another giant sucking sound or better business?

Ten lanes wide, from the Rio Grande to the Yukon! You've probably seen the artists' renderings of the gigantic new highway that's going to connect Manitoba to New Mexico and Old Mexico right up the middle of the US of A.

Known as the NAFTA Super Highway, it's been depicted as a sort of huge, intercontinental aorta with side corridors for trains and with oil and gas pipelines running alongside it. Depending on whom you ask, it will either enhance trade for us, Mexico, and Canada, or drain our sovereignty into some tripartite cabal that's looking to kill off the unions in the United States as well as just about everything else that's red, white, and blue. What's really going on here?

In the past few years, politicians and public opinion leaders of all stripes have chimed in on this "project." Why do I put the word in quotation marks? Because it's really not so much a project as it is a set of ideas that have been under discussion by a growing collection of groups: NGOs (non-government organizations); state, municipal, and federal governments; and private companies, including some major trucking outfits. All of these groups say they're seeking ways to increase the efficiency of international trade among the three countries.

Sounds pretty sensible, no? Well, judging from the outcry, it's all part of a conspiracy to dismantle the United States. Numerous politicians—not all of them Democrats—have raised the alarm: The borders will collapse! Illegals will come swarming in! NAFTA was responsible for the "giant sucking sound" the first time around; next time, the cause will be NASCO.

So who or what is NASCO? The initials stand for "North America's SuperCorridor Coalition Inc.," the name of a Dallas-based non-profit advocacy group that backs the Super Highway project. As for its mission, the group supports "maximizing the use of infrastructure" throughout North America, says Frank Conde, NASCO's director of communications and special projects.

Is NASCO behind some conspiracy to create a North American counterpart to the European Union? "That is completely wrong," Conde says. "Actually, it's quite the opposite. This effort will make our borders more secure with the use of electronic manifests. Easier for illegals? No, just the opposite." Sophisticated security is part of the planning process, and the Department of Homeland Security is a member of NASCO.

When asked why we need this highway, Conde points to booming North American trade. "Since 1994, when NAFTA took effect, to the end of 2006, U.S/Mexico trade has grown from $82 billion to $332 billion," he reports. "U.S./Canada trade has hit $500 billion in the same period.

"All we are trying to do is make sure we all operate and use already existing infrastructure smarter and better," Conde adds. "We are trying to help the whole of North America take advantage of what we call 'inland ports.'" He explains that the growing network of inland ports—logistics and distribution hubs strategically located near air, road, and lake/river connections in regions well away from the coast—offers great potential for improving the efficiency of international commerce. (See the related story on page 52.) New highway construction may play a major role in the network's development in coming years.

By 2020, Conde says, foreign trade will account for some 35 percent of the U.S. GDP. Shouldn't we be getting ready now? NASCO held an early June conference in Fort Worth. Some of you were there. The rest of us look forward to your report.