Truckers across the United States may soon face an impossible choice – an inordinately expensive and unnecessary medical test, or losing their right to drive.

The topic at hand is sleep apnea, and the FMCSA’s Medical Review Board is recommending a testing standard for the illness that could encompass a significant portion of all U.S. truck drivers.

And while that board is strictly advisory, the mere thought that this could happen has many truckers near rage.

However, that brings us a very logical question: If cross-border trucking is every allowed, will the feds make truckers from Mexico get tested for apnea?

Not likely. And that, along with the probability that they won’t follow any other regulations that U.S. truckers will have to, is a real problem.

Are truckers likely to face a double standard here? In the medical field, as with many safety and pollution regulations, the answer has clearly been yes.

Yet while the feds have let those trucks escape notice, on the state level, at least a few officials are trying to do something.

Let’s go back to the emissions standards.

Several years back, I interviewed a California legislator who was pushing a bill that would prevent any truck from entering the state if it didn’t meet certain emissions requirements.

She acknowledged that some U.S. truckers could suffer a financial hit from the idea. But she was very clear in saying her bill was aimed at trucks coming in from Mexico.

Under her plan, if those trucks didn’t meet the requirements in her bill – requirements tougher than the EPA standards at the time – officials would stop it at the California border.

At the time, I urged truckers to call her and let her know what they thought of her bill to eliminate any possible double standard.

We’re always eager to tell lawmakers when they do bad. We should be equally eager to tell them when they’ve done good.

However, this is no guarantee that someone will fix the overall problem – the double standard. This is what we call a glimmer of hope. And to keep that glimmer alive, we must act.

Please, make that call today.

Although the contents of care packages sent through OOIDA Truckers for Troops are important, just as important is making it clear to the troops serving overseas that people here still think of them, and still care.

Many of the thank-you letters we received during the past year reflected that sentiment – and this one is a good example.

On behalf of my squad, and myself, I would like to say thank you very much for the packages that were sent to us. All of the soldiers were very appreciative.

Next September will be much better when we are back with our families. Everything here in Ramadi is good. Spirits of the soldiers are high and some have started leave back to the U.S. to get to see their families.

Once again, thank you for the packages and thank you for the support. It’s nice to know that we are thought about.

Respectfully,

Sgt Kreston Taylor

And 3rd squad 2nd plt B Btry 158 FA

We all know by now about some good things that have happened in Ohio.

The state’s decision to end the split speed limit on interstates, for example, is a big cause for celebration.

Some folks have found other things to cheer about – and some to jeer about – in Ohio.

For example: The state’s decision earlier this year to add more E-ZPass lanes to the Turnpike.

Some folks were celebrating the move. But I’m not so sure that adding more E-ZPass lanes is good news. I’m not sure there’s anything good about it.

I know it helps folks move down the road more quickly. But the move toward more electronic tolling has a lot of known and potential consequences that I think may very well outweigh any benefits.

Let’s take one not even related to trucking: the loss of jobs in an already rotten economy. Weren’t people involved in collecting tolls?

And for another, as systems like E-ZPass expand, it will make it easier and easier for states to look toward expanding tolling. And that is a very bad thing indeed.

What’s more, the number of booths taking cash gets smaller and smaller. How does that make things for truckers who want to use cash? It’s going to be slower and slower.

Another concern – how long do you think before we see these systems used for enforcement? It’s pretty easy for a computer to look at when you got on and when you get off, and from that figure your speed.

That’s not to say I’m advocating speeding. But it is to say that when a state claims that this will maintain your privacy, I think that’s just not honest. If they have information, and they can use it to ticket you, in the end I think they will.

And that could apply to other things besides speeding – and not necessarily in an accurate way. They could take that information and make assumptions about your logbook – assumptions that may or may not be correct.

So over all, I guess this is one case where I don’t feel like celebrating. But hey, at least this makes Ohio 1 and 1 – and that’s a way better record than the Kansas City Chiefs.

We often say that the troops who receive care packages through OOIDA’s Truckers for Troops Telethon are the sons, daughters, husbands and wives of truckers.

