In 2006, ITR Concession Co., a partnership of Macquarie Infrastructure Group of Australia and Spanish toll operator Cintra, paid the state of Indiana $3.85 billion for the right to operate and collect tolls on the Indiana Toll Road for 75 years.

The contract immediately raised concerns on the part of truckers, residents, lawmakers and others across the political spectrum.

Among the concerns: questions about how well the private operator will maintain the road; concerns about a contract clause that prevents the state from improving or expanding roads within a certain distance of the toll road, even if traffic counts require it; and another clause that allows the private for-profit operator to increase tolls regularly throughout the 75 year terms of the lease.

Add to that some much more basic concerns: that citizens had already paid for the road themselves, that truckers pay fuel tax to use what is now a private road ON TOP of tolls, and that we’ve turned over a vital piece of our national infrastructure – and therefore, a portion of our domestic security apparatus – to foreign concerns.

Also weighing heavy – the thought that other states would pursue similar deals.

And now, we have this:

An OOIDA member named Kenny Nelson called us about a sign on the toll road. It said basically: To avoid traffic congestion in the Chicago area, take the Chicago Skyway.

So Kenny, naturally, assumed the other routes into Chicago from Indiana were congested, but the Skyway wasn’t.

At least, he did – until he heard radio reports that no congestion existed on any of the roads.

Well, guess what. The same outfit that owns and runs the Indiana Toll Road owns and operates the Chicago Skyway.

Well, well. What an incredible surprise.

A private for-profit toll operator used nonexistent congestion to try to drive traffic onto another highway they own, where they charge another, separate toll.

Are we really surprised? I don’t think so.

In fact, this kind of behavior is a very lightweight version of what some of these companies – including one involved in the Indiana Toll Road – have done in other countries.

In Australia, one privately operated road had a contract clause they used to force public officials to close down existing alternate routes to force traffic onto the private toll route.

Let me say that again. They forced, through a clause in their contract, the government to shut down an existing public street that was an alternate route to their private toll road. And the purpose was to force people like you and me to use the toll road, since there was no longer any other choice.

Behold the future, my friends. If we do not stop this trend toward tolling our interstates and selling them off, we could face a future where you pay fuel tax, plus a toll on every highway, and the alternatives eventually shut down.

This isn’t fantasy, this isn’t conjecture. In some places, this is already history.

Let’s all call our lawmakers. Let’s make sure this history doesn’t repeat itself.

In this particular case (which involves Swift Transportation), the claim against the carrier is that the lease-purchase truckers are improperly classified as independent contractors when they should be classified as employees – which would entitle them to the same benefits as employees.

I wrote this response (to stress that I was agreeing with another trucker’s comment on the original posting). In looking over what I wrote, I thought it was worthwhile to share it with all of you:

I used to be a landlord, and I became very familiar with IRS rules while doing that over 20 years.

I can tell you that if I leased a person the equipment they used to perform a job, then they became my ‘independent contractor’ – after which I told them when to start work (pick up load) and when to stop work (drop). And if I required them to meet a whole host of obligations that required me to withhold money to pay for services I provided, the IRS would have kicked my butt-ocks (in the words of Forrest Gump) for not classifying them as employees.

I would owe a ton of back Social Security taxes, and I would pay penalties out the wazoo for the misclassification.

Someone who lease-purchases a truck from the carrier they work for is not the same as an owner-operator who owns their rig independently and leases on with the carrier.

I’m not putting down those folks, and have met many who are good, honest, hard-working and safe truckers.

But the bulk of carriers who are offering these deals aren’t doing it to help the truckers become owner-operators; they’re doing it to shift the cost of doing business on to the trucker, and to make money off the trucker INSTEAD of making their money off hauling freight.

Lease purchases hurt everyone in this industry because of that. Since the carriers involved aren't making their money from hauling freight, they take loads that pay far less than anyone else could, driving down rates for the entire business.

It’s about time someone called their bluff on this, and held them to the same standards that any other company in any other business is held to.

These dirtbags like to spout off supposed “facts” about how trucks are responsible for most of the major collisions on our highways; trucks cause more deadly wrecks each year than any other vehicles on the road; trucks will murder you and your entire family, and burn your house down, and kill your dog, and sell your grandmother so they can buy meth, and on and on and on.

The trouble with these “facts” is that they are all completely, totally, 100 percent wrong. But these guys don’t care. All they care about is scaring people half to death so they will call these law offices and sue trucking companies so that these lawyers can line their pockets with a little more green.

