ORONO, Maine — It wasn’t easy, U.S. Sen. Susan Collins said Tuesday, but she finally won out. For the next two decades, trucks weighing 100,000 pounds will be allowed on Maine’s interstate highways.
Collins, a Republican, recounted the negotiations that led to the passage of truck weight legislation during a gathering of community and industry leaders at the University of Maine on Tuesday to congratulate her on her successful push to move heavy big rigs off Maine’s secondary roads.
Congress passed the bill Nov. 17 after gaining approval from the Senate and — after a long, late meeting that ironed out a deal — the House of Representatives.
The law change has been a goal of Collins’ for more than a decade. She said her efforts finally came to fruition during a “difficult” bipartisan meeting between her, another senator and two members of the House.
At the time of the meeting, the House had no provisions in its version of the bill to alter Maine’s truck weight limit.
Collins wanted a permanent increase. The House wanted to keep the truck weights issue out of the bill because it couldn’t back policy changes within a funding bill, the two House conferees argued.
After a lengthy debate during which Collins presented charts, maps, statistics, a stack of letters from law enforcement agencies, Maine residents and other groups, as well as a list of items already within the House funding bill that resulted in policy changes, the House conferees finally broke.
“Susan, if I finally agree to your position,” Collins quoted one of the conferees as saying, “would you please stop giving me more letters and charts on truck weights?”
More debate followed on how long the law change would last. The House members called for a one-year extension. Collins kept pressing for a permanent increase.
“Finally, the two House conferees literally threw up their hands and said, ‘Fine, 20 years!’” Collins said.
Collins’ efforts drew praise from those gathered at the University of Maine.
“The lady that we honor today is one of the most respected and trusted people in Washington, D.C.,” said Peter Vigue, chairman and CEO of Cianbro. “When she speaks, they listen, because she doesn’t mince words, she doesn’t play head games. She simply does the right things for the people of this state.”
Brewer, Bangor, Orono, Mobilize Eastern Maine and other groups presented Collins with awards, certificates and letters of appreciation for her efforts.
Public safety agencies, town and city officials, the wood products industry and business owners widely supported Collins’ bill, arguing that increasing the truck weight limit would make secondary roads safer and longer-lasting, decrease traffic in cities and towns, cut carbon emissions and help companies move more goods while using fewer resources.
Collins noted that a big truck traveling from Hampden to Houlton on I-95 rather than U.S. Route 2 would avoid 300 intersections, 86 crosswalks, 30 traffic lights, nine school crossings and four railroad crossings.
The bill met little opposition in Maine, Collins said, but some national groups stepped into the fray to oppose the effort, arguing the change in weight limits doesn’t make the roads any safer.
The Virginia-based Truck Safety Coalition — representing a partnership between Citizens for Reliable And Safe Highways and Parents Against Tired Truckers, founded by Maine resident Daphne Izer — has long argued that six-axle trucks are too dangerous to be on the roads.
The group contends that the allowance of 100,000-pound trucks encourages more widespread use of the larger vehicles, citing an increase by 100 percent of the number of permits sought for 99,000-pound trucks in Vermont in 2010, when that state also implemented a one-year federal pilot for the heavy trucks.
“These are likely the same people who underestimate the persistence of an Aroostook County gal,” said Jim McCurdy, chairman of the Maine Motor Transport Association. He credited Collins with being “unfailingly tenacious” in her pursuit of the change in law.
Maine business leaders and public safety officials encouraged Collins to find a way to get the bill through Congress — and quickly.
As she worked to broker a deal in November, Vigue decided to up the ante by betting his paycheck that Collins would work out a deal by Thanksgiving. He made the bet during a transportation conference in Bangor just one week before the holiday.
“Talk about pressure,” Collins said Tuesday.
Collins met the deadline. She credited the information, data and support provided by many of those present at Tuesday’s meeting with helping her get the job done.
The senator argued that the push to broker a truck weights deal was a prime example of what needs to happen more often in Washington — cooperation.
During a meeting of the Bangor Rotary Club on Tuesday afternoon at Bangor Theological Seminary, Collins recounted her successes from the past year. Most important, she said, were the removal of the truck weights limit, the defeat of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s effort to limit the potato to a once-per-week item on school lunch menus, and the introduction of the Bipartisan Jobs Creation Act with Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo.
That bill would expand the 2 percent payroll tax cut for workers to employers on the first $10 million of payroll. Second, it would invest in fixing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. Third, it would require federal agencies to analyze the cost and benefits of proposed regulations. Fourth, it would improve and create federal job training programs.
McCaskill and Collins also have agreed that a 2 percent surtax on Americans who make more than $1 million annually would be a good step toward stemming the climb of the nation’s $15 trillion debt. Small businesses would be exempt from that tax, she said.
“Americans are frustrated that our nation’s unemployment rate remains unacceptably high,” Collins said to the Rotarians. “They are frustrated that people who want work can’t find good jobs. But most damaging is the frustration that Washington can’t seem to set aside partisan bickering long enough to agree on a plan to spur job creation and boost our economy.”
