Author: admin@adriverspers

ARE WE REALLY WINNING ON TRUCK PARKING? (Or Is Autonomous)

A DRIVER’S PERSPECTIVE

AUGUST 19, 2026 / ADPI-012
Estimated Read Time: 11 Minutes

THE VERY INFRASTRUCTURE DRIVERS ARE BEING TOLD TO CELEBRATE MAY ALSO HELP BUILD A FREIGHT SYSTEM DESIGNED TO NEED FEWER OF THEM.

Research acknowledgment: special thanks to Tamie Stuttle for the Georgia corridor research that helped launch this investigation. Tamie gathered and forwarded the project records that allowed me to follow the infrastructure from the Port of Savannah through Macon and north toward Atlanta.

Every professional driver knows the contradiction.

The government enforces our 14-hour work window and 11-hour driving limit down to the minute, but it has never guaranteed us a legal place to stop when that clock expires. For years, drivers were told that adding parking was too complicated. There was not enough money. Land cost too much. Communities did not want trucks nearby. Rest areas could not be expanded.

The clock kept counting anyway.

Drivers burned legal hours searching for spaces, crowded onto ramps and shoulders, or stopped in places where they were neither safe nor welcome. The freight still had to move, and the driver was expected to solve the government’s infrastructure failure one night at a time.

Now Georgia has several truck-parking projects moving through its program. That is good news. Every legitimate space gives another driver a chance to get off the road, comply with the law and sleep without wondering whether somebody will hit the back of the trailer.

But when Tamie sent me the Georgia project records and I began placing those projects on the same map, I noticed something bigger. The parking is advancing along the same Savannah–Macon–Atlanta freight spine where Georgia is expanding port capacity, improving direct access from the port to the Interstate, installing fiber and connected-vehicle equipment, and proposing barrier-separated commercial-vehicle lanes that the state says will facilitate future connected and autonomous technology.

That leaves a question drivers have every right to ask:

IS TRUCK PARKING FINALLY BEING PRIORITIZED BECAUSE GOVERNMENT NOW VALUES THE DRIVER—OR BECAUSE THE PARKING ALSO FITS A MUCH LARGER, CONNECTED AND AUTONOMOUS-READY FREIGHT NETWORK?

Let me draw the evidence line clearly. I found no document saying Georgia deliberately withheld parking until driverless technology matured. I found no evidence that an autonomous-truck company ordered these projects, and the records do not identify the new public parking sites as autonomous terminals. “Autonomous-ready freight corridor” is my description of the pattern, not Georgia’s official name for the full route.

What the public record does show is an expanding port, improved port-to-Interstate access, connected-road infrastructure, truck parking and a proposed commercial-vehicle-only facility whose future benefits explicitly include connected and autonomous technology.

That is not proof of a secret plan. It is enough evidence to question the public priority.

THE PARKING CRISIS CAME FIRST

Truck parking did not suddenly become a safety problem in 2026.

Congress enacted Jason’s Law in 2012 after truck driver Jason Rivenburg was murdered while parked at an unsafe location before a delivery. The law made the shortage of long-term commercial-vehicle parking a national priority and expanded the types of projects eligible for federal support. (FHWA)

The need remained severe. The Federal Highway Administration’s 2026 Truck Parking Development Handbook reports that more than 75 percent of drivers in the 2019 national survey regularly had trouble finding safe parking. More than 90 percent reported difficulty between 7 p.m. and midnight, and more than 60 percent still struggled between midnight and 5 a.m. The shortage exists in every state, and Georgia was among the states drivers most frequently identified. (FHWA Truck Parking Development Handbook)

Drivers, Hope Rivenburg, freight advisory groups and trucking organizations have fought for years to keep the issue in front of government. They deserve credit for every space that gets built. Jason’s Law also explains why truck-parking projects can receive federal support. Any honest examination has to acknowledge that.

But that history makes the timing more important, not less.

Drivers did not suddenly become tired in 2024. Electronic logs did not suddenly start counting in 2025. Georgia did not suddenly become a freight state in 2026. The human need was already documented, the safety consequences were already known and federal eligibility had existed for more than a decade.

So what changed?

FOLLOW THE FREIGHT FROM SAVANNAH

Start at the Port of Savannah.