Well, I have some real, honest-to-God facts I would like to share with these ambulance chasers that might just shut them up once and for all.

A recent study from the Web site Insurance.com analyzed accident claims and the professions people listed when applying for car insurance online. They looked at the people who admitted to having been in prior accidents when applying for car insurance. They broke the list down by profession to determine which profession had the most prior accidents.

You’ll never guess who topped the list. I’ll give you a hint: It wasn’t truck drivers. It wasn’t even NASCAR drivers. It was – are you ready for this? – lawyers. Judges were also lumped into that same group. Truck drivers didn’t even make the top 10.

So the next time you see one of those ads – and you know you’ll see them again, they never go away – maybe you should call the law offices and inform them that, according to Insurance.com, lawyers are the most dangerous drivers in the country.

Guess it’s hard to keep your eyes on the road when you’re too busy looking for your next victim.

Received your care package yesterday here at Camp Victory, Iraq. Everyone really likes the caps with the scratch marks on the bill.

I shared out the contents with other Soldiers, Airmen, and Marines in my area. The trail mix is a huge favorite, as was the self-heating cocoa.

Had our biggest duststorm of year a few days ago, so the Q-Tips have been really helpful as well to help clean the sand out of our weapons and equipment.

Thanks again,

Allen Stratton

However, what the state does not have in many places are new signs, or at least signs that correctly identify what the law is now.

In fact, we heard reports from quite a few folks from all over Illinois. The entire mess left truckers wondering what would happen if they drove at 65. Would they be fine? Would they get a ticket?

We decided to find out for ourselves. And the news is good.

Our folks here at Land Line Now contacted the state, and they stay that the law is the law, no matter what the signs say.

That means your legal speed limit is 65 miles per hour.

I think what you’re seeing there is yet one more state that is struggling with budget problems. Even if you’re not talking about a new sign, it costs the state. They have to either hire someone or take their state workers off other necessary work and put them on taking down signs.

Since they’ve laid off workers in so many states, that means work that really does have to be done, like repairing huge potholes that could damage vehicles, might be left while this is done.

I don’t offer that as an excuse for Illinois, but only say it to explain what they’re thinking.

So here’s the downside: The signs are still up, and the speed limit is still lower in the six counties that surround Chicago.

That will be the case going forward, and it was a necessary compromise to get this passed.

But don’t forget the upside: The state patrol has told us that your legal speed limit is 65 as of New Year’s Day.

He had a lot to say about the economy. His main point was that, right now, all signs point to things getting worse before they get better. I posed the question the other day on Diesel Update of whether or not we were headed for a so-called “double-dip” recession. Most folks who called in said yes. Steve seems to agree with you.

In spite of that, there was some good news in what Steve had to say. One positive note is that people are reducing their debt faster than ever. Credit card spending is way down. Loans are down. Debt is down. Dave Ramsey would be proud.

The other edge to that sword, though, is that it also means that nobody is spending right now. And nobody spending means fewer dollars going into the economy. And fewer dollars into the economy means that companies will continue to cut back. And companies cutting back means that there won’t be many jobs available. And no jobs means more people out of work. And more people out of work means fewer people spending. And fewer people spending means fewer dollars in the economy.

Dizzy yet? Me, too.

So what’s a person to do? Do we whip out the Visa and go on a spending spree in hopes that we can goose the economy back to life? Of course racking up massive amounts of debt is part of what got the economy in this mess in the first place.

Okay, we can’t go into debt, and we can’t save, so what does that leave us with? It is possible to spend without going into debt. I know people who pay cash for everything right up front. They don’t buy a single thing until they save up and have all the money they need for it in hand. I’ve heard tales of the expressions on the faces of car salesman when these people come in and want to pay for a car up front, with no financing (and no extra money in the form of interest on the payments). I’ve never seen it myself, but I imagine it’s quite the sight.

Imagine if we all did that. Credit card companies would go out of business. Credit ratings would become a thing of the past. Banks would probably start dropping like flies. Okay, more banks would start dropping like flies. Debt collection agencies would be a distant memory. Who knows? Maybe the government would even learn a thing or two from us and try to curb its own wasteful ways.

Yeah. And we’d all ride to work down rainbow highways on the backs of unicorns made of gold. It’s nice to dream, though, isn’t it?

That danger pales in comparison to the threat posed by tasting while driving.

