With the price of oil, and also the price of fuel, rising once again, it brings up an old, and familiar topic.

Speculation. That nasty effect that drove prices into the upper atmosphere last summer.

During the election, we were promised some regulation of that, something that would lessen the possibility that market traders could artificially raise the price of oil and diesel in defiance of market forces and damage the whole society just so they could line their lousy, silk-lined pockets.

(Sorry, I’m still angry over last year.)

So where is our promised regulation?

Well, before the administration can step in, Congress has to pass a law allowing that regulation.

And, well, we know how long it takes Congress to do anything these days.

Plus, they seem entirely focused on alternative fuels, with little attention being given to problems faced by those of use still fueled by petroleum, rather than wind and solar power.

Never mind that we’re the overwhelming majority of the country; the attention is going elsewhere these days.

Nevertheless, we were promised some regulation of the oil futures market, and of the off-shore trading. A little call here and there to remind our members of Congress that we’re still waiting isn’t a bad thing.

Meanwhile, one other note to those who say the whole thing is based on “market demand.”

The fact is, the supply and demand for oil, and for diesel fuel, never fluctuated by the same percentage as the price. If the price were strictly determined by the supply and the demand for the actual product, that would be the case.

What did exist was not more demand for oil itself, but more demand for futures – an artificial market commodity created by our financial system, a piece of paper.

The problem was heightened by the low requirements for engaging in oil futures trading. Traders have to invest less of their own money, and can borrow the rest they need to buy the “future.” They pull a profit out of the transaction when they sell the product represented by that piece of paper, having risked very little of their own cash.

The fact is, in a true free market economy, profit is supposed to be higher when you face more risk. More risk, more gain. However you want to put it.

Real risk would be if I bought the oil, I had to store the oil and incur those costs, and then I sold it for a profit, risking the fact that it may have gone down in price. Futures trading – as it exists for the oil market – allows the profit of that transaction without any of the real risk.

When we create these artificial systems to “represent” actual commodities on the market, and we don’t regulate them so they are reflective of the true free market, we are – as a society – asking for this stupid crap to happen.

We’re waiting, Mr. President. We know you have a lot of your plate, but we’re waiting … and we’re watching.

One of the big issues that is used as a justification for the fatigue checklist and other efforts is the presence of sleep apnea.

Even the FMCSA’s medical review board is obsessing on this topic, proposing that up to half of all truckers be compelled to pull thousands of dollars out of their own pockets for apnea testing, even absent any prior statement by a doctor that those individuals might have the illness.

Far too many people have bought into the sleep apnea argument without thinking, without questioning, without evidence.

And why is that.

Well, you want to find out what’s really driving something, you follow the money. That’s what trucker Warren Riley suggested when he called recently, and as far as I’m concerned, he hit it on the head when he mentioned the money trail.

First, Land Line Magazine staff writer Charlie Morasch has documented connections between members of the medical review board and companies that profit off apnea testing and equipment.

In addition, Melissa Theriault Rohan, who works in OOIDA’s Washington, DC, office, has attended most of the medical review board’s meetings.

Melissa says every time a trucker testifies, hordes of vendors – people who supply apnea equipment and testing – gather around that trucker, asking them to endorse their product.

This has become a feeding frenzy, a process controlled by people who have a direct financial stake in making truckers, no matter what the cost in personal, medical or financial terms, be tested for this illness.

When people talk about our medical system in America, they often talk about cost control, that the cost of medical care is far too high in comparison with other countries.

And one of the areas that’s identified as a significant part of the problem is the cost of unnecessary medical tests.

Well guess what, folks? What do you think they’re proposing here?

They want hundreds of thousands of truckers to undergo a medical test, a test costing up to $10,000 a shot, a test not called for after a careful medical examination, but instead a test based on arbitrary and inaccurate figures.

They want to do this to a profession where double the number of people lack insurance compared with the general population.

They want to do this in the name of safety, despite the lack of any scientific evidence whatsoever linking this illness to safety.