The Georgia Ports Authority says Garden City Terminal handles approximately 16,000 truck-gate moves a day. GPA also describes a self-financed $4.5 billion, ten-year investment plan that will add five big-ship berths in Savannah. This is not a small expansion. Georgia is building capacity to move substantially more freight through the port and into inland markets. (Georgia Ports Authority fact sheet)

The new Brampton Road Connector strengthens that movement. The approximately $126 million, four-lane highway opened in July 2026, linking Garden City Terminal’s Gate 3 directly to the Interstate system, eliminating an at-grade rail crossing and moving truck traffic away from neighborhood streets. Georgia Ports called it the final piece of a Savannah cargo beltway created through nearly $600 million in Georgia DOT roadway investment over twelve years. (Georgia Ports announcement)
Those are legitimate improvements. They give drivers a safer, faster route and give residents relief from heavy truck traffic. They also create a higher-capacity, more controlled path for containers leaving one of the nation’s largest freight gateways.

That path leads toward I-16.

THE ROAD IS BECOMING CONNECTED

Georgia DOT’s Interstate ITS and Connected Vehicle Implementation projects cover I-16 from Savannah to Macon, I-475 around Macon and major sections of I-75, along with other Interstate routes. The official project synopsis calls for fiber-optic cable, connected-vehicle roadside units, cameras and vehicle-detection equipment. (Georgia DOT project synopsis)

Those systems have ordinary and valuable safety uses. They can improve incident response, traffic management, work-zone warnings and information for drivers. Fiber and roadside equipment do not magically turn an Interstate into a driverless road.

But they do create the digital backbone of a more observable and manageable transportation network. The U.S. Department of Transportation says vehicle-to-everything technology can work alongside in-vehicle sensors to support the integration of automated vehicles. Georgia’s own planning material also connects this infrastructure to future connected and autonomous applications. (U.S. DOT on V2X)

In other words, the road can help human drivers today while being prepared for a more automated freight system tomorrow.

THE PARKING IS ON THE SAME FREIGHT SPINE

Georgia’s National Highway Freight Program project list includes truck parking at I-16 Rest Area No. 88 in Laurens County, directly on the Savannah-to-Macon corridor. Farther north, Georgia plans a parking expansion at the I-75 northbound weigh station in Monroe County, where the state says 24 truck spaces will be added. (Georgia freight project list; P.I. 0020269)

Twenty-four legal spaces are better than 24 trucks crowded onto ramps. But they are not a statewide solution, and a handful of modest projects should not be presented as though Georgia has solved the parking crisis.

Their location is what makes them important to this investigation. They sit inside the same freight geography where Georgia is improving port access, expanding freight capacity and installing communications and monitoring equipment.

The records do not call these parking sites autonomous hubs. But the parking is no longer isolated pavement beside an ordinary highway. It is part of a corridor becoming more connected, measurable and valuable to high-volume freight movement.

THE AUTONOMOUS CONNECTION IS IN GEORGIA’S OWN PLAN

The strongest evidence appears north of Macon.

Georgia’s June 2026 public-hearing response describes the proposed I-75 Commercial Vehicle Lanes as 38 miles of two new, barrier-separated northbound lanes reserved for commercial vehicles. They would begin near the I-75/I-475 interchange in Monroe County and continue toward metro Atlanta. Georgia says one major purpose is to handle increasing truck traffic coming from Florida and the expanding Port of Savannah. (Georgia DOT public-hearing response)

Georgia DOT’s own program material lists another benefit in plain language:

“FACILITATES THE FUTURE USE OF CONNECTED AND AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.” (Georgia DOT program material)

An official alternatives report likewise discusses accommodating connected and autonomous applications. A Texas A&M Transportation Institute project description says researchers examined connected vehicles, platooning, infrastructure requirements and how those technologies could become part of Georgia DOT’s planned commercial-vehicle-only facility. (Georgia DOT alternatives report; TTI project description)

That does not mean driverless trucks will control the lanes the day they open. The project is still proposed, and its design, schedule and operating rules can change. But it ends the argument that automation is unrelated to the state’s larger freight strategy.

Now put the map together.

Container freight leaves an expanding Savannah port through new and improved connectors. It moves west on I-16 through a corridor receiving broadband and connected-vehicle infrastructure. It reaches the I-75/I-475 node at Macon, then continues toward proposed barrier-separated commercial-vehicle lanes designed with future connected and autonomous use in mind.

The parking projects are located along that same freight spine.

That alignment is the story.

