Warning all leased O/O

I'm not familiar with any of the court rulings against MA, but their ABC test is identical to California's. So I would assume once California's law hits the SCOTUS & if it's upheld, MA will enforce their law.

 

Could the PRO Act become law?

 

What I read was the first circuit's ruling on the MA version was almost the exact opposite of the 9th circuit's ruling on the CA version, and that this is the exact type of scenario that the Supreme Court was made for. So if it passes Congress, then the next round would theoretically be in SCOTUS, where again, the odds seem bleak.

 

Interesting update from OOIDA

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has started the process of marking up this year's Highway Bill. OOIDA is opposing the legislation unless the proposed insurance increase to $2 million and several other anti-trucker provisions are removed. While no votes have taken place yet, there has been discussion on Bost Amendment #184 which eliminates the $2 million insurance mandate.

Thanks to all your calls and hard work supporting Bost #184, 12 Members of the Committee spoke up on behalf of independent truckers and adamantly opposed raising insurance levels (typically only 1-2 Members will speak on an individual amendment). Given the partisan nature of the markup, the amendment failed on a Voice Vote and a recorded Roll Call Vote will take place later tonight. While we anticipate Bost #184 will unfortunately fail on a party line vote, the attention the amendment received will ultimately help defeat this poison pill provision as the legislative process moves forward. Our fight will continue as this bill heads to the House floor and the Senate advances its own version. We'll work with lawmakers from both parties to stop this harmful policy from ever becoming law.



We would like to thank Reps. Mike Bost, Rodney Davis, Garret Graves, Doug LaMalfa, Dusty Johnson, Jefferson Van Drew, Michael Guest, Beth Van Duyne, Pete Stauber, Carlos Gimenez, Troy Balderson, and Ranking Member Sam Graves for defending the rights of small-business truckers.

You can see a list of all the efforts OOIDA is supporting and opposing during the markup here. We thank you again for all your outreach!

-OOIDA Call To Action Team

 

I read there were two rulings, but I didn't know the opposite ruling came from MA. I'm not to sure the odds are bleak in the SCOTUC though. The court is conservative with textuals which means they interpret laws as written, providing the laws are constitutional.

 

But Amazon still paid 1.8 billion in taxes.

 

Republicans, Democrats divided over House highway bill
JUNE 9, 2021

Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee called out a highway bill for its lack of bipartisanship during a markup hearing on Wednesday, June 9.

Last week, the House T&I Committee unveiled the five-year, $547 billion INVEST in America Act. The bill is similar to last year’s HR2 highway bill that ultimately failed in the Senate.

“Our Republican proposal provided increased and historic levels of funding – moving toward the majority’s position in that regard – but today’s bill moved further away from a compromise by adding yet another 11% increase over their bill last year,” said Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., ranking member of the T&I committee.

House T&I chair Peter DeFazio, however, said passage of the bill is critical. The current surface reauthorization bill expires at the end of September.

“America’s surface transportation infrastructure is in crisis,” DeFazio, D-Ore., said. “Our roads, bridges, public transit and rail systems are badly outdated, causing stress and safety hazards for our citizens, strain on our economy, and an enormous toll on public health and our planet. At the same time, other nations are out-investing us, and moving people and goods faster, cleaner and better than ever.”

Highway bill amendments
The debate over the general partisanship of the bill consumed the majority of the markup hearing well into Wednesday.

As of late Wednesday afternoon, the committee was still waiting to consider a number of amendments to the bill.

One of those amendments, which is extremely important to small-business truckers, was Rep. Mike Bost’s proposal to strip a minimum insurance increase on motor carriers from the bill.

The original version of the Invest in America Act included a measure to increase minimum liability insurance from $750,000 to $2 million.

OOIDA’s stance
The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association called the insurance increase a “poison pill” to the highway bill and supported Bost’s amendment.

OOIDA sent a Call to Action to its members on Wednesday, June 9, asking them to call their representatives to ask them to vote for the amendment.

“Beginning today, your representative in the U.S. House will vote on a number of trucking related provisions, including whether or not to increase your minimum insurance requirements from $750,000 to $2 million,” OOIDA wrote. “Your representative has a choice – to stand with truckers and remove harmful provisions from the House highway bill or continue burdening small businesses with costly mandates.”

OOIDA also was lending support to amendments to eliminate personal conveyance mileage or time limits, as well as to strike a potential side underride guard mandate, a sleep apnea screening mandate, and an automatic emergency braking mandate. The Association also supports amendments to stop FMCSA from using electronic logging devices for “research” and one that would prohibit and penalize the act of staging crashes.

In addition, OOIDA opposes amendments that would allow under-21 drivers to operate in interstate commerce and one that would increase maximum truck weights for logging vehicles.

Although OOIDA opposed several measures in the original highway bill, the Association is extremely supportive of the proposal’s provision to provide $1 billion over five years to address the nation’s truck parking crisis. LL

 

Government is like an out of control crack addiction. Absolutely right hopefully someday the popul will wake up and WE THE PEOPLE TAKE IT BACK!.

 

The last few paragraphs under "Looking Ahead" is what's so troubling.

 

Look at us sitting around debating public policy like a bunch of Kennedys lol.