But in many cases, they are truckers, ordinary Americans who are part of the National Guard or Reserves who were called up for duty over the past eight years.

This letter of thanks for a care package is a good example of that.

Please allow me this opportunity to thank each and every one who helped with the telethon in support of the troops. The items you all sent over were all used and appreciated.

SSG Steward came to me and showed me the letter you included and asked if I knew anything about you. I told him I used to be a member several years ago, and that you were the voice of independent truckers. At one time I had five trucks of my own and two owner-operators leased to my company. I now have one truck which is presently parked until we return.

I have always believed that your organization is a good one, and this gesture of kindness proves it. We all thank you for putting forth the effort and taking your time to organize such an event. We thank each and every driver for supporting us. Let them know that they are all in our prayers.

It is nice to know people are thinking of us and are willing to give their money in support of us despite high fuel prices and all the other expenses associated with owning trucks.

Have a wonderful day and thanks again!

Sincerely,

SPC Dennis M. Hutto

US Army IRAQ

A while back, public officials, industry experts and others gathered to discuss the topic of distracted driving.

That summit meeting has lit a fire under public officials across the nation, and suddenly everyone’s on the topic.

And while truckers can talk about all kinds of distractions down in the four-wheelers they’ve seen from the cab, most of the focus is on a very limited number of distractions – including texting and cell phones.

All of that discussion about texting ignores an important question: Is texting really the biggest problem we have on our highways?

Personally, I think texting in a moving vehicle is a whole different world than other distractions. A lot of us have trouble typing at all. Now, we’re talking about typing with just your thumbs. Not good at all when you’re behind the wheel.

But, that aside, we have a far more serious and important problem to solve here. We don’t even offer driver’s education as a regular school class in most parts of this country.

How can we expect our young people to know how to drive if we don’t teach them.

And please don’t give me the “parents will do it” line. Yes, many of us will be responsible and spend real time with our kids teaching them what we need to know.

But unlike all you of you reading this, most of those parents are not professional drivers. Many have enormous lists of bad driving habits themselves, and only a handful are good teachers.

We’ve come to expect the lack of driver’s education, to accept it as normal.

But honestly, folks – we teach sex education so kids don’t get pregnant, we teach home economics (or whatever they call it these days) so they can feed themselves, we teach math so they can add, we teach all kinds of subjects that we think are good general knowledge that they may never use again (dissect a frog lately, anyone?).

But we don’t teach them the one subject that could save them from the No. 1 cause of young people dying.

In what world does that make sense?

It’s easy to scapegoat truckers and others for problems on our roads, but we have a bigger problem that we’re ignoring. Until we get really serious about training our drivers, what makes us think they’ll obey the latest restriction or rule?

Folks, most four-wheelers can’t pass a simple driver’s test on their first try. Some states even offer it now open book.

Let’s solve the real problem, and stop spending so much time on what amounts to a distraction.

Editor’s Note: I wanted to share this message I received with everyone out there.

If you heard our program this week, then you know about an attempt to add an amendment to a motor coach regulation bill – an amendment that would force EOBRs onto every truck in the U.S.

Well, we received this note today here at OOIDA Headquarters from Todd Spencer, OOIDA's executive vice president.

Good news!

If you’ve ever wondered whether making phone calls to lawmakers really makes any difference, wonder no more. IT DOES! You just proved it once again.

As we expected, Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey offered his amendment calling for EOBRs and tracking devices on all commercial trucks at a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. And thanks in no small part to the thousands of phone calls to senators on that committee, he just as quickly withdrew it.

Great job, guys and gals!

The phone calls made all the difference --- and a hearty bravo to all of you that made the calls. Thanks for getting involved.

Todd Spencer

I got another glimpse of what it must be like to be a truck driver the other day. I must confess in my almost five years here I’ve only been inside a truck a handful of times. And only one of those times was on the road.

Howard Hart, our beloved former driver of the OOIDA tour truck, The Spirit of the American Trucker, was kind enough to take me for a ride one day so I could see for myself what the world looked like from up there. There was increased visibility in many respects. I felt like I was sitting high up on a mountain and could see for miles around.