DRIVERLESS TRUCKS DO NOT SLEEP—BUT AUTOMATED FREIGHT STILL NEEDS INFRASTRUCTURE

The obvious response is that an autonomous truck does not need a ten-hour break. That is true. So why would driverless freight care about parking?

Because the truck may not sleep, but the freight system still needs controlled places where equipment can enter or leave an automated route, stage, wait, undergo inspection, receive maintenance or be held when weather, congestion, a closure or a customer interrupts the plan. Torc Robotics describes a hub-to-hub model in which automated tractors handle the Interstate portion while human drivers initially manage the more complicated first and last miles. (Torc Robotics)

A public rest area is not a private transfer hub, and those facilities should not be treated as interchangeable. The larger point is that a corridor with direct port access, continuous communications, real-time vehicle information, commercial-vehicle capacity and separated truck lanes is easier to manage and eventually automate than an ordinary stretch of highway.

Truck parking is one piece of that network. It is not proof of automation by itself.

SO WHY IS PARKING MOVING NOW?

There is no single answer.

Jason’s Law made projects eligible. Federal guidance has renewed pressure on states. Advocates kept demanding action. Georgia identified opportunities at rest areas and weigh stations where it already controls the land. Port growth and rising truck volume made freight investment more urgent. All of those explanations are legitimate.

But from where I sit, they do not erase the larger pattern.

For years, parking was treated mainly as a driver problem: expensive, local, politically difficult and easy to postpone. Once the same corridor became central to port expansion, connected transportation, controlled truck movement and future autonomous operations, every piece of that corridor became more strategically valuable—including places where commercial vehicles can legally stop, be counted and be managed.

My conclusion is not that Georgia built these parking spaces for robots.

My conclusion is that driver safety may be a real reason for these projects, but it is not the only value they provide to the freight system Georgia is building.

The state can be helping drivers today and preparing for a system that needs fewer drivers tomorrow. Both can be true at the same time.

PUT THE HUMAN COMMITMENT IN WRITING

If Georgia wants drivers to view these projects as a true parking victory, it should prove that the human being behind the wheel is more than the first user of infrastructure intended for a different future.

Publish a corridor truck-parking scorecard. Show the number of net new spaces, when each one will open, whether restrooms remain available overnight, what lighting and security are provided, and whether a driver can complete a federally required rest period without paying or being forced to move.

Disclose what parking and vehicle data will be collected, how long it will be retained, who can receive it and whether it may be used for enforcement or commercial purposes. State openly whether any location is being designed for later charging, staging, transfer or autonomous-fleet operations.

Give working drivers real decision-making seats in the planning process—not just another survey after the major decisions have already been made.

And put one protection into policy:

NO PUBLIC TRUCK-PARKING CAPACITY SHOULD BE CONVERTED TO AUTONOMOUS STAGING, CHARGING OR TRANSFER OPERATIONS UNLESS THE STATE HOLDS A PUBLIC HEARING AND REPLACES EVERY DISPLACED HUMAN-DRIVER SPACE WITH EQUAL OR BETTER CAPACITY FIRST.

That is not anti-technology. It is an accountability test.

ARE WE REALLY WINNING?

Take the parking. Use it. Demand more of it. Thank Hope Rivenburg, the advocates, the working drivers and everybody else who kept this issue alive while government moved too slowly.

But do not mistake a ribbon cutting for proof that the professional driver has finally become the priority.

We are winning when a tired driver gets safely off the road. We are not winning if a few dozen spaces are used to declare victory while the larger freight system is being designed around ports, carriers, technology companies and government planners—with the person behind the wheel still standing outside the room.

America cannot stop advancing, and I am not asking it to. I support better roads, safer parking and technology that prevents crashes and gives drivers reliable information.

But progress does not require us to pretend that every project carrying the word “truck” was built because government suddenly remembered the human being in the cab.

TAKE THE PARKING. DEMAND MORE OF IT. BUT DO NOT CONFUSE BEING ACCOMMODATED BY THE FUTURE FREIGHT NETWORK WITH BEING THE REASON THAT NETWORK WAS BUILT.

So, are we really winning on truck parking?

We may finally be winning some spaces. What I am not convinced we are winning is a secure place for the professional American driver in the transportation system being built around us.

Until government and industry put that commitment in writing, I am not ready to take a victory lap.

Will Cook
A Driver’s Perspective Real Driver / Logging Real Miles

#TruckParking #AutonomousTrucking #ADriversPerspective

A DRIVER’S PERSPECTIVE

AUGUST 18, 2026

TRUCKING NEEDS MORE UNITY—AND LESS DIVISION. THAT’S WHAT WE THE TRUCKERS REPRESENTS.