Consider these news headlines from just the last month:

Trucker Blames Crash on Wendy’s Chili

(Lumber truck driver Eric Gremm crashes into a house in Lowell, Massachusetts because he choked—and then blacked out—while eating chili.)

Truck Driver Drinking Soda Crashes Rig

(Trucker Jim Kolodiej runs into a ditch off I-15 in Idaho after gulping some ginger ale down the wrong pipe—leading to a coughing fit and the crash. “It was all a blur” says Jim.)

Trucker Chokes on Chicken, Crashes

(Trucker Andrew Quinero overturns his rig near Albany, Oregon after choking on a piece of chicken and passing out.)

Happily, none of the truckers was seriously hurt—and neither was anyone else.

But do you see where I’m going with this?

Texting doesn’t make you pass out—tasting does.

Ray LaHood should issue an immediate ban on truckers eating or drinking while driving—but allow 4-wheelers to wolf down half-pounders all they want.

It’s not an idle, academic debate. This is something we have to figure out now, and figure out fast, as we are still facing a serious economic crisis.

Many folks in Congress and elsewhere say that highway spending is one sure way to generate jobs. There’s plenty of evidence in the past to support that.

And many folks support it either way, because it represents not only new jobs, but also taking care of a problem we’ve allowed to get significantly out of control.

But others remain skeptical. The fact that so many highway workers are poorly paid – in the eyes of some, making those jobs less valuable – doesn’t help those supporting infrastructure improvements.

However, I think it’s important to look at a few factors in regard to that.

First, pay is low in some states, higher in others. A private company may build the highway for the state, which for the most part pays more.

Second, if the state doesn’t lay off higher-paid workers involved in road projects – the engineers and such – then we’ve just saved a job. And a state or federal job is worth just as much in the economy as a private sector job. If they hire more of those folks, all the better.

Third, let’s talk other jobs involved: Truckers move supplies and equipment necessary for road construction.

Someone has to supply the materials used, and those companies have to hire to do the work.

Dirt-moving companies often get contracts. In some states, where a new highway replaces an old one, they even hire landscaping firms to restore the ground where the old highway was.

Companies provide signage not only for the state highway signs, but also for private billboards and others.

Businesses spring up at exit ramps.

And the folks who get those jobs spend money locally for food, housing, clothing, furniture, cleaning supplies, and on and on.

So don’t buy this stuff about highways not creating jobs. Instead, call your state lawmakers and urge more work.

Think of it as your little contribution to the economy.

One big part of that debate over the plan is the form of gas trucks would need to make it a practical fuel – a liquid form that’s at incredible subzero temperatures.

Another important point of contention: cost, as everyone listening right now knows all too well.

The problem is comparing the two fuels apples to apples. So the experts came up with an interesting way: They measure the cost of natural gas in “equivalents to diesel gallons.”

They have a good reason for doing that: It does take more of the natural gas fuel to run the truck than the diesel. However, if you compare the cost of enough fuel to run a truck a single mile, the natural gas is much cheaper right now than the diesel.

That raises another question: What would the cost be if we had all trucks on natural gas? We can’t know for certain, but it’s likely still far less.

What’s more, as more trucks moved to natural gas, fewer and fewer would be on diesel, which means less demand, which means lower prices for that fuel.

We still have to study this issue, but for now, it looks as if this fuel would be a winner in terms of cost, and that is one more factor to recommend it.

We would like to thank you for everything you have done for the soldiers and for your country. It is wonderful to see that people do still care.

We appreciate all of the support you have shown to us. All of the goodies are absolutely wonderful and so much appreciated.

Thank you so much from the Delta Company 10th Mountain Division Fort Drum, NY.

Tim Smoot

It’s not just about toll roads. If a state were to build a new road, use tolls and bonds to build it, and then drop the tolls when the bonds are paid off, few would object.

However, keep those tolls on forever, long after the bonds are paid, and you get some pissed-off people.

Take a free interstate, one paid for by the people through their fuel taxes, and put tolls on it, and those people get even more pissed off.

Sell it to a private company and give them the right to raise those tolls indefinitely – and to prohibit any other road from going in nearby – and you could end up with open warfare.

So how do you address it?

This trucker has a suggestion.

OOIDA member Steve Jennings says make it law that money raised on a toll road be spent on a toll road.

Well, that’s a good idea. In fact, that’s actually how it’s supposed to work.

The law allowing just a few states to put tolls on existing roads says the road must need significant repair and rehabilitation, and the states must have a need for more money than they have.