And yet, in the truck’s blind spots, I often couldn’t see what was right at the base of that mountain. I had that feeling again recently after my car was broken into. The front passenger-side window was smashed and the thieves made off with a beat up old leather bag that had my lunch bag inside. Nothing of value, really, unless they enjoyed scraping bottom of the container inside for any shreds of the leftover lasagna I had for lunch earlier that day. Bon appétit, jackasses.

What I was left with was a shattered window on a cold, bitter night. Thankfully, there was a Home Depot nearby and we obtained a tarp and some duct tape to cover the window and keep me from freezing to death on the ride home. Is there nothing duct tape can’t do?

I was also left with a massive blind spot on the passenger side of my minivan. Yes, I drive a minivan. I have kids now. It’s the law. So there I was, rolling down the highway in the dead of night, constantly craning my neck, trying desperately to see around the blind spot and make sure I didn’t run over anybody.

Sound familiar? I don’t know how you all do it every day, but I’m glad you do.

OOIDA goes to incredible lengths to collect cash owed truckers – including seizing personal assets

Monday, Dec. 14, 2009 – “There has to be a price to pay.”

That’s what OOIDA President and CEO Jim Johnston said recently about the Association’s latest attempt to collect what truckers are owed from Ledar Transport, a Kansas City, MO-based motor carrier.

Typically, making someone “pay the price” would involve taking money from the motor carrier.

However, in the case of Ledar, the association has gone much further – seizing, with the court’s permission, items such as a lawnmower, stereo equipment, televisions, tools and video games – essentially, the personal possessions of the people who own that carrier, taken right out of their home.

It’s been a long road to that point. The Ledar case has been around for more than a decade now – even though at first, it looked as if it would be over quickly.

A little history

OOIDA first went after Ledar Transport in March of 1996. The Association contended that Ledar had committed multiple violations of the Federal Motor Carrier Leasing Regulations. That same year, the judge in the case, Fernando J. Gaitan Jr., ordered the company to return escrow funds to truckers.

By 2000, OOIDA had filed a second court action against the carrier on behalf of a larger group of Ledar truckers, alleging more leasing rule violations – including the rules’ escrow requirements.

Apparently, the judge in the case agreed.

In November of that year, Judge Gaitan issued a preliminary injunction against Ledar. Under the injunction, Ledar could not haul any freight in trucks it didn’t own unless it fixed its leases so they complied with the leasing rules.

In 2001, OOIDA took the case another step. At that point, the suit was not only against the carrier. It named the principal owners – Carl E. Higgs, Alice Norma Higgs and Scott L. Higgs – as defendants as well.

Finally, the second suit against Ledar ended the same way as the first. On Dec. 30, 2004, the judge ruled in favor of OOIDA and the truckers.

Damages in both cases were determined, and OOIDA moved forward to collect the money owed the truckers, along with other expenses – just under $1 million in damages in the second Ledar case.

And that – according to Belinda Harrison, an attorney working with OOIDA – is where the trouble began.

“It’s been incredibly difficult to collect the money owed in this case for a number of reasons,” she said.

The three principal owners of Ledar – Norma, Carl and Scott Higgs – avoided paying the judgment that OOIDA had won in court. They refused to tell the court where their assets were, and even refused to say what assets they had.

The court issued an order on OOIDA’s behalf requiring them to disclose their assets. One of the respondents pleaded the Fifth Amendment.

That series of events led to Dec. 2, 2008.

On that date, OOIDA officials, sheriff’s officers and a series of tow trucks arrived at Ledar headquarters. The group left with two tractors, a utility vehicle and one of the owner’s personal pickup trucks – all taken to help pay the judgment awarded to the truckers in the case.

Of course, that didn’t come near paying the full amount owed. And that is where we come to Oct. 19, 2009.

It sounded like a Christmas wish list

On that date, again with the judge’s permission, a similar group went not to Ledar’s offices, but to the homes of some of the principal owners. At most locations, nothing of value was found.

But at Scott Higgs’ home, OOIDA officials, the sheriff, the process servers and others did find what they were looking for – property that could be used to pay the truckers back.