I have been around this industry long enough to know that DIVISION IS EASY. Bringing people together is the hard part—and that is what I respect about Mike Erb, Janne Owens, and We The Truckers.

From what I have seen, they are not asking everyone to surrender their own platform or agree on every issue. They are creating a place where drivers, owner-operators, advocates, and organizations from different corners of trucking can share knowledge, find common ground, and build a stronger voice for the people behind the wheel. Look beyond the mission statement and you will find real work being done: educational discussions, driver resources, industry information, bills and petitions, and knowledgeable people freely sharing what they have learned.

My own plate stays pretty full. Between spending time with my kids, operating my truck, writing through A Driver’s Perspective, and serving through my street ministry, I cannot give every worthy effort as much time as I would like. But I drop in on We The Truckers when I can, listen to their discussions, and continue to be impressed by the work taking place behind the scenes.

Building another platform is one thing. Patiently bringing people together in an industry filled with strong personalities and different opinions requires something more. It takes time, sacrifice, patience, and a genuine heart for trucking.

I believe in what Mike, Janne, and everyone involved are trying to accomplish. I have recommended We The Truckers to others, and I gladly recommend them to everyone who follows my work.

Whether you are a driver, a supporter, or simply someone trying to better understand this industry, I believe you will find We The Truckers to be a place for education, information, and unity.

WE DO NOT HAVE TO AGREE ON EVERYTHING TO STAND TOGETHER ON THE THINGS THAT MATTER—and trucking needs a whole lot more of that.

Will Cook
A Driver’s Perspective

https://www.wethetruckers.com

#WeTheTruckers #TruckingAdvocacy #ADriversPerspective

THE REPRESENTATION GAP

WHO SPEAKS FOR AMERICA’S TRUCKERS?

Sunday, August 2, 2026

A Driver’s Perspective Investigation

Report No. ADPI-004

By Will Cook

HOW THIS INVESTIGATION WAS CONDUCTED

This investigation examined publicly available legislation, executive orders, federal regulations, legislative histories, committee proceedings, organizational publications, public letters, interviews, news reporting, industry research, and other records concerning national trucking advocacy, commercial-driver qualification standards, highway safety, and the emergence of American Truckers United.

The investigation did not begin with the assumption that any organization had failed, succeeded, or deserved to replace another. It began with one question: Why did another national trucking advocacy organization emerge when established national organizations already existed?

The findings and analysis that follow are based upon the public record available as of August 2, 2026. Statements concerning the experiences, intentions, opinions, or recollections of individuals are attributed to those individuals and are not presented as independently established fact unless corroborated by official records or additional supporting evidence.

The purpose of this report is not to persuade readers to support or oppose any organization. It is to examine why another national trucking advocacy organization emerged when national representation already existed—and why its message attracted the attention of professional drivers, trucking-business owners, lawmakers, crash victims’ families, industry observers, and members of the public.

PART 1 – THE GAP DID NOT APPEAR OVERNIGHT

Every industry depends upon leadership. In commercial aviation, rail transportation, maritime shipping, manufacturing, agriculture, and countless other sectors, organizations exist to represent the interests of the people and businesses operating within them. They monitor legislation, participate in regulatory proceedings, conduct research, communicate with government officials, and advocate for policies affecting their industries. Because of their experience and institutional knowledge, lawmakers, regulators, journalists, and the public frequently look to these organizations to identify emerging problems before those problems become national crises.

For decades, two organizations occupied that position within American trucking. The American Trucking Associations represented much of the motor-carrier industry, state trucking associations, and commercial transportation interests. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association represented owner-operators, small trucking businesses, and professional drivers. Together they possessed decades of experience, established relationships throughout government, legal and policy expertise, industry research, and national platforms capable of shaping transportation policy and public discussion. With that influence came an equally significant responsibility: not simply to participate in government, but to recognize developing threats and respond with a level of urgency proportionate to the circumstances.

This investigation ultimately asks whether those organizations fulfilled that responsibility—or whether their institutional response proved insufficient to prevent a representation gap from developing that American Truckers United would later occupy.

