the cause is fairly easy to find; believe it or not, it’s not just about the money. Although several factors contribute to driver churning, its root cause is a lack of communication from the very beginning. It’s making sure both trucker and carrier understand each other’s needs and wants, and how this is going to be accomplished within the business relationship.” If the large carriers can get EOBRs and speed limiter regulations through, they think that this will stop drivers leaving for greener pastures. Billy Woolsey, President of Midwest Compliance Inc., states in a letter to the editor to Transport Topics about EOBRs, “But all that information carries a price because drivers are likely to favor carriers without e-logging devices. That creates additional problems for small fleets competing for drivers in a marketplace now being reshaped by the government’s new Compliance, Safety, Accountability safety-management program(CSA)… it is glaringly obvious that this is really about politics, not safety…not to mention fueling an incorrect but widely held belief that the agency (DOT) wants to put smaller carriers out of business.” Marge Bailey, founder of DriverFinder.net states, “Depending on what resources a company engages to advertise, i.e.; the size of their budget, what their orientation costs are and cost to get a driver to orientation, a new ‘experienced’ hire can range from $3500.00 to over $5,000.00 each.” Add in the costs of schooling for entry-level drivers that the company may pay for or reimburse plus additional costs of the training time after school, and you end up with a seriously significant amount of money that replacing drivers costs a carrier. While creating a level playing field using EOBRs or speed limiters due to HOS compliance or safety does not make a lot of sense, creating a level playing field to retain drivers does, at least to the larger carriers who support it. CSA takes care of both HOS compliance and safety issues adequately; there is no need for the rest of us to suffer for the wants of large carriers to save money by retaining drivers.
Every truck driver and car owner understands the term “throwing parts” at a problem; when a mechanic cannot figure out what is wrong with a vehicle large or small, they just say, “might be this, I will replace it.” Nevertheless, it does not fix the problem, only the mechanic or shop benefits. We are seeing that attitude in trucking. By now, the whole world knows of the efforts of the FMCSA and special interest groups to bring down the accident rates involving trucks to a zero level; this effort is featured in national news reports. Because of the political power of groups such as Parents Against Tired Truckers (PATT) FMCSA has focused on fatigue as being the major cause of accidents though statistics do not support this factor. To fight this so-called fatigue factor, supposedly found in all truckers, FMCSA is literally throwing parts at driver’s fatigue without addressing the real issues behind most accidents. Technological developers and device manufacturers who stand to make a financial killing off the ‘fatigue’ regulations are supplying the parts. The technological parts are widespread. Recently, in a discussion with a customer service engineer of a major truck manufacturer, he was touting the benefits of a device that will slow or stop a truck if it got to close to another vehicle ahead of it in case the driver falls asleep. When I showed little appreciation for the device, he was surprised that I was not gung ho on it. “But,” he said, “I thought you were all about safety.” This is a common response of people due to propaganda from the special interest groups when someone does not jump on their bandwagon. Electronic On Board Recorders (EOBRs) are being pushed to remove the ‘human’ factor from the hours of service equation along with being able to show what a truck driver was doing at the exact point of an accident ie, hard braking, speed, etc. The plain EOBR system, without electronic logs, are already available thru the truck’s engine computer system in a slightly less sophisticated manner with hard braking incidents being recorded and can be set up to record speed. The e-logs were not in place in the industry a month before both drivers and dispatchers figured out ways to get around them. That old ‘human’ factor thing again as dispatchers can adjust a driver’s hours from the terminal if they want to and drivers can go off duty and keep driving though they take a chance in being caught. The latest type of technological device touted is the anti roll-over system to alert the driver if the trailer is about to tip over. This system is attached to the back of the truck and records deviation of the trailer from level. If the trailer deviates past a certain point, an alarm goes off, supposedly to ‘wake’ up the driver to the problem. Health enters in with sleep apnea at the forefront. The dollar signs are in everyone’s eyes as even carriers jump on the bandwagon and open sleep clinics in their terminals and offer ‘lease purchase’ of cpap machines to drivers. If a driver is overweight, Katey bar the door, because he/she is going to be sleep tested without recourse if they want to continue to drive. The poor overweight driver is out several thousand dollars when it is over and the medical device manufacturers and the sleep study clinics keep the weight off running to the bank. As far as the real causes of fatigue in truck drivers, no one wants to find the real problems involved. Long delays at shippers and receivers, inadequate parking, anti-idling laws, being pushed beyond one’s limits by dispatchers and brokers who cannot/will not reschedule appointments to fit the driver’s schedule, maximize your hours attitudes by companies, lack of adequate hometime and a hundred other factors actually affect whether a driver gets fatigued or not. Both and the government companies can easily solve most of these issues yet the issues are ignored or downplayed. The real causes of most accidents are simple, going too fast for conditions and lack of good training for the entry-level drivers; the first could be solved by the last. Is the FMCSA really looking at training regulations being strengthened? No, they are not, citing that there is no data showing that entry-level drivers are less safe than experienced ones. Wait though, could it be that there is not enough money to be made by making trucking schools and/or carriers properly train their newest drivers? No benefit to manufacturers and inventors, just more time from the carrier to ensure that their drivers can do the job properly and safely is the obvious reason, costing them a little more money on the training end. So, OK, let’s just throw some more parts at the problem, it won’t fix the problem at all, but it sure looks good on the