But not company assets, or even the owners’ personal vehicles. This time, the seizure was much more thorough.

A personal flat-bed trailer, a chainsaw, a John Deere riding lawnmower, golf clubs, a dining table with chairs.

A big screen TV, an LCD TV, a DVD player and a VCR player.

A receiver and stereo speakers, model trains, model planes, Atari and Xbox video games.

A Les Paul guitar, a baby grand piano and a Fender amplifier.

All kinds of personal goods, all seized to help satisfy what the court says Ledar and its owners owe the truckers who suffered damages at their hands.

Attorney Belinda Harrison has worked with OOIDA throughout the process, and was part of the OOIDA team that day. During a recent conversation, she recalled how things went down.

“We were executing on four locations at the same time – two personal properties and two business locations,” she said. “Because we wanted to prevent the various respondents from notifying each other … we had to hit at all four at roughly the same time.”

Early that morning, all the folks involved in OOIDA’s action gathered at a public location. That group included tow trucks, locksmiths, sheriff’s officers, process servers, outside counsel, OOIDA personnel, and others.

“It was quite a little gang of people,” Harrison said.

Also involved were several private investigators retained by OOIDA to watch all the locations involved – and the defendants in the case.

“We had personal vehicles on the list that we were … entitled to secure if we could find them,” she said. “Unfortunately, we weren’t successful in that effort.”

At three locations, nothing was found that could be seized.

“They’ve already hidden the assets or just didn’t have any assets to begin with,” Harrison said.

But at the other, they did find something – the personal property now in OOIDA’s hands.

A different kind of case

Recovering money for truckers isn’t the only reason the Ledar case is important.

Unlike many of the cases regarding federal leasing regulations, the Ledar case was filed against a relatively small carrier – making it clear the Association would go after any carrier that established a pattern of abusing truckers.

It also involved two separate court cases against the same entity.

But for OOIDA and the truckers involved, Ledar represented a double victory for another, very special reason.

That’s because the case – to put it in the words of OOIDA President and CEO Jim Johnston – “pierced the corporate veil.”

Most of us have probably never heard that term. But Johnston says it’s an important principle in court.

“When you incorporate a business, you get certain legal protections. … They protect you personally; the corporation is exposed, but you personally are not,” he said. That protection is the “corporate veil.”

Problems arise when a company does not follow “the corporate form.” If they don’t do things like having board meetings, using separate accounts that are not accessible for personal use, and so on, then the corporate veil can be pierced – and people suing the company can get to the personal assets of the corporation’s owners.

“In the case of Ledar, the principals essentially used that like their own personal bank account,” Johnston said. “They did whatever they felt like doing with the funds and the assets of the corporation, and were personally responsible for some of the egregious violations that took place.

“So the court approved what’s referred to as piercing the corporate veil, meaning we could go after the individuals personally and go after their personal assets to recover losses that truckers suffered.”

And to collect money owed to truckers under a court judgment, that ability – to pierce the corporate veil – is an invaluable tool.

Hide and seek

Belinda Harrison says that in cases like this, the folks being sued have all kinds of ways to hide their property and avoid paying the judgment.

In fact, she says that when it comes to personal property, it’s not really that hard at all for defendants to hide what they have.

“Much of it there’s no record of, so that’s a pretty simple fix; you just, you just hide it,” Harrison said. “I mean, you can hide it with relatives, you can sell it – there are all kinds of things you can do with personal property.”

If that personal property is registered – like a car – that’s a different story. Those are much harder to hide, although it’s still not impossible.

However, the process becomes even harder as the defendants acquire more property.

“When they go to secure additional assets or new assets, and they title things in the names of friends and family … it evades execution, because if it’s not titled in the defendant’s name or the respondent’s name, then you have no right to it,” Harrison said.

“The more dogged pursuer will eventually get their judgment settled as best they can. But if you give up at any point, you’re just going to be out of luck.”

That very situation has turned out to be the case with Ledar.

Jim Johnston said that collecting from the actual company, from Ledar itself, was nearly impossible.