Long before American Truckers United entered the national conversation, professional drivers and small trucking businesses had already been raising concerns about the direction of the industry. Questions involving licensing integrity, qualification standards, enforcement, and the long-term survival of responsible trucking businesses were not suddenly discovered in 2025. They had circulated for years through truck stops, trade publications, state legislatures, federal agencies, social media, and conversations among the people whose livelihoods depended upon commercial transportation.

During the same period, freight markets weakened, operating costs increased, insurance premiums climbed, and many small carriers either suspended operations or disappeared altogether.

Fatal commercial-vehicle crashes also continued drawing attention to broader questions involving licensing, qualification, hiring practices, and regulatory oversight. Public discussion often focused upon the individual driver involved in a particular collision, yet many professional drivers increasingly argued that those conversations rarely extended to the institutions responsible for licensing, qualifying, hiring, supervising, and regulating the people operating commercial vehicles on America’s highways. The concern extended beyond individual crashes. It became a question of whether the transportation system itself was functioning as intended.

These developments unfolded while the trucking industry’s established representative organizations continued operating through their traditional institutional channels. Legislative participation continued. Regulatory proceedings continued. Policy statements continued. Yet the concerns raised by many professional drivers and small trucking businesses also continued. Businesses closed. Confidence declined. Questions multiplied. The existence of national representation did not prevent a growing number of people from believing that the industry’s most serious concerns were not receiving the level of urgency the circumstances demanded.

That observation does not establish that the established organizations accomplished nothing. The public record demonstrates that both remained active participants in transportation policy. The question raised by this investigation is different. It is whether those institutional efforts produced a response that matched the seriousness of the conditions developing across the industry.

THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER TRUCKING HAD REPRESENTATION. IT DID.

THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THAT REPRESENTATION RESPONDED WITH THE URGENCY MANY DRIVERS, SMALL TRUCKING BUSINESSES, AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC BELIEVED THE MOMENT REQUIRED.

Organizations are ultimately judged by more than their history, membership, or access to government. They are judged by whether they recognize danger before it becomes crisis, whether they elevate that danger beyond routine institutional processes, and whether the people they claim to represent believe their advocacy changed the course of events rather than merely documented them.

If national representation had convinced enough people that those responsibilities were being met, another national trucking advocacy organization would have had far less opportunity to emerge.

The fact that one did suggests that, for a significant portion of the industry, the institutional response had not prevented a representation gap from developing.

To read the full report on Substack, click here Read the Full Report.

AMERICA WITHOUT DRIVERS

A Driver’s Perspective

Five or six years ago, America Without Drivers began when I brought together a small group of people who shared a common vision. As time passed, everyone eventually chose a different path. Today, America Without Drivers remains as a record of that early work, while I continue writing through A Driver’s Perspective, with the help of a longtime friend, Jen, who manages my website and edits and publishes both my trucking and Christian books.

Long before many of today’s trucking personalities built large online audiences, America Without Drivers was contacting elected officials, asking difficult questions, and attempting to bring national attention to autonomous trucks. At the time, the subject received relatively little public attention. Today, that conversation has reached the mainstream. Government agencies, carriers, technology companies, industry organizations, news outlets, content creators, and professional drivers are all discussing the future of autonomous trucking. Because of that, I spend far less time writing about autonomous trucks. My attention has shifted elsewhere.

Today, there is no shortage of talking heads, influencers, and self-proclaimed experts producing trucking content. Much of it follows the headline of the day. My work has always taken a different direction. I am less interested in today’s controversy than I am in understanding the SYSTEM behind trucking—the legislation, regulations, organizations, financial incentives, and institutional decisions that shape where this industry is ultimately headed. I prefer to examine the industry from 30,000 feet, looking beyond today’s headlines to the larger forces that will shape tomorrow.

That approach has earned its share of criticism. I’ve been called names, dismissed, and discredited by some of the loudest voices in trucking. That doesn’t concern me. Time has a way of separating temporary opinions from documented history.

Five or six years from now, just as America Without Drivers serves as a historical record of what was being discussed before many others began talking about it, A Driver’s Perspective will provide another record. The difference is that this work is being preserved more intentionally through investigative reports, published books, and a permanent archive designed to document the evolution of this industry. Readers will be able to look back and judge for themselves who was educating drivers, who was documenting facts, and who was primarily building a personal brand.

My goal is not to become another trucking personality. My goal is to preserve the history of a profession that gave me a lifetime of work. If professional drivers spend more time following personalities than understanding the forces reshaping this industry, we risk becoming followers of brands instead of informed advocates for our own future.