They want to do this even though the portion of the trucking population most likely to be tested are in fact statistically the safest drivers.

Want to know why the cost of medical care is so high in this country? Look no further than crap like this.

I eat Wheaties every once in a while.

And of course they downsized the box.

The old box was 3 inches thick and 12 inches wide and when you picked it up, it actually had a little heft.

Now it’s 2 ½ by 10 and almost weightless.

Same thing with the newspaper.

They downsized it from a big, rolled up bundle chock full of news and information to a wimpy play-like paper full of ads—but very little information.

It’s no longer suitable for lining a bird cage because there aren’t enough square inches to do the job.

The final indignity came when I picked up a one-pint plastic container of my favorite baked beans at the grocery store the other day.

The container didn’t feel right, and I noticed it wasn’t brim full like it should be.

It was about 80 percent full.

So I checked two or three other containers and found they’d all been downsized.

I fully expect that someday soon, you’ll walk onto a truck dealer’s lot to pick out your new ride and find that the cab has shrunk so much that you don’t have any headroom—and the steering wheel’s the size of a Frisbee.

Dude, you’ve been downsized.

But look behind you—they super-sized the 60 foot trailer!

No one seems to like the government these days – even the people who elected it.

And even fewer people seem to like the way government is starting to get involved in private businesses.

Your government is helping run your car companies. They’ve bailed out – and are setting rules for – your banks. And depending on who you listen to, they may be taking a far bigger role in health care.

But the latest I heard was a trucker upset about how the government is running TWIC – the Transportation Worker Identification Credential.

Most of you know by now what TWIC is – a card you’ll need to get into any port nationwide. And it is a mess. Multiple trips to get the card, offices located far away from truckers’ homes, and in places trucks often can’t drive to, extra cost, questionable benefit, and so many missed deadlines on the way that some thought it would never materialize.

But this is not a case of your government at work.

The government doesn’t run TWIC or those offices. It’s a private company the government hired to do it.

If this is how a private company operates this program, frankly I wish the government were running it. As much as I’m suspicious of government, and I am, I can’t think they could possibly run the TWIC program any worse.

Now that doesn’t mean I want the government running some of the other things they are these days. Some things, governments are good at. Other things, private companies do better. Both should keep to their own spheres, where they do the best work.

But I have to say, TWIC is something that every private company involved has screwed up royally. At this point, I wouldn’t be averse to seeing it disappear completely.

It’s done little to help security, but it has cost truckers a lot of hard-earned money, and taken up years of time, all for nothing.

Oregon is apparently considering a California-like system for controlling emissions from trucks, including aerodynamics and other physical changes in the trucks themselves.

Several folks have called to complain about the plan itself, and problems they see with it. And for the most part, their criticisms are on target.

Oregon has a point, too, which I’ll grudgingly admit. Things like skirts, fairings and super singles can increase fuel economy by marginal amounts. That’s well known.

But according to the bulk of science done, one factor has a bigger impact than any other – driver habits.

A well-trained driver who understands how to adjust his driving to increase fuel economy can make a 35 percent different in mileage.

35 percent.

Most of the physical changes that can be made to a truck offer an increase of far less than 10 percent, some only 1, 2 or 3 percent.

So why all the focus on those? Why haven’t Oregon, California and other states pushed for more and better driver training? Why haven’t they set up information on those driving habits that do increase mileage?

For me, that’s a question we really need to have answered.

OOIDA has pushed for more and better driver training for years. And yet, every time something like this comes up, it’s always about technology. We can never expect people to learn or adapt or perform. We just need bigger, better more controlling machines.

Bullhockey. The science is conclusive.

States, the feds, big trucking companies, all of them, don’t want to do a better job training drivers because that’s hard.

Plus, you’ll notice that many experienced drivers, more skilled drivers and such, expect more pay. That isn’t gonna get you a smile when you walk in to see the dispatcher. Teach new truckers better, and they’ll expect to be paid what they’re worth. Can’t have that, no sir.