“On several different occasions – I believe three and possibly four times – they simply closed down the company that was the target of the lawsuit and emptied out all the assets to another corporation,” he said. “In so doing, we’re going after an empty shell when we go after the corporation that they’ve just abandoned.

“It’s like the old shell game: Where’s the assets? They’re just continually moving them from one place to another.”

Harrison said that’s part of a greater problem for folks collecting money won in a suit.

The U.S. legal system is designed to protect people’s rights – even the rights of those who have lost court cases.

And even though other court processes are in place to help those who win to get access to the money they’re owed, it can still sound like an advanced game of hide-and-seek for laymen who are unfamiliar with the legal system.

“There is a mechanism by which you can learn of their assets called post-judgment discovery,” she said. In the case of Ledar, “that has been propounded upon respondents, but they just refuse to respond.

“When that happens, you have to go back to the court, and you have to ask the court to compel them. The court has to rule on that,” Harrison said. “Of course, that all takes time, and in the meantime, they’re hiding assets.

“We’ve played that game for quite a while, and when we finally did get a judge’s order to compel two of the three respondents to respond to the discovery … it was incomplete,” she said. “The third respondent pled the Fifth, which the court clearly … ordered him not to do.

“Now we’re back in court with respect to that respondent, and that’s the respondent that has the majority of the assets.”

Where do we go from here?

Despite the difficulties, OOIDA continues to press forward with its efforts to collect the money owed to the Ledar truckers – even though the entire amount may never be obtained.

Jim Johnston points to the important principles involved – not just on the legal front, but also in terms of how the trucking business has evolved in recent years.

Carriers like Ledar, he said, don’t make their money by hauling freight. They pursue profit through lease-purchase deals with their drivers, and often through charge-backs to the truckers involved.

As a result, those carriers can keep the trucks moving by offering rates far below the actual cost of hauling the freight – forcing all the other operations in the industry to lower their rates in order to remain competitive. And that, he said, pushes down rates for all truckers everywhere.

For those reasons and many others, Johnston says he intends to carry the process to the very end.

“We intend to pursue whatever recovery we can reasonably obtain,” he said. “But even more important, we don’t want to see them just restart this thing and go after it again.

“If left alone, they’d simply restart the whole scam, and it’s hard telling how many truckers could become victims of their practices.”

–By Mark H. Reddig

Host, Land Line Now

mark_reddig@landlinemag.com

Well, the 2009 Truckers for Troops Telethon is drawing to a close. The week went by so fast. I can’t believe it’s almost over. We had a blast putting it together, as we do every year. It’s like Christmas around here. We look forward to it for so long, get ourselves all geared up for it and then – poof – suddenly it’s the day after Christmas and we’re in line at the mall returning that ugly sweater that Aunt Ethel bought us.

We won’t have final numbers in for a while yet, but this year seems a bit slower than last year or the year before. Of course, both of those years wildly exceeded our expectations and we knew we couldn’t ride that wave forever. Especially not with the economy the way it is.

Last year, we went into the telethon thinking that things were bad and there’s no way we would do as well as we did the first year, back in 2007. We beat that first year by a country mile. We went into this year with cautious optimism – an attitude we are still clinging to, even though we know this year’s numbers aren’t likely to top last year’s.

Which makes the participation of those who gave this year all the more meaningful. We’ve been living in this down economy for well over a year now and we know folks have it rough out there. We know people are scrimping and saving and holding on to every last nickel they can find. That’s why it means even more – to those of us here at OOIDA and to our troops serving overseas – that a few of those nickels found their way to us this year.

I know things are starting to look up for some parts of the economy, but the trucking industry is still suffering. We all know that when things go south for the economy, trucking is hit first and worst. It’s going to be a little while yet before things right themselves again.

That’s why we want to send a special, heartfelt thank you to everyone who participated in this year’s Truckers for Troops Telethon. We know it wasn’t easy to do. We know, in some cases, it probably even hurt a little bit. That’s why you need to know how much we appreciate it.

One of my favorite stories about trucking involves the first year I was at MATS for Land Line Now, back in 2008. That was when the economy was in the midst of its downward spiral and nobody knew how long it would last. That year, in the parking lot at Papa John’s Stadium, there was a concert held to benefit Chance Rodgers, grandson of OOIDA member Jim Rodgers. Chance had been diagnosed with bone cancer and was in a fight for his life.