BDN writer Seth Koenig contributed to this report.



Mckernans call girl.
I think you may have mixed up the girls. His is the other one.
Look at the pic, just who wants to shake who’s hand? I’m sure that she would sign an autograph too.
For your information if you do not know the lady always percents her hand first when shaking a mans hand
That looks like 100% of a hand ! Prehaps you type to fast !
You mean “too fast”.
My bad !
I see nothing wrong with the increase of weight this will save companies money
And make non-I-95 roads safer.
Yeah, more corporate welfare is what we need. Who is going to pay for the additional wear and tear on our roads and bridges? We taxpayers.
This legislation helps numerous independent truckers hauling multiple commodies along with small business owners (i.e. logging companies) to be able to become more efficient with their time and operating expenses immediately, thus benefiting these non-corporate operations with cost savings that should hopefully put more dollars directly in their pockets….this legislation will not cause an increase in trucking traffic or numbers, it just shifts the available trucking routes to include more of the interstae highway than previously was permissible prior to said legislation…..in actuality, there should be a significant decrease in “wear and tear” on many two lane highways and bridges and the increased truck traffic on the interstate north of Augusta should not affect road surface condition any differently than that of the Maine Turnpike where these weights have been allowed for years….
nicely done but. You have to drive the secondary roads to get to I-95 and that there in is still a problem and will be. When you look at this states infrastructure there is actually no way around the heavy truck issue that will pacify all. So now with the increased allowance for every five loads hauled there is one more driver out of work.
This will help independent truckers save money and it will keep heavy loads out of residential areas and off of narrow back roads.
It isn’t corporate welfare, it is good for business.
Are we not subsidizing the trucking industry by repairing roads they damage? Surely the tax they pay does not cover these repairs.
I did a search even with all gas taxes add together that only cover just about half of the cost on building an repairing the roads
This legislation does NOTHING to keep heavy loads out of residential areas and off of narrow back roads. Heavy trucks are permitted to travel there as well as on the Interstate.
Whose business? Certainly not the trucker who now must buy additional three axle trailers if he wants to haul into Maine.
How can it be corporate welfare ?
While it increases your taxes to pay for updating roads and bridges.
you will pay one way or the other because they do not collect enough tax money on gas an fuel to pay to build an maintain the roads thru out the united states
Interesting point. .47 of every gallon of gas and Diesel goes to taxes. The State police are funded through the gas tax (I still have never received an answer from any legislator as to why) other monies are also robbed from motorists and passed out to pet projects.
This does not even include the taxes and fees paid out by truckers and passenger vehicles for registration, excise sales and use taxes.
The State does not have to account for any of this money, but as a tax paying citizen I see a bunch of abuse. That stupid “scenic” Verona Island bridge is a perfect example of the Baldacci administration’s gift to their friends at Chinbro. I have also observed the repaving of route one in East Machias at the Whiting line where a perfectly good road already existed. The rebuilding of route one from Gardiner’s lake to Indian lake was necessary, BUT there was abuse here too. Crews spent months smashing rocks off to the side of the right of way putting up needless guard rails. I also notice that although the work was just completed last year, the road is already developing frost heaves and cracking pavement.
We’re being robbed..
There is a diffrence the fuel tax is higher per gallon . gas tax is lower than fuel
That’s right if it is cheaper to move goods they will pass the benefit on to the customers right?
Did anyone ask her how she voted on the NDAA? Or are we still allowed to ask her questions?
Answer to second question: NOPE.
I know that Snowe voted for NDAA because I wrote her a letter urging her to vote against it..she wrote me after to explain why she did vote for it…which was a bunch of malarki.
She voted yes, along with Snowe. Your question has been duly noted and your e-mail/subscription information has now been logged in thr directory…watch your step citizen!
John, I know they know that I know. I’m sure we’re all noted and logged. What’s the alternative? Sit silently and say nothing? That is exactly why we are in this predicament.
Struggle? Huh? The <$ 174,000 dollar salary, the great healthcare for life, or the unique tax payer pension for life? Come on. She did get this done but to compare it as a "struggle". A struggle is feeding family on three parttime, low wage jobs, no healthcare, and finding the mortgage payments or heating the house. Politically leaders are in a unique class who for example went from 97,000 a year in 1990 to almost doubling salary to date. Need I go on?
Let’s not forget her exemption from insider trading restrictions…little Susy and company are LOADED!
If this was a struggle I hate to think what a burden it will be for her to actually help the middle class. This is an example of the middle of the road horse pucky Collins and Snowe are famous for.
Maine business leaders and public safety officials encouraged Collins to find a way to get the bill through Congress — and quickly
“Talk about pressure,” Collins said Tuesday
Any plans for bringing jobs back from China and putting Mainers back to work Susan? This trucking bill is just a warm fuzzy. Another couple of years and we won’t have any products to ship, over any road.
That’s right! And since we Mainers can produce anything and everything we need, we should be putting our efforts where they will help us most, and not lose all our assets to the Chinese or the big money corporations who have shown us where their loyalties lie.