Trucking is a diverse industry comprised of many different types of trucking with each type having their own problems and issues. For instance, container haulers on both coasts are under the gun from the EPA and others over pollution and traffic congestion; some are being forced to upgrade their equipment or leave the industry. This diversity in trucking tends to make truckers themselves isolated within their own segment of the industry, not so much as a physical isolation, but a mental one. This mental isolation, or focused vision on only what affects their segment leads to the old saying that “you cannot get two truckers to agree on the price of a free cup of coffee” as a friends says. He is right to a great degree. This inability of truckers to agree on any one thing has stopped truckers from addressing issues facing them both in their own segment of the industry and for the trucking industry as a whole. There is a lot of ‘it doesn’t matter to me so why act on it’ mindset; they do not see how it affects other drivers other than themselves; or care. HOS and EOBRs are a good indication of this mindset. Looking at HOS first, a driver who works for a large company who has ample equipment and drivers to relay freight might not understand, or care, how those same HOS might affect a small company who cannot compete by providing relay drivers to move the higher rate, faster moving freight. The HOS might not affect the larger company driver, but would put say, 10 drivers at the smaller company, out of work. While it would not matter to the larger company driver, which type of HOS rules come along, that driver should care about how they would affect the smaller company driver and stand with the smaller company driver to find a compromise rule that would not adversely hurt the smaller company driver. EOBRs might not matter too much to a younger in experience driver who comes from a prior career where they were micromanaged. This driver perhaps started out with a large training company who already utilizes some sort of electronic logs and does not know any other way of working. They do not understand that the cost of installing EOBRs might put a 30-truck company out of business, or how invasive they will be to a driver’s personal privacy. They should take a stand so that EOBRs are by choice for a company, not that they are mandatory so the small company driver can stay working. Jason’s Law is another area where there is much divided thinking. To a driver who works in the western 11 or in the Midwest, parking might not be such an issue while to a driver who works the eastern seaboard or California, safe and adequate parking is virtually nonexistent after a certain time of day. Drivers should understand that parking is an issue and stand up for safe and ample parking for all drivers in all areas. There are interlocking issues and topics that lock all truckers together; we all drive trucks that are fairly standard as to engines and mechanical similarities. We all haul freight of some sort whether it is talking, hot, cold, dead, small, or large. We all drive on highways made of concrete or asphalt and have to deal with the same traffic. We all are required to hold a CDL of some sort to do our jobs and we all have to follow the same federal regulations if not state. We all do our jobs looking at the world though a windshield sitting on a seat bumping along to make a pick up or delivery while under some sort of schedule. When you look at it that way, there are more similarities than differences and we are more like family than strangers. In a family, the family stands together and protects each other; one steps in when another member is threatened and the good of a family takes priority over the good of a stranger. This is how we truckers are going to have to start thinking of each other, as brother and sister drivers who are part of a larger family outside of blood relation. We have to start working together to protect each other both in our personal safety and our job security; we all cannot work for those huge companies. Finally, we have to stand together and show each other the respect due us as professional drivers. No one else is going to give us that, not even our companies to a great degree. By showing each other respect we will learn how issues can affect our brother and sister drivers and help them by standing up with them to fight for our rights and to stop the abuse of each other by everyone from the government to the companies we work for. John Donne had it right when he wrote: No man is an Island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankind; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee. John Donne, Meditation XVII English clergyman & poet (1572 - 1631) We truckers are interlocked in the trucking industry, it is time we understand that and remember that eventually the bell will toll for us, if not on any one current issue, eventually another will come along that affects you specifically; wouldn’t it be better if you had someone to stand with you when that time comes? Start now by recognizing the interlocking similarities between us, the differences do not matter.