We have a tendency in our society to keep solving the wrong problem. This is a particularly vexing case of that disease.

Until they figure out what the real problem is, and try to solve that, nothing they’re trying to address will really change at all.

I’m about tired of Mexico.

Not the country, and certainly not the people. The government and its major trucking association are the ones who have earned my ire.

We are watching the Obama administration, our national government, basically kowtowing to officials in Mexico, who put illegal trade sanctions on U.S. goods after Congress said no to an ill-conceived and illegal pilot program.

Illegal because Congress had cut off funding – and yet it continued. Ill-conceived because pilot programs are supposed to show us how something would work, so we can decided if we want to do it more. This program showed us only the arrogance of the previous DOT.

But something else going on here is illegal. And that is the trade sanctions Mexico imposed.

The NAFTA panel that ruled the U.S. must allow cross-border trucking also said, in the same ruling, that the U.S. has the right to employ the same, or stricter, safety standards to trucks based in Mexico as it does to trucks based in the U.S. and Canada.

But the fact is, those trucks don’t meet the standards. And through no fault of their own, neither do the drivers.

Mexico has no MVR database. It’s required here. They do not have a drug testing, not one certified lab in a nation of 110 million people. They do not have an hours-of-service rule. Their equipment safety rules, if they exist, are clearly not enforced.

This is why Todd Spencer and other folks say the trade sanctions that Mexico placed on the United States are illegal. They have not yet met their end of the bargain. Therefore, why should we prematurely keep up ours?

It’s also why it’s so perplexing that the Obama administration – an administration led by a man who voted against cross-border trucking in the Senate – and the Department of Transportation – led by a man who voted against the pilot program in the House – would push to start this whole mess again.

Let Mexico get their house in order before they send their problems into our house.

That is what NAFTA says. And that is what needs to happen.

We’ve been bringing you some of the thank-you notes from soldiers who received care packages as part of OOIDA’s Truckers for Troops effort. And since all of you paid for the care packages, we wanted to share some of the notes with all of you.

Here’s a recent offering, addressed to OOIDA staffer Connie Becraft.

Dear Connie,

On behalf of the Marines of Regimental Combat Team 3, thank you for the care packages you have sent to Afghanistan. When our guys get things from back home we feel remembered. Most of us are far from a place where we can buy things, and care packages mean a lot.

Sincerely Yours,

CDR Steve Unger
Chaplain, RCT 3

One sure sign that the economy seems to be improving is that the oil market is up to its old tricks again.

Last summer we had a wildly inflated oil market that seemed to be operating in direct defiance of the laws of supply and demand. In other words, the price went through the roof regardless of whether or not the market forces were actually pushing it that way.

If you remember at all what life was like before that giant spike, you remember that the oil market was extremely sensitive to the slightest hiccup in the supply chain. A refinery closing down for five minutes would cause a panic and send oil prices climbing faster than the space shuttle 10 seconds after liftoff.

Remember Hurricane Katrina? That was a major supply disruption and the oil market went haywire. The retail market went right along with it. That was in 2005 and there are still price gouging investigations going on to this day.

But last summer was different. There was no Hurricane Katrina. There was no major supply disruption. There was no reason. There was no excuse. A bunch of folks just got real greedy real fast.

And then the bottom fell out and it all came tumbling down. In the months following the crash, the oil market was, on the whole, stable. At least, as stable as the oil market can get. There were no wild spikes, no major price increases. There were some supply disruptions, but the market didn’t respond to them at all. It was as if the investors were afraid. Who knows? Maybe they were.

But now, as we head into summer and the economy is showing signs of a recovery, albeit a slow one, those investors seem to be getting bolder. The price of oil hit above $71 a barrel the other day, and gas prices have gone up sharply past month. Diesel is moving slower, but it, too, has been on the rise in recent weeks.

And why? Well, it depends on who you ask, but the two main culprits right now are the signs that the economy is starting to improve and a weakening dollar. How you can have both of those things happening at the same time is beyond me.

