The controversy surrounding the 3 × 1 packet program has been a topic of discussion lately, with many criticisms and comments affirming irregularities from the government. The program, an initiative of the Jalisco government, aims to gather the most relevant tax obligations in a single payment, allowing drivers to pay the endorsement, verification, and replacement at the same time. While it may sound like a convenient option, critics argue that it’s a hoax, with the Collective “Tamination Yes, No Verification” denouncing irregularities and meaningless decisions from the state government.
Evaluating the 3 × 1 Package
The members of the movement claim that the 3 × 1 package has one objective: to transfer 900 million pesos annually to concessionary companies that operate the verifiers and the software systems used. They question whether the policies are designed to support drivers and contribute to the well-being of the environment, or if the program is simply a way to confuse the population. In their opinion, the 3 × 1 package is a program that, rather than favoring drivers, is a confusing initiative that prioritizes private interests over common well-being.
Criticisms of the 3 × 1 Package
According to citizens, the 3 × 1 packet program has been full of modifications that confuse drivers. Since its launch, it has been unclear in terms of measures, and many claim that it is an unconstitutional act. One of the most criticized measures is that records that do not pass the verification twice would be retained in the verifiers. The program was promoted under the premise of gratuity, but left out any clarity about possible sanctions. Additionally, drivers have denounced that a requirement not previously announced was included: the realization of a “Vehicle physical verification,” which has been interpreted as an additional pressure measure towards drivers.
Seeking Change
The group has accused the government of using this program to channel public resources to concessionary companies. They denounce that any person who verifies their car, whether approved or not, must make the corresponding payment. This makes verification, in their opinion, a simulation that does not meet the objective of its creation: reducing pollution. Instead, they argue that it is a way to produce income. Given this problem, representatives of the group have requested the immediate suspension of the 3 × 1 packet or, failing that, a complete restructuring. They propose a program where engine reconditioning is a priority, to avoid pollution of the environment.
A Call to Action
In parallel, the members of “Tuning Yes, No Verification” announced that they will resume public demonstrations in the coming weeks. These mobilizations seek to make visible their position before a program that, according to them, “has been plagued by constant lies and modifications, harming more than benefiting the population.” The group suggests that the payment of the endorsement and the issuance of plates are separate procedures of the vehicular verification program. They argue that a right, such as the use of a vehicle, cannot be conditioned to the fulfillment of a different obligation, which they consider a violation of constitutional rights. With this controversy, a debate has been created in Jalisco, generating political tensions and among citizens. For the collective “Tamination Yes, No Verification,” the current program is nothing more than a collection tool, disguised as an environmental concern, which prioritizes private interest over common well-being.