er 11. I assure you the cost of such measures cannot be completely absorbed by the transportation industry. As we saw with airlines in the days following September 11, the transportation industry is very volatile and anything that disturbs its ebb and flow could cripple the industry. Not to mention the fact that the industry has become so competitive that adding an additional cost could force smaller firms out of the market. The government must do as President Bush has recommended in his budget proposal and step in and subsidize the cost of heightened security. NAFTA is scheduled to open Americas borders by the end of the year. Following allegations from Mexico that the US was not living up to its part of the treaty, President Bush has vowed to open the southern border. If not, a NAFTA Arbitration panel has warned that, the US could be subject to stiff fines. Once the borders have been open you can expect the volume of truck traffic at the border to increase exponentially. This could create a multitude of problems at ports of entry that are already plaque by congestion. Bushs budget proposal offers to spend money on security initiatives such as ITS, smart cards and multi-functional databases that not only promise tighter security but also could make it more efficient to process containers and freight thus helping to eliminate some of the congestion along the southern border. If it is necessary to reduce spending in other areas to cover the cost of improving security then we must cut spending. I will reiterate the importance of the government shouldering the cost of such security measures. It is certain that another catastrophe or ay additional cost to firms could have dramatic affects on the industry. So if it is necessary for other sectors of government to face cuts then so be it. However, the Bush administration should not use money held in reserve to fund projects that are facing cuts. I think that this could be detri...