Before the show started, a call was made for donations and these truckers – who were at that moment just beginning to feel the sting of the economic downturn, and who needed to hold on to every dollar they could just to buy $4 a gallon fuel to make it to their next load – began digging into their pockets and launching $20 bills toward the stage. It was the most amazing act of generosity I had seen – until the Truckers for Troops Telethon later that year.

My point is the generosity of truckers has never ceased to amaze me, and the telethon this year is no exception. Even though we may not beat the records of previous years, or even match them, I think we’ll still have enough to make more than a few men and women in uniform happy, even if only for a little while.

Whether we send 100 boxes or just one, the value to those who receive them is the same. And you can’t put a dollar amount on that. Thank you to everyone who helped out this year.

At this time of year, it’s traditional for all of us to say what we’re thankful for.

It almost always includes friends and family, and that’s certainly on my list. My health is another.

Personally, I’m thankful to be doing what I’m doing, to not only have a job, but to have one where I feel every day like I’m helping people.

I’m also thankful for the truckers out there – the ones I’ve met, and the ones I haven’t had an opportunity to meet yet. It’s been an honor to work on behalf of all of you, and I hope to do it for many years to come.

Normally, I’d also talk about what truckers are thankful for, asking as many as I can for their list.

But this year, I wanted to do something different. I wanted to tell the truckers who is thankful for them.

Over the past year or two on this blog, we’ve been running a series of thank-you letters from members of our armed forces overseas who have received care packages paid for by the Truckers For Troops Telethon.

Folks, this is your money. You are the sole reason this can happen. And I want each and every one of you who dug into your wallets in the toughest economy ever to understand just how much you are appreciated.

So here is a series of links to the many thank-you letters we’ve run, so you can read them all. Many are addressed to OOIDA, or to Connie Becraft, one of the folks heavily involved in our efforts.

But in reality, all of them are for you, the truck drivers. So here it is: your Thanksgiving message from our troops.

BIG THANKS!

Another box of goodies

'My team thanks you all for being great Americans'

Touched by a generous gesture

Truckers love letters from kids

A letter from home is always good

'You helped keep our spirits lifted!'

'Patriotic, supportive, thankful and selfless'

Brightening the faces of many soldiers

EVERYTHING was greatly appreciated

A double-shot of thanks

Soldiers paying it forward

'We are not forgotten'

Making a gift 'even more special'

'WOW - A huge thanks'

'The care packages were perfect'

'I am proud to serve'

'Pretty awesome'

'We are not forgotten'

Many soldiers with a single box

'Welcome by everyone here'

'We really needed everything you sent'

'There are still people in this country who stand for principles'

Don't take for granted the time you have with your friends and family

Sharing the caring ...

'It's nice to know that you are thinking of us over here'

A member says thanks on the troops' behalf

Another note from a grateful soldier

A soldier sends appreciate for care packages

A Letter from our Troops

Care packages also catered to women in uniform

Care packages are like Christmas all year long

Family and friends led OOIDA to soldiers who received packages

From every package, many soldiers find a piece of home

Thinking of others before themselves

Letter from a soldier: Tonya Harrington

Thanks came from family and friends as well ...

A letter from SFC Jerry Andrew

A letter from Cpl. Dennis J. DeForest Jr.

A thank you letter from Sgt. Andrew Phelps

Editor’s note: At the request of a number of OOIDA members, we are publishing a transcript of my conversation with Melissa regarding the health care reform debate currently under way in Congress.

A few quick notes: We initially covered the health care reform topic in response to member requests – truckers who wanted to know some specifics about how the bill could affect small businesses. Essentially, it was same situation that has led us to offer you this transcript.

We should make clear at this time, that this information was up-to-date as of the day it aired on Land Line Now. However, as Melissa notes in our conversation below, this bill is changing as we speak, and the final version has yet to be written.

In fact, new information is already available regarding some of the specific areas Melissa discussed, such as the effect on small businesses, and amendments to the Senate version are being made … and rejected.