The point is, investors are doing things in reaction to those events. Some investors are betting that, because the economy seems to be looking up, the demand for oil will be going up along with it, so they are pouring more money into the oil market. That demand has yet to materialize, by the way.

Others, meanwhile, are looking for a safe place to hedge against the falling dollar, so, once again, they are turning toward the oil market, which seems to be looking up again.

The upshot of all this is that we went from a market last summer that completely ignored the laws of supply and demand to one that was hypersensitive to those laws, and now we seem to be heading back to one that’s ignoring them again. The market’s immunity to common sense remains unchanged.

We enjoyed several months of stability in the oil market after the crash. Looks like that’s over now and it’s back to madness as usual. Many people have learned valuable lessons from this recession. The traders in the oil market, it seems, are not among them.

How do you solve the problem of red-light cameras?

For some, the solution is simple: Don’t run red lights. If you don’t, then you won’t ever face the ticket that comes from that camera.

As simple as it sounds, that is a correct statement.

But of course, that’s not why OOIDA and others oppose these things.

These are not safety devices. They’ve never been intended to be. They are strictly there to raise revenue for cities, and for the private companies that operate them.

That raises several problems.

First, should a city or state be able to harm numerous citizens with a ticket, often which can go on their record, which might be the fault of another driver, not the owner who gets the ticket, just because the city can’t be honest and raise a tax or cut spending when they have a budget problem?

Second, do we really want a private company in charge of our law-enforcement, especially when they are given a financial incentive to fine more citizens?

Third, Land Line Magazine reported some time back about a U.S. Department of Transportation study that found that rear-end crashes actually increased in cities with red-light cameras. That’s because no one wants to get a ticket, so they stop abruptly at the yellow light, often leading the car behind them to collide with them. With that in mind, should we be putting revenue above the physical safety of our citizens?

Does any of that sound like a good idea? I don’t think so, and I can’t believe you think it is either.

Not running the red will save you the ticket. But there are bigger issues left even if you’re not fined.

Before you know it, the networks will be out with their Fall TV lineups.

American Idle – the heroic story of one courageous trucker’s struggle to stay warm in Northern California without an APU. Peter Bilt stars as Chatter N. Teethe.

Dancing With The Cars – the harrowing saga of trucker Dodge M. Barely coping with cars that hang in the blind spot, cut back in way too close after passing, or abruptly pull out from side streets allowing zero braking distance.

(FM)CSA Miami – a knee-slapping comedy featuring two hapless federal regulators who impose new hours-of-service rules on truckers – 2 hours on, 2 off, 1 on, 3 off, 4 on, 5 off, 4 on, 3 off.

America’s Next Top Model—an exciting audience participation show that pits models like the Freightliner Cascadia against the International Lone Star. Weekly winners are decided by an applause-o-meter.

These are just a few of the great shows I’ve heard will premiere this Fall.

Land Line Magazine copy editor Elizabeth Andersen offers two more:

Dipstick Jungle is a dramedy that follows the professional and personal lives of three best friends, all of whom are top professionals. These three powerful truckers are always there to support one another and navigate the crazy and sometimes scary world that is the National Highway System.

Skin and Bones was inspired by real-life meetings of the Medical Review Board. Sleep expert Dr. Temperance BMI has an uncanny ability to detect CPAP non-adherence and addiction to Biggie-Sized Value Meals. She tracks down truckers and hounds them so relentlessly that their gross weight plummets.

The other day, I was walking out of the OOIDA building on a particularly rainy day.

I was the last person (outside of the cleaning crew) to leave that day, so the parking lot was, for the most part empty.

But as I headed toward the car, I saw the oddest thing: a single crawfish, right there on the blacktop, staring right at me.

He must have come out of the cattail-clogged drainage ditch behind the back parking lot, just a few feet away, and crawled up to take a look around while everything was wet.

The little bugger had taken up a defensive position, kind of up on his hind legs, both claws raised in the air toward me, as if to say, “You want some of this, buddy? Keep walkin’ this direction.” Obviously, I had trodden in his territory, or so he thought, and he wanted me out.

