The Trans-Texas Corridor - A Justification for Keeping the Borders Open?

Have you ever heard of the Trans-Texas Corridor? It is described this way by critics:

Imagine this: your state government puts a transportation corridor in your neighborhood. It’s nearly a quarter-mile wide. It will serve vehicles and trains and incorporate oil, gas, electric and water lines. Try to fight it and you’ll not only face the combined might of your local, state, and federal governments, but foreign interests as well. The internationalization of U.S. roads has begun.

We’re not just talking about isolated instances of privately-built toll roads with foreign management, as we’ve seen in Southern California. We’re talking about networks of toll roads that may be built by foreign builders, managed by foreign operators, function primarily to accommodate foreign goods, and connect U.S. roads to similar networks in Canada, Mexico and, later, Central and South America.

The purpose of the corridor is trade: the movement of goods across a network in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Interstate 69 is "a 1600 mile planned national highway" involving eight states, connecting Port Huron, Michigan to the Texas/Mexico border."
The Texas section:

In Texas, I-69 will be part of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) project – a 4000 mile network of existing and new toll roads – which will create the largest private highway system in America. Interstate 35, also called the Oklahoma to Mexico/Gulf Coast element, will be developed as part of the TTC.

Plans call for the TTC to be 1200 feet wide with 10 vehicle lanes (three passenger vehicle lanes in each direction), truck lanes (two in each direction), six rail lines (three in each direction), two tracks for high-speed passenger rail, two for commuter rail and two for freight. The corridor will include a 200 feet right-of-way for oil, gas, electric and water lines.

Politicians are "walking in lockstep with international trade groups such as North America's Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO), The North American International Trade Corridor Partnership, (NAITCP) and the Central North American Trade Corridor Association (CNATCA),

NASCO (www.nasco.com) describes itself as a “public/private, non-profit corporation seeking to create an international trade corridor system throughout North America, secure funding for certain projects, i.e., tax dollars, and promote the development of International Trade Processing Centers. A lobbying group, linked to other lobbying groups, it is “partnered” with the North America’s Supercorridor Caucus in Congress and working with Senate committees on a Multi-State International Corridor Development Program. Tim Brown, a Bell County, Texas Commissioner is President.

NASCO opines that, because of “several important trade agreements, the heartland of America enters a new era as a geographic crossroad for international trade.” They refer to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) nations of Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. and “those who will follow,” doubtless meaning the CAFTA and FTAA (pending trade agreements) countries of Central and South America. NASCO’s Web site links to the NAFTA Secretariat site where you may view "the complete text of the NAFTA."

The NAITCP (www.naitcp.org) purports to be a “partnership of cities of Mexico, the United States and Canada linked by a trade corridor that works to promote economic and social development in our region.” NAITCP just held its 11th annual summit in Mexico, May 11-13. It was called “Hemispheria, the North American Convergence Summit,” and featured working groups on “Trade and Transportation Corridors in North America, Smart Borders, and Cultural Integration.”
The CNATCA (www.cnatca.org) aims to encourage “continued economic integration between the three North American countries and to foster greater collective involvement in the emerging global economy.” Dedicated to “proactive global citizenship,” the Association’s Web site presents the flags of Canada, the United States and Mexico both horizontally and vertically, but as one entity, the U.S. flag between the other two.

CNATCA’s project, the Central North American Trade Corridor, extends from Alaska through the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, through North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, the Oklahoma panhandle, and Texas, and then south of the U.S. border to Mexico City. ....

Why foreign involvement? Besides cost considerations, modern trade agreements prohibit discrimination against trading “partners”, i.e., foreign suppliers of goods and services, even in the area of government procurement. NAFTA, for example, mandates treatment “no less favorable than the most favorable treatment” the U.S. accords to its own goods and suppliers.
Another NAFTA mandate – and likely the primary impetus for developing the Texas corridor – authorizes Mexican trucks to transport international cargo throughout the U.S.; it also allows the establishment of Mexican trucking enterprises in the U.S. and permits Mexican bus services throughout the U.S.

Opposition is is building, and the Bush administration is pushing for additional free trade pacts. Free trade is one thing, but foreign ownership and operation of toll roads within the United States is another.

What guarantee can the American people be given that this network will not harm them? A stunning revelation: under these conditions, no guarantee is possible nor is it likely that the any proposal to guard the border will be seriously entertained.