That being said, per member requests, here is my conversation with Melissa Theriault Rohan from Nov. 25, 2009.

MARK REDDIG: Land Line Now thanks for joining us today.

There’s a bill out there that could have a huge impact on every trucking business. And it’s one that we haven’t covered much.

It’s the health care bill – or more precisely bills, since there are at least two versions still out there.

OOIDA hasn’t taken an official stand on this, and we haven’t covered it much on the show because this is not a trucking- or transportation-specific measure.

But because any business small or large could see their operations change under this plan, we think we really need to provide you with some insight into what’s happening.

Here to discuss what you need to know is Melissa Theriault Rohan of OOIDA Washington, DC, office. Melissa how are you doing?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: I’m doing real well; thanks for having me on.

MARK REDDIG: Well, glad to have you here. Let’s start with going over what the House bill calls for that truckers need to know. And in this case, I want to start with, what are the basics as far as how this applies to individuals, and how it would affect individual people?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: If you do not have an insurance provided by an employer, then you would be required as an individual to purchase insurance or pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of your income, up to the cost of the average national plan under the exchange.

MARK REDDIG: Now you mention exchange; what do we mean by the exchange?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: The administration would be required to establish as part of the administration an insurance marketplace that they’re calling the exchange. And this is where people without access to affordable coverage through an employer could purchase comprehensive plans. Basically this is the public option.

MARK REDDIG: Now through the exchanges, wouldn’t you also be able to purchase other private plans that would be thrown into the exchange

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Yes, at this point, with the House version, that is true.

MARK REDDIG: Now ah what about folks that don’t really make enough to actually afford to buy insurance at the prices that it’s offered at today. Is there some provision in there to help them out or to deal with that?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: There are a couple of things. First off, they would be expanding the Medicaid program under the House version to 150 percent of the federal poverty level which is $33,000 for a family of four.

So if your family or if you made $33,000 or less, then you would be eligible for the Medicaid program, and it would kick in for you. Now, if you make above that $33,000 for a family of four up to $88,000, then if you fall within range again, $33,000 to $88,000, you would be able to have subsidies available to your households for the programs on the exchange.

MARK REDDIG: Now that’s individuals, but obviously there’s also a lot that is going to apply to employers here in the House plan, and, again, we’re talking about the version of the health care bill that currently in the U.S. House. So let’s start with the general stuff about employers – not stuff that would apply to employers off any particular size, but all of them. What are the common requirements that employers would face under the House version of health care?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Well, they’re calling this the pay or play provision. So if you hear it in the news, this is what we’re talking about. Basically, small businesses that are below a payroll of $500,000 would be exempt from this provision. So anything, any small, any small business or any business that’s above that $500,000 threshold would be required to offer health benefit coverage to employees.

And then there’s another provision. So, if you’re a small business owner and your payroll is between $500,000 to $750,000, you would pay lower penalties than a larger business, if you did not provide health coverage. So there’s a lot of different caveats to this.

Also, if you are a business with fewer than 25 employees, average wages of $40,000, then you could get tax credits that could amount to as much as 50 percent of premiums. So this is … pretty good for small businesses, especially for the smallest of small businesses. Um, it really wouldn’t cost a small business much, if it did at all.

In an independent study that both Republicans and Democrats are using, basically, if you’re a firm that’s fewer than 10 workers, and currently provide health care benefits, the cost per worker would actually drop by $829 per worker.

Uh, now, if … the burden actually lies if you have a firm that’s 25 to 100 employees, because, according to this study, those small businesses, or those businesses, would see costs rise an estimated $412 per worker for a year.

MARK REDDIG: And of course, these are averages in a study, these wouldn’t apply exactly to every business in those size categories.

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Correct – this is based on a study that is pretty highly regarded by everybody that’s covering this health care bill.

MARK REDDIG: And, and just for clarification here, one of the things we have as a problem, all of us out here, not only in the business you and I engage in, but also every member of the public is, both sides politically are spinning this their own way. Is this a non-partisan group or a partisan group that did this study?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: This is a non-partisan group. It’s, um, called Lewin Group, it’s a subsidiary of United Health Group, and they conduct analysis of health care policy and operate independently of insurance carriers. It’s completely a non-partisan, and is a 3^rd party. They are not beholden, really to anybody, and they are just providing these studies. And, like I said, it is being quoted and used by numerous folks.