I found it entertaining. The idea that this tiny, inch-or-so-long crustacean would ever think, with his brain the size of a pinhead, that he was a threat to me. I laughed a bit, got into my car and turned over the engine.

As I left the parking lot, I looked back. The crawfish was turning each time I or my car moved, making sure his claws were always pointed directly at me. Ballsy, I thought. You gotta give this little guy credit for bravery.

As I drove away, I had a thought. In a way, this little mini-lobster was a lot like so many of the truckers I’ve met.

Facing off against a world far larger than themselves – massive multi-billion-dollar shippers, mega-carriers, federal agencies with hundreds of employees – truckers typically stand their ground when they think they’re right, refusing to back down. Bravery is a common virtue, but so is standing alone.

And that led me to another thought.

My little crawfish friend represented no threat to me. But if I came out into the parking lot that evening and saw 160,000 crawfish, I suspect I would not have laughed. Although I don’t think I’ve ever done it, I very well might have screamed like a little girl.

Think about it: 160,000 crawfish, all pointing right at you, claws raised. All of them saying, “You want some of this, buddy? Keep walkin’ this direction.” That’ll get the adrenalin pumping.

That’s why, in my mind, OOIDA makes so much sense to truckers. You may stand your ground. And the massive forces lined up against you may choose, as I did with the crawfish, to ignore you, to not crush you, or even may choose to do as you ask.

But they don’t have to. It’s hard for one person to inspire minor concern, much less fear, in such large entities.

But when truckers gather and work together in large numbers, those entities have a very different reaction. At 160,000 truckers, they tend to start really paying attention. Perhaps some will even scream like little girls (OK, maybe not, but if you showed up all at once in their parking lot, hey, it could happen).

As more and more truckers join, the association gains more and more ability to compel change that benefits truckers. If each of those not only adds their membership, but also calls and writes their elected representatives, if they all make comments on regulations, if they all attend city council meetings to speak out for more truck parking options, if they all run compliant, if they all stand together, then that combined strength becomes great enough to really command attention.

If you leave the fold, or if you never join, continuing to stand alone, then you become just another tiny crawfish with his claws up in the air. And not everyone out there is going to be as tolerant, or as sympathetic, as I was to my little crustacean friend.

Want to know how powerful we can all be? Just imagine 3.5 million crawfish comin’ atcha.

It makes my voice go up an octave just thinking about it.

I don’t think it’s a novel bit of info that GM is in the crapper right now. But I’m not sure it’s appropriate to make it worse.

OK, General Motors has made some mistakes. But they’ve also done good, made many, many great automobiles, provided a good living for many Americans – and hey, let’s not forget the role they’ve played in wartime, supplying our troops with military vehicles and such.

Yet now that they’re in bankruptcy, at their financial bottom, with nearly worthless stock and taken over by the government, that’s what some folks seem intent on doing – finding whole new ways to point out that they’re living in hell.

The latest was CNN Money. The Web site offered up an article recently featuring GM’s biggest failures:

· The original Corvair, which inspired Ralph Nader to give us the phrase “unsafe at any speed”;

· The oil-slurping Vega;

· The Cadillac Cimarron, an expensive version of the far cheaper Chevy Cavalier.

· And the Pontiac Aztek, which some say inspired one of the greatest “Saturday Night Live” fake ads of all time – for a mud-based car called the Adobe.

I can understand doing a serious article about why GM is in this mess. I would be pleased with someone interviewing some experts – real experts – about what kinds of steps would lead to a positive outcome.

I intend to call my members of Congress about this, to let them know what I think about the situation, so they know my opinion when they perform their oversight function in relation to this car deal. Hey, my tax money’s on the line with everyone else’s, whether I like it or not, and I want to make sure that I get as much of my tax money back out of this deal as I can.

But how does listing off a few individual failures help that? Seriously, when we’re all in this economic mess together, when we’re all suffering through hard times, how does this inform us, how does this help?