In the end, I don’t expect my opinion to be the deciding factor.

The record will speak for itself.

Will Cook
A Driver’s Perspective
August 1, 2026

WHY I WRITE

A Driver’s Perspective

Over the years, many people have asked me where I stand. Some assume I’m against company drivers. Others assume I’m against corporations. Some think I’m only interested in owner-operators or independent trucking. The truth is much simpler than that, and I thought it was time I explained it.

First and foremost, I am a truck driver. For more than three decades, I have made my living behind the wheel. I’ve hauled freight through good markets and bad, watched this industry change, experienced the highs and the lows of trucking, and tried to do my part to represent our profession with integrity. Before I am a writer, before social media, and before anything else, I am simply a working truck driver.

Because of that, I support drivers. I support truck drivers, bus drivers, delivery drivers, heavy-haul drivers, owner-operators, and company drivers alike. If you’re out here legally, properly trained, and committed to doing the job safely, then I respect what you do. Transportation is one of the foundations of this country, and the men and women who move people and freight deserve to be respected. My record over the last thirty-plus years reflects exactly where my heart has always been.

I also believe deeply in opportunity. One of the things that has always made America different is that ordinary working people could build something of their own. Whether it’s one truck, one bus, one landscaping company, one construction business, one restaurant, or any other small business, I believe people should have the opportunity to work hard, take risks, and build a better future for themselves and their families.

That doesn’t mean everyone should own a business. Many people prefer working for a company, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Every successful company depends on dedicated employees. We need good company drivers just as much as we need good owner-operators. I have never believed one is more valuable than the other.

I’m not against corporations either. Large companies have created jobs, developed technology, invested billions of dollars, and helped move our economy forward. They absolutely have a place in America. My concern begins when large corporations use their influence to shape public policy in ways that make it harder for small businesses and working people to compete. I believe competition should be decided in the marketplace, not by who has the largest lobbying budget or the greatest political influence in Washington.

I believe America is strongest when there is balance. We need successful corporations. We need thriving small businesses. We need company drivers. We need owner-operators. We need entrepreneurs who are willing to take risks, and we need hardworking employees who help businesses succeed. One should not come at the expense of the other. Everything I write comes from that perspective. I believe in honest work. I believe in safe, professional drivers.

I believe in protecting the opportunity for someone to build a business if they’re willing to earn it. I believe in preserving competition and independence. Most of all, I believe the American Dream should still be within reach for the next generation of working men and women. That is why I write. Not to divide drivers, but to support them. Not to attack success, but to protect opportunity. Not to tear down corporations, but to make sure working people and small businesses still have a place at the table. If we can preserve that balance, then I believe America, and the trucking industry will be stronger because of it.

 

Will Cook
A Driver’s Perspective

June 18, 2026

CREATING TRUCK OWNERS: THE DREAM IS STILL ALIVE

The Incentives Conversation – Nobody Wants to Have

From A Driver’s Perspective

Over the last several days, I have written about something that I believe sits at the center of trucking’s future but rarely receives the attention it deserves. First, I wrote about the part they never talk about. Then I wrote about how we create more truck owners. The more I thought about those articles, the more I kept coming back to the same conclusion.

It all revolves around incentives.

Incentives determine behavior. Incentives determine policy. Incentives determine what businesses invest in, what organizations fight for, and ultimately what kind of industry emerges over time. When I look at trucking today, I do not believe we are witnessing an accident. I believe we are witnessing the predictable outcome of incentives that have been shaping the industry for years.

One of the best examples is the lease-purchase debate.

For years, we have heard about predatory lease-purchase programs. We have seen investigations, lawsuits, documentaries, and countless stories about drivers who entered agreements only to lose money and walk away with nothing. Some of those criticisms are absolutely justified. There have been bad contracts, bad programs, and situations where people were set up to fail before they ever turned the key.

But there is a question hiding underneath that entire conversation.

If ownership is such a terrible idea, why do so many people continue chasing it?

If nobody wanted to own a truck, lease-purchase programs would disappear overnight. Nobody would sign the contracts. Nobody would take the risk. Nobody would be willing to sacrifice their time, money, and energy trying to build something of their own.

Yet the demand remains.

That tells me something important.

The dream is still alive.

Despite everything that has happened over the last decade, people still want independence. They still want ownership. They still want the opportunity to control their own future instead of spending an entire career working for someone else.

In fact, I see evidence of that every day.

