Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="CSSHEGEWISCH"][quote user="futuremodal"][quote user="arbfbe"]   The only way public money will be used to upgrade these lines is if the State of Montana siezes them in a Imminent Domain action.  Then the state will still need to find some way to connect them to a rail system who wants to use them.  MRL will be reluctant since that just moves the connection problem farther down the line.  Who can force a carrier to provide service on tracks they do not own? [/quote] Assuming that action would pass muster with the courts, Montana would still need neighboring states to do the same thing at the same time so that the tracks are freed for multiple use from commodity origin to destination.  Otherwise, Montana would be on an island, with only UP via Monida Pass or CP via Sweetwater as potential competition suitors.  Neither route offers much in the way of an improvement over BNSF's routes to the West Coast for Montana export grain.  Now, if Idaho and Washington were to do the same thing, then the list of likely transporter participants grows exponentially. [/quote] I see that you still have little respect for the Fifth Article of Amendment to the United States Constitution.  Also consider that a multistate eminent domain suit would take a very long time to work its way through the various courts.  If the states happened to win, where would they come up with the money to purchase the property?  More taxes would be political suicide. [/quote] Don't try playing holier than thou now, when you know perfectly well the railroads themselves used Eminent Domain to obtain the initial right of way.  In principle, ED is supposed to be reserved for public entities, not private, and the purpose of ED is to obtain a public good, e.g. public access.  It certainly makes more sense for a State consortium to use ED to facilitate that public usage caveat than it is to use ED for private entities which subsequently bar that public access. More taxes would be political suicide?  If the railroads are forced to pay into the Highway Trust Fund via a diesel fuel tax (as suggested by UPS and yours truly, e.g. great minds think alike!), how is that political suicide?  If anything, the public will appreciate the inclusion of railroads which heretofore have been exempted from paying that tax.  Tax fairness plays very well with the public.  Since railroads are now drawing from that Fund, it is appropriate that they pay into it as well. Personally, I prefer land grants to States such as Montana, Idaho, and Washington e.g. states that have significant (and property tax exempt) holdings of federally owned land within their borders.  Those land grants themselves would more than pay for the assessed value of railroad ROW.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag