I always find it interesting when I hear about government regulations obstructing market growth. With the plethora of government regulations still on the books, I don’t see myself getting bored anytime soon.
The most recent one to spark a giggle, followed by a sigh, is a trucking regulation that stops the use of “Twin 33s.” Some states have legalized them already, but the general consensus is that allowing this trucking solution reduces traffic congestion, shipping costs, and increases safety. A win-win, but not allowed in many places.
A twin 33 consists of two shorter 33-foot trailers that together can’t weigh more than a single 80,000 lb. trailer. The everyday large trucks that you see traveling down the highway are restricted to 80,000 lbs. This weight is what Congress decided in 1982 kept safety, breaking distance, and road wear down to reasonable levels. The same regulations allowed for twin 28s, which is two 28-foot trailers that still must abide by the 80,000 lb. limit. However, with the recent explosion in online sales shippers, consumers, and governments are looking for new solutions such as the twin 33. While each trailer is just 5 feet longer, this allows shipper an additional 18.6 percent of space.
They are the most efficient way to ship the multitude of items that we are buying from places like Amazon and other online retailers that often ship lightweight goods, but still take up large amounts of space inside of the trailer. For instance, when a pallet of goods are shipped to a store like target, each product is on a pallet stacked with other goods. Each product isn’t individually shipped in its own larger cardboard box along with padding. Therefore, the truckloads destined for these larger box stores are denser and heavier. However, if you order that same product directly to your house, it is put in a larger box for protection to make sure that no damage occurs during shipping. The problem is that packaging items this way takes up much more space and requires more trucks to ship the same amount of goods. And, because each of these trucks is lighter than the 80,000 lb limit, the shipping is less efficient. When this problem is multiplied throughout the country and the growing online retail market, shipping delays and congestion are the result.
The twin-33 is at the very least one of the solutions to this growing problem. And, as a commuter in one of the metro areas with the worst traffic in the country, any proposal to reduce congestion draws my interest. Slug lines? Great! Flex lanes? Even Better! Fewer trucks on the road? Sign me up.
But, as the Wall Street Journal recently pointed out, lobbying from industries that would potentially lose money because of the twin 33 are holding up the win-win solution.
Congress has considered allowing the twin 33s in the past, but opponents include powerful regional rail interests that don’t want more competition from trucks. The House appropriations bill for transportation includes a provision on twin 33s, but the Senate bill doesn’t. Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., has opposed twin 33s—no surprise given that short rails are common in Mississippi.
The first rule of cronyism – see it say it – that is cronyism. Of course this makes sense that railways will lose money if trucking becomes cheaper and more efficient. But when it is at the expense of everyone else, we should derail (pun intended) their plans. Cronyism is bad public policy, creates waste, and slows economic growth – these aren’t things that the Trump economy should accept.
The regulations on the books should focus on safety, and maybe even wear and tear on the roads since they are public goods. Anything more than that, and cronyism is bound to find a way to shift the policy to benefit one group over another. And here it is not different.
I am not a shipping expert, but as a driver, a consumer, and the father of three little kids, this issue seems like a no-brainer. Cronies, get out of the way! Or, at least stop putting more trucks in my way.
Charles Sauer (@CharlesSauer) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the author of Profit Motive and president of the Market Institute. Previously he worked on Capitol Hill, for a governor, and for an academic think tank.