And most toll roads were set up with the idea that the tolls would be spent there.

So what Steve is asking for is, basically, what they already promised to do.

So, of course, they break those promises over and over.

So how do we fight this trend?

I know it sounds like a broken record, but folks, you really, really do need to call your lawmakers.

Let your elected officials know that you expect them to return to properly spending highway money.

Let them know eternal tolls are no longer acceptable.

Let them know that we won’t simply allow an open spigot to be attached to our wallets, just so they can continue misspending what we already gave them.

If we don’t tell them what we want, they won’t know. And if we do tell them, then we have a right to expect results.

However, our troops are already doing just that kind of work. We heard from one of the teams doing agricultural work in this thank-you letter, sent to us by members of our military who received care packages through Truckers for Troops.

Thank you very much for the package that was sent to our team. We all appreciate the hard work and support from your organization.

ADT II is the second team that has come to the Nangarhar Province to assist in the agriculture mission.

ADT I was from Missouri as well, and the Missouri National Guard leaders are in the process of selecting ADT III personnel. It is the intent of the Missouri National Guard to send a team to this province year after year until our mission is complete.

So next year ADT III will be here to receive a package from you.

I have attached a copy of our last newsletter to better acquaint you with the members of our team. We included a thank you to the OOIDA, as well as the Saint Thomas More School, Appleton, WI, which included cards and letters in the package you all sent.

Again, thank you so much,

Maj. Denise L. Wilkinson

TC Executive Officer Missouri Agri-Business Team

And it not only involves the tendency in the mainstream media to blame big bad evil trucks for everything wrong on the highways, but it also involves the way some out there seem to value truckers’ lives less than other peoples’.

An OOIDA member by the name of Vern Shore called with one such example.

It happened in Canada. A woman with a child in the car suddenly pulled a U-turn – right in front of a truck.

The trucker ditched his vehicle, saving the woman from her own actions.

Vern points out a truth we all already know. If the woman and child had been killed – even though ultimately, they caused the collision – it would have been labeled a tragedy, and used to promote further legislation against and bad publicity about truckers.

Yet in the wake of the incident, no one is calling for better training for four-wheelers. No one is even chiding this woman for endangering her own child, for putting time convenience ahead of her life, and the life of both the child and trucker.

In fact, it was the trucker who suffered, and according to Vern, the incident received no coverage at all.

So how do we get something good out of this? I have a suggestion.

Write a letter to the editor, not only to the local newspaper, but to area TV stations, news radio stations and others. Post it as a comment on their Web sites as well.

Ask why they value that truckers’ life less.

Point out that he is a person, a family man, a father, a brother. Yes, if a woman and child were killed, that would be a tragedy. But why is it any less a tragedy if the trucker is killed?

Don’t be accusatory, don’t be profane. Be respectful. Ask them the question, put the ball in their court, and ask them to explain why they chose to cover one and not the other.

If you do that, you’ll be asking legitimate questions that deserve an answer.

Maybe you’ll get one, maybe you won’t. But no matter what, you will have planted the seed, to start them thinking about the way they cover things and how they treat different types of news.

That’s a valuable service, and if we do it again and again, eventually we will start the process of changing how news is covered.

I’ve said it before about this and other situations. Doing this right will take a long time. But important things done right often do.

And important things are worth the effort.

Bob spent a little over a year working to earn the trust of that dog, who had made a field near the truck stop her home. He and Amy nicknamed her “Val” after the Valero and, although she seemed to recognize Bob every time he stopped by, she wouldn’t come anywhere near him.

Thirteen months of patience and dog treats later, that all changed. Bob finally caught up with Val and was able to take her home to begin the long process of acclimating her to a new life. Sadly, Val had some puppies she lost just before Bob was able to coax her into his life.

In spite of that, this story does have a happy ending. Amy e-mailed me the other day to let me know that Bob and Val – and Bob’s other dog, Bubby – are getting along just fine. More than fine, actually.

Amy said, “Bob is having the time of his life, but Val more so.” Val has gotten attached to Bob and enjoys running around in his back yard. She has also become something of a thief. She’s stolen Bob’s hat, his shoes, and even $2 off his desk. But more than that, Amy said, Val has stolen Bob’s heart.

Bob took Val for a ride in his truck and she sat there on the floor with her head in his lap the whole time. He stopped by the Valero where she used to live and she started to shake, apparently fearing that Bob was going to leave her there. I don’t think Val has anything to worry about.

In fact, I’d say she’s found a home.