WashingtonWatch.com - H.R. 2125, The Railroad Competition and Service Improvement Act of 2007

Comment by Eric D (June 27, 2008, 01:00:00)

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:00:00 EDT

The only people that are getting good rail service these days are the ones that are shipping in 100 car units. It really makes it hard for the small to midsize industries ordering 10-50 cars in to their plant siding a day -you don't know if you're going to get switched on a given day. Let alone if you are a small industry wanting main line rail access, not going to happen unless your an upstart nuclear power plant....

Comment by Tony L (January 23, 2008, 01:00:00)

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:00:00 EST

You people that are for regulation are insane. Do you not know the history? Let's see - 20% of the industry operating under the protection of bankruptcy, 1/3 of the shippers unhappy with service, accidents increasing nearly 400% in 10 years because they didn't have the capital to make improvements. That's what you want? And don't give me the "rates are unfair" business. They are lower now than were under regulation. Do your homework people!!!...

Comment by Derek K. (November 5, 2007, 01:00:00)

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:00:00 EST

Louis, you must be under the false impression that competitors would balk at paying 1Mil/mile to build their own tracks. Have you seen the revenues reported... and projected for that matter... of major class 1s? If you are trying to imply that the government (national, state, and local) doesn't provide significant financial benefits, tax incentives, etc to railroads you are out of your mind. If you think that since the govt does not explicitly hand out these benefits for infrastructure, that it is not connected, then you must wear a helmet and drink your food through a straw....

Comment by LOUIS WEINBERG (November 4, 2007, 01:00:00)

Sun, 04 Nov 2007 00:00:00 EDT

REGULATION BROUGHT YOU THE PENNCENTRAL BANKRUPTCY, THE END OF RAILROAD PASSENGER TRAINS,CONRAIL BECAUSE OF 6 BANKRUPTIES, THE END OF CN&W, MILWAUKEE, ROCK ISLAND, WESTERN PACIFIC, ETC. FINALLY IN 1980, STAGGERS DE REGULATED THEM. IT TOOK THEM 20 YEARS TO GET IT BACK TO WHAT IT IS NOW FOR CLASS I'S. GOVERNMENT CHARGES THEM FUEL TAX FOR HIGHWAYS AND AIRPORTS. NO GOV'T AGENCY HANDS THEM A DIME FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. PEOPLE, GET EDUCATED BEFORE COMPLAINING. THE BUSINESS OF RR'S NOW IS BUSINESS, NOT JUST RUNNING TRAINS. NEW, SMARTER, MORE RESPONSIVE MANAGERS. (UNION WORKERS WILL NEVER STOP BITCHING, IT'S THE MINDSET) DO THEY NEED MORE SAFETY (HR2095?) YES, DOES AMERICA NEED THIS? NO!!! DEREK, HOW NEW COMPETITION?, YOU CAN'T RUN YOUR TRAINS ON MY TRACK, YOU HAVE TO BUILD YOUR OWN AT A MILLION DOLLARS A MILE! THEY ARE NOT GOV'T OWNED HIGHWAYS PAD BY PUBLIS, THEY ARE TRACK PAID FOR BY THE RAILROAD AND NO ONE ELSE....

Comment by Derek K. (October 20, 2007, 01:00:00)

Sat, 20 Oct 2007 00:00:00 EDT

Maybe playing by the economic rules that the rest of the business world follows will force railroad managers to actually manage. I'd imagine that earning profits due to good ol' fashioned hard work instead of government coddling might go a long way. Besides, the rail industry is here to stay... the companies that control it, well, let the competition begin. I could give a crap less what the ramifications are for the industry. Slowdown in traffic? Maybe temporarily, but the demand will spur competition, new industry leaders, and new jobs. Isn't that what competition is all about. Save the railroad sob story for someone who cares....