The definition of Junk Science is simple, from junk science.com; "Junk science" is faulty scientific data and analysis used to advance special and, often, hidden agendas. The people who might use junk science are: The MEDIA may use junk science for sensational headlines and programming. Some members of the media use junk science to advance their and their employers' social and political agendas. PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS may use junk science to bamboozle juries into awarding huge verdicts. Large verdicts may then be used to extort even greater sums from deep-pocket businesses fearful of future jury verdicts. SOCIAL ACTIVISTS, such as the "food police," environmental extremists, and gun-control advocates, may use junk science to achieve social and political change. GOVERNMENT REGULATORS may use junk science to expand their authority and to increase their budgets. BUSINESSES may use junk science to bad-mouth competitors' products or to make bogus claims about their own products. POLITICIANS may use junk science to curry favor with special interest groups or to be "politically correct." INDIVIDUAL SCIENTISTS may use junk science to achieve fame and fortune. INDIVIDUALS who are ill (real or imagined) may use junk science to blame others for causing their illness.
I remember when, as a rookie driver, someone did a big slanted study on drug use by truckers because of some major wreck at the time where the driver was either drunk or doped up. Because of this, the TV show 20/20 went out to Colton California to the old Waterman Street truck stop and did interviews of the drivers lain over there for the weekend.
Of course, truckers being truckers, many who were interviewed took advantage of being possibly on TV and told ‘trucker’s tales’ of how drivers all were handed big handfuls of speed when dispatched. Then the TV crew went over to Colorado Kids, a bar next to the truck stop, on Saturday night and filmed truckers who were partying. The TV show producer then edited this into the infamous “20/20 Killer Truck Driver” segment showing that truckers were all pill popping, drinking while driving killers of innocent people. Talk about sensationalism!
It does not stop there. Shortly after this segment and study, the government decided that seeing as how truckers were such dopers, that they should be pulled over for random roadside drug testing; yes, the pee in the bottle whenever told to law. Some companies even had these test kits in the trucks for the tests. OOIDA jumped into this fray and got it stopped, but this faulty science thought keeps sneaking into the government’s head. Within the last few years, there was talk about drawing blood during routine stops to check for drugs and alcohol.
Another media tactic using ‘junk science’ that is still fall out from that ‘20/20 segment’ is that of starting to call any accident concerning any size of truck for instance, “Drunk Truck Driver Kills Five”. It is only in the last paragraph that one finds that it was a pick up truck involved in the wreck.
Accident statistics are another area that are often misquoted by the media and others who benefit from ‘junk science’. The number of fatalities involving semi trucks per year is around 5,000 people. Approximately 80% of those accidents were not caused by the truck driver, but were the fault of the other vehicle. The media rarely mentions the ‘who’s at fault’ part of the statistics, only concentrating on the semi trucks kill 5,000 people annually slant.
The above led, along with being given the right to advertise, to lawyers who started specializing in personal injury cases involving truckers. Billboards abound, the yellow pages are full, the web is covered with lawyers who’s main goal is to promote fear of truckers that are going to ’run over you’ but it is ok, the lawyer can get you millions of dollars in settlements if you hire them to take your case.
Another media focus is on prostitution at truck stops that further defames truckers. Some crime happens at a truck stop concerning a prostitute, the local media jumps in, has someone do some sort of statistical analysis about how many hookers are at truck stops (though I have no idea how they would come up with that figure), then write big stories about it. Of course, this only happens in big city truck stops and nothing is mentioned about how many hookers are working on the street corners down town. Next thing you know, the major media are covering undercover ‘sting’ operations to catch those nasty truck drivers who avail themselves of a prostitutes services making it seem that every trucker does this.
All of this ‘junk science’ has led to truckers being viewed not as the important part of the economy or as the public servants they are, but as terrible people who are only out to party, do drugs, chase lot lizards and kill you and your family in your car. The general public follows along believing in everything they read or hear from the media, not realizing that sensationalism sells and newspapers and TV shows are there to make money in one way or another.
Add to that the fact that when an accident happens involving a semi truck, it is usually quite spectacular and you have the perfect start for more ‘junk science’ against trucks and truckers to be used by more groups for their benefit, surely not the trucker’s.