Now maybe someone will work to put mufflers back on the trucks, so they can operate within the excess noise laws.
Oh that’s an enforcement issue and cutting the intrusive noise will cut into corporate profits.I guess that’ why the noise is allowable, despite the law.
Look at the bright side, at least the noise will be on 95 not down town Bangor or all the towns off route 2 and 202.
It will be in BOTH places, now.
Trucks weighing over 100,000 pounds are still allowed to cruise the secondary roads. This bill just allows them on the interstate too.
Just last week, not a mile from my home, a truck unloaded a harvester complete with chains onto Rt 189 the chains dug into the recently refurbished pavement and created gouges which can be felt when driving over them.
It is obvious to me that the big trucking industry owns ALL the roads in Maine, so why do the rest of us have to pay for them/
This will take MANY trucks out of towns and off secondary roads, putting them on the Interstate where it was DESIGNED to handle the weight and where they belong = LESS damage to the roads. Trucks pay many extra fees, permits, and taxes to jump to the 100,000# limit so THEY pay for it. Furthermore, these heavier trucks have a third axle on the trailer better dispersing the weight.
Stop and think a minute if you can…everything you touch was moved by a truck.
No, in point of fact much of what I touch was moved by me. Also what does that have to do with a reasonable weight limit?
This law will take NO trucks out of Washington County (where I live) they will still snake through Machias, Millbridge, Calais and Whiting.
I guess that if the lower weight faction of Maine voters could muster the money the trucking industry threw at Collins, maybe we could get some decent legislation for us….
thats actually where you’re wrong, everything in your home was delivered by truck, how else would it be brought to the store to be sold to the public? how else would it get to those places? everything includes your home, the materials that were used to build it were brought in by TRUCKS, not by you. you may grow your own food in a garden but those seeds were not produced by you, they were produced by a company, those seeds were delivered to the store from the company to the store by TRUCK
Some people are so sure they know everything. My home is 250 years old. it was built from trees cut from the land on which it now sits. The bricks were manufactures from clay harvested on the back acreage, and cooked in the brick-works on the property. Much of what I own belonged to my parents their parents and so on. Sure I use some things brought in by truck…. just not EVERYTHING.
All homes are not furnished in Walmart chich
Harry,
I am in the same position as you. However when looked at closely you will find that everything from your groceries, clothes, hardware, autos and the roads they travel on as well as the signage to direct and warn you along the way moved at least once via truck, as does your heating oil, gasoline, medical supplies, books etc etc
He said “everything” absolutes are most often incorrect.
T-Rex
You get no argument from me on this for you are correct. However, what has your statement got to do with increased truck weights?
Here here
AMEN JACK
Jack,
It is time you thought a minute. This new law is not a boon to truck owners or trucking companies. Now they will be faced with mandatory purchases of three axle trailers if they want to haul to or from Maine vendors. As soon as this is accomplished a move will begin to increase the length from 53 to ? and then to increase weights yet again. It is a never ending game and the citizen ends up with the bill as well as the Owner Operators and the trucking companies.
You are right Guy. Furthermore, the only reason a driver is willing to pull a larger trailer or a larger load limit is to make more money. Unless they are an owner-operator they don’t make more money. Even with the extra money it’s a toss up on the value to the owner-operator. Meanwhile the rest of the public pays. Taxes and other fee’s DO NOT cover the cost of damage done to our roads by overweight trucks. By the way Jack_K, bridges and under-rated roads don’t care how many wheels a truck has. I think they ought to go back to 48′ trailers and a reasonable weight. Use rail to carry the larger loads and then break up the load for local distribution. While we are at it lets get rid of tandems too! What an idiotic stupid idea those are.
Harry,
I was about to comment but after reading yours the subject is covered. The big trucks are indeed still on secondary roads for there is nothing to stop them. And, their numbers are increasing. This was a simple give away to shippers and receivers in our state.
Time to vote people like her out. Question, how did she and her friend Snow become so rich. Answer – from our pockets.
vote em out.
They get rich off of insider trading…just like their friends Polosi and Reid
From our pockets and the private info they have access to. Congress members are exempt from insider trading laws.
Look at how the trucking industry completely ignores the covered load law, as it shows how
well the trucking companies care about the rest of the motoring public. A rock to the face,no
problem.
Poor Susie-Q…. she has all that free healthcare and the big pension and the big salary to content with along with her heavy responsibilities to the corporations which pay for her votes, and the potholes on I-95 will cost how much to fix? And nothing says the trucks will now have to stay OFF secondary roads. Next: we will put toll booths on secondary roads. Just wait for that one.
Heavy trucks? How about getting the Canadians out of Bangor traffic for a weekend? JUST ONE! PLEASE!!
So you vote to inprison everyday american’s as political prisoners to get weight limits passed.. and she concidered that a fair swap of votes…
I appreciate her work here, but I have to say that if she hadn’t been able to pull this off, then I would have been seriously concerned about her ability to serve the people of Maine.
What was this gathering at the University of Maine? Was this an organized group? Did Senator Collins invite these people or did these people invite her? The article is unclear.