Status as of October 2, 2007

Tue, 02 Oct 2007 00:00:00 EDT

10/2/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Comment by Bill M. (September 25, 2007, 01:00:00)

Tue, 25 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT

Rail employment fell far more rapidly during the fifties, sixties and seventies while they were regulated. Check the numbers. Traffic declined, equipment and track went downhill. After dereg, prices fell, traffic returned, and maintenance improved. Learn from history!...

Comment by Cecil B. (September 24, 2007, 01:00:00)

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT

The railroads have proven that they cannot operate fairly without regulation. They had their opportunity and consistently abused it....

Comment by Robert D. (September 20, 2007, 01:00:00)

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 00:00:00 EDT

When the railroads were regulated, there were thousands more employees. Deregulation resulted in mergers and cutbacks. Maybe this isn't such a bad idea!...

Revision by webmaster (August 2, 2007, 01:00:00)

Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 EDT

H.R. 2125 would amend title 49, United States Code, to ensure competition in the rail industry, enable rail customers to obtain reliable rail service, and provide those customers with a reasonable process for challenging rate and service disputes.

Detailed Summary

Railroad Competition and Service Improvement Act of 2007 - Sets forth Surface Transportation Board directives calling for effective competition among rail carriers and reliable rail transportation service for rail customers.

Requires a rail carrier, upon shipper request, to establish rates for transportation and provide requested service between any two points on the carrier's system.

Prohibits the Board from issuing a certificate authorizing construction and operation of railroad lines, short line purchases by Class II and Class III rail carriers, or consolidation, merger, and acquisition of control of rail carriers, or exempt from such certificate requirements any person, transaction, or service with respect to such activity, if the activity involves a transfer of interest in a line of railroad, from a Class I rail carrier to a Class II or III rail carrier, and the activity would: (1) restrict the ability of the Class II or Class III rail carrier to interchange traffic with other rail carriers; (2) restrict competition of rail carriers in the region affected by the activity in a manner that would violate U.S. antitrust laws; or (3) require higher per car interchange rates for Class II or Class III rail carriers to interchange traffic with other rail carriers. Prescribes procedures for Board review of any activity alleged to have resulted in a restriction of competition.

Makes mandatory (currently, discretionary) entry by rail carriers into reciprocal switching agreements where the Board finds it is practicable and in the public interest, or where such agreements are necessary to provide competitive rail service.

Requires the Board to designate any state or substantial part of a state as an area of inadequate rail competition after making certain findings.

Requires the Board to post rail service complaints on its website.

Sets forth time limits for the Board to act on complaints filed alleging unlawfulness of a new or revised rail rate, rule, or practice.

Establishes the Office of Rail Customer Advocacy.

Grants rail customers access to a Board process for determining rail rate reasonableness in railroad market dominance cases.

Requires the Board to submit certain rail rate, service, and other disputes to arbitration.

Authorizes the Board to investigate rail carrier violations on its own initiative (under current law, the Board is authorized to investigate only on complaint). Requires the Board (currently, discretionary) to initiate an investigation upon receiving a complaint alleging rail carrier violations.

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 5/4/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Comment by John S. (July 25, 2007, 01:00:00)

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

Just trying to get big goverment involved with the railroad indutry again. Why can't they just let things be....

Revision by webmaster (July 9, 2007, 01:00:00)

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

Detailed Summary

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 5/4/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Revision by webmaster (July 9, 2007, 01:00:00)

Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:00:00 EDT

Detailed Summary

Requires a rail carrier, upon shipper request, to establish rates for transportation and provide requested service between any two points on the carrier's system.

Requires the Board to designate any state or substantial part of a state as an area of inadequate rail competition after making certain findings.

Requires the Board to post rail service complaints on its website.

Sets forth time limits for the Board to act on complaints filed alleging unlawfulness of a new or revised rail rate, rule, or practice.

Establishes the Office of Rail Customer Advocacy.

Grants rail customers access to a Board process for determining rail rate reasonableness in railroad market dominance cases.

Requires the Board to submit certain rail rate, service, and other disputes to arbitration.

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 5/4/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

Status as of May 4, 2007

Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT

5/4/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.

Status as of May 4, 2007

Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 EDT

5/4/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.