Spend a little time watching what is happening in the hotshot industry. People are buying pickup trucks, purchasing trailers, obtaining authority, hauling cars, RVs, campers, equipment, and partial freight all over the country. Some succeed. Some fail. That has always been true in business.

The important point is that they are still trying.

The desire to own something has not disappeared.

The desire to build something has not disappeared.

The desire for independence has not disappeared.

What has changed is that much of the industry’s conversation no longer focuses on helping people achieve ownership. Instead, it often focuses on why ownership is dangerous, risky, or unrealistic.

That should concern anyone who believes trucking should continue providing opportunity for working-class Americans.

For generations, trucking represented one of the few industries where an ordinary person could enter with very little, learn the business, save money, buy equipment, obtain authority, and build something of their own.

Some remained one-truck owner-operators.

Some built small fleets.

Some built successful companies.

The path was never easy, but it existed.

Today, that pathway feels increasingly under pressure.

Insurance costs have exploded. Equipment costs have exploded. Regulations have increased. Compliance requirements have increased. Barriers to entry have increased. At the same time, larger carriers have become larger, consolidation has accelerated, and corporate influence throughout the industry has grown significantly.

Again, that is not an accident.

It is the result of incentives.

For years, the incentives rewarded scale. They rewarded larger fleets. They rewarded consolidation. They rewarded capacity. They rewarded finding additional labor pools. They rewarded corporate growth.

What they did not reward was creating more independent truck owners.

That distinction matters because ownership and labor are not the same thing.

Much of today’s trucking conversation revolves around labor. We hear discussions about labor shortages, labor supply, labor recruitment, labor retention, and labor costs.

What we rarely hear is a serious discussion about creating owners.

Where are the conversations about helping people become owner-operators?

Where are the conversations about making startup insurance more affordable?

Where are the conversations about creating financing pathways that help working people purchase equipment?

Where are the conversations about teaching business ownership instead of simply filling another seat?

Where are the conversations about protecting the pathway that once allowed an ordinary driver to become an independent business owner?

Those questions rarely receive the attention they deserve.

Instead, much of the discussion focuses on maintaining capacity.

When I look at many of the debates happening today, I cannot help but notice how connected they really are.

The lease-purchase debate.

The owner-operator debate.

The labor debate.

The immigration debate.

The safety debate.

The consolidation debate.

All of them connect back to incentives. For years, I have watched the industry search for additional capacity while independent operators continued disappearing. I have watched barriers rise for people trying to build legitimate trucking businesses while large corporate interests continued expanding. I have watched discussions about driver shortages dominate headlines while discussions about creating truck owners remained largely absent.

That should raise questions.

If trucking truly needs people, why are we not creating more American truck owners?

If trucking truly values opportunity, why are we not building stronger pathways from company driver to owner-operator?

If trucking truly values safety, why are we willing to aggressively enforce some rules while appearing far less concerned about enforcing others?

The recent attention being given to non-domiciled CDLs, English proficiency requirements, licensing standards, and enforcement issues has only reinforced those questions.

Regardless of where someone stands politically, equal standards should matter.
Consistent enforcement should matter.

Safety should matter.

Yet from my perspective, the larger issue is still incentives.

For years, the industry benefited from policies and business models that increased capacity. The question I keep coming back to is whether those same incentives came at the expense of the independent owner-operator.

While everyone was talking about filling seats, very few people were talking about creating owners.

While everyone was talking about labor, very few people were talking about independence.

While everyone was talking about capacity, very few people were talking about opportunity.

That is why I continue to believe the independent pathway matters.

An industry that creates owners, spreads opportunity.

An industry that only creates employees, limits opportunity.

One creates independence.

The other creates dependence.

This is not an argument against company drivers. Every owner-operator starts somewhere.

This is not an argument against growth. Businesses should be free to grow.

It is simply an argument for preserving the pathway that once allowed an ordinary working person to build something of their own.

Because despite everything that has changed, despite the regulations, despite the costs, despite the risks, despite the headlines, and despite the warnings, people continue chasing ownership.

The hotshot operators prove it.

New authorities prove it.

Every person willing to risk their savings and bet on themselves proves it.

The independent spirit that built trucking is still out here.

The dream is still alive.

The real question is whether anyone is still willing to fight for it.

Because if we stop creating owners, eventually the only people left owning anything will be the people who already own everything.

Will Cook
Just “A Driver’s Perspective”

June 15, 2026