Ford had the Edsel. Chrysler had the – well, Chrysler had a lot over the years. I love the Mopar, and I’ve owned a batch of those suckers, but hey, I’m not delusional.

My ’75 Plymouth Valiant Brougham with its V8 318 may have cooked down the road, and I may have loved it personally, but it sucked down gas like a drunken sailor and it was out of style the day it came off the assembly line. Let’s be real.

Every car company in the world has had its failures – even those who are not in bankruptcy. Those individual models, bad as they may have been, are not the reasons this company is playing the Titanic in our little play. Listing those cars now is not helpful.

With the jobs of so many Americans – including tens of thousands of truckers who haul everything from parts to finished cars – depending on these companies, reporting something useful instead would be appreciated.

That sounds nice doesn’t it? After all, what could be more comforting?

If you’re traveling through Missouri, you might see those words on some of the bridges you cross.

It’s a nice, square sign, with just three words and a nice graphic drawing of a bridge, all in a pleasant blue color on a white background.

Each of the signs, below the drawing of the bridge, says those comforting words: “Safe and Sound.”

The word “safe” is a little bolder than “sound,” as if to emphasize that this is a safe place.

As you cross the bridge, you’re probably thinking, hey, this is Missouri. I’m driving this big heavy truck, and they have a lot of bridges that need work. And this particular bridge I’m crossing doesn’t look too good.

But don’t worry. There’s that sign. “Safe and Sound.” Ahhh. It must mean that my bridge here, even though it looks kind of ratty, is a safe and sound bridge.

Well, guess what, bubba? That nice little sign means the exact opposite. In fact, if you see a sign on a bridge in Missouri that says “Safe and Sound,” watch out.

It means that bridge is one of the 802 lowest rated bridges in the state. Some of them actually have holes in them.

The state DOT even has pictures of some on its Web site. Check it out: Modot.mo.gov/safeandsound. Just under their online map, they have a rotating group of photos showing crumbing concrete, holes in pavement and rusted metal.

That’s what this sign means. This sign means that this bridge is so bad, it’s either one of 248 that are being bid out in small groups, or one of 554 bridges that are part of a massive, single bid.

All are so bad, the state wants them replaced within 5 years.

When last I looked at their Web site, only 25 of the bridges were complete; 34 are under construction, and 743 are still waiting to be worked on.

Safe and sound my Aunt Fanny.

That cute little sign should be replaced instead – with a warning label. How about something with a skull and crossbones that says “Danger Will Robinson,” or maybe “Warning: This bridge is one of our worst.” Or how about all capital letters screaming, “ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR GEAR-JAMMIN’ MIND? DO NOT CROSS THIS RICKETY OLD BRIDGE WITH AN 80,000 POUND TRUCK. IT HAS HOLES IN IT.”

I only say this because as I recently traveled the state’s highways and byways, I saw a massive amount of truck traffic crossing these very bridges, most likely driven by folks wholly and completely unaware that their “safe and sound” bridge is anything but.

Let me tell you about one of the roads I saw this on. It was a two-lane highway in a rural area of the Ozarks. I sat in a café on a street corner, eating my roast beef sandwich, and in five minutes counted over a dozen and a half fully loaded semis pass.

And based on the direction they came from, and the roads that lead to that point, each and every one of them, I guarantee you, passed over one of those bridges.

This is PR gone amuck. And I say that with all respect for PR folk. I know many who do excellent work for the public good, our own Norita Taylor among them. I even know some at MoDOT who are top-notch folks.

But why in the name of Route 66 would you put a sign that says “Safe and Sound” ONLY on your WORST bridges? What kind of logic is that? Can you say “counterintuitive,” boys and girls? There – I knew you could.

I applaud MoDOT’s efforts to repair their bridges. I applaud the stepped-up, urgent schedule. I love the sense of priority, that highway money is going to real highway safety, that someone, anyone, is addressing the condition of our national infrastructure.

But how about a little common sense? Please, so people know what they’re crossing, so people don’t put extra strain on these structures, change the signs.