MARK REDDIG: Now, one of the things that we’ve seen with health care up till now is big businesses had an advantage because they had this huge pool of employees that they could use to bargain for rates. Small companies just didn’t have that. And for years, there’s been a lot of barriers to small companies gathering together in order to try and purchase that pooled coverage as a unit. Um, is there anything in the law to fix that particular problem in terms of buying insurance for small companies?

Both the House and Senate, and the administration are looking to create a large pool, and that’s why they’re requiring everybody to get on to … into an insurance program, whether it being the public or a private option, because they want these larger pools.

Now as an individual, you know, if you were currently on your own going to get insurance, you wouldn’t be able to benefit from a pool. Or if you had a small business, and you were trying to get, um, insurance for your employees, you also, again, would not be able to benefit from the pool – whereas large companies are able to provide health benefits to their employees at such a low cost because they do have these pooling mechanisms.

So, both the administration and the House and the Senate are all trying to create these pools to reduce the risk.

MARK REDDIG: Now, we’ve talked so far about the version in the U.S. House, and we have just a couple of minutes left. Can you give us some differences – what are some of the key points where the Senate version differs from the House version?

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: The Senate version isn’t finished yet, um, and we don’t know when it will be. So this can change before it’s passed. But currently, as it stands right now, it creates a public option, but it allows states that don’t want to participate to opt out. And that’s huge. Whereas the House version, there would be this public option.

Also, the penalties for individuals on the Senate version starts at $95 in 2014, but for the individual it would rise to $750 by 2016, or a max of $2,200 per family. So I think that’s an important difference there.

Also, there is a difference as far as how they treat small businesses. In the Senate version, it talks to … about a small business not in the terms of payroll, but in terms of number of employees. So the, um, threshold in the Senate bill is 50 employees. And then the penalty to an employer would be $750 per person on their payroll. Now, there are, uh, more stipulations to that, but that’s the basic information there.

MARK REDDIG: And when we say penalty, we’re talking about if firm larger than 50 people doesn’t …

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: Correct.

MARK REDDIG: … buy their employees insurance.

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: The Medicaid, like I mentioned before, would be expanded, but it’s slightly lower on the House bill. Theirs would be $29,000 for a family of four. But other than that, everything’s pretty much looks similar to the House version – when we’re talking about small businesses or the individual.

MARK REDDIG: Well, Melissa, thank you very much for the information, I know it’ll help people out a lot.

MELISSA THERIAULT ROHAN: I hope so.

MARK REDDIG: Thanks for joining us. We’ve been talking Melissa Theriault Rohan of OOIDA’s Washington, DC, office.

For some time, we’ve been talking about climate change legislation, including the so-called cap-and-trade system.

Here’s the basic idea. Every company that emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is allowed to emit only so much of it. That’s the “cap” part.

They receive something called carbon credits – basically, a certificate that says this is how much you’re allowed to let out into the air.

Well, if they don’t use all the credits they’re allowed – meaning, they don’t put out as much carbon dioxide as the government said they were allowed to – then they can sell some of their credits to someone else, say, someone who needs to let out more carbon into the atmosphere.

All that being said, it’s drawing a lot of comments, and some very real concerns, from truckers all over the nation.

As I understand it, most of this is aimed at stationary sources – like an electric plant. Mobile sources, like trucks, aren’t a target … yet.

However, no one can say what could happen five or 10 years from now.

Here’s what they are talking about that could affect you. Every refinery that makes fuel for your truck emits carbon. If they get so limited that they have to buy carbon credits, they’re going to have to charge more for that fuel.

We don’t know exactly how much. And, realistically, I think any estimate at this point is kind of useless.

But I think I can say with confidence that it will be more than any of the estimates. And when you think about the prices you were paying last summer, and then you think what if that hit, and this was on top of it … well, you get why so many folks connected to trucking are worried about this plan.