Amtraks power of eminate domain.

[Anonymous]

Now that I have taken my pills[:)][:)][:)] lets get back to buisness
1.Amtrak is a railroad
2. Railroads were given and still have powers of emnate domain given to them by the States and the Feds
3.When Amtrak was created they were given authorisation to gain access to any class one and take over railroad lines that were nesessary
4. They did this in the case of the Montrealer between Springfield Mass and Brattleboro VT with Guilford transportation when tracks got so bad that they were down to 15 MPH(Thats fast on Guilford) on that line. They went to court
and the Fedaral Court ruled in Amtraks favor.
5. Amtrak should use there powers of emnate domain using money from states that want passeger rail to set aside Infrastructure for Passenger rail
6.Abondoned Railroads should be "Railbanked" with rails in place for future Amtrak Use
7.Amtrak eminate domain supercedes that of "Private Railroads" and should use such threats to whip railroads into doing what they want.
8.If there was no Amtrak The Railroads may actualy Have to Run passenger trains themselvers again since Amtrak was a corprate welfare sceme to have railroads weasal out of there obligation to run passenger trains.
9.Railroads should not be taxed on Right of Way that Amtrak uses

[88gta350]

without going into all the points you made, there are others here far more knowledgable than I, let me say this. I don't think railroads have an "obligation" to run passenger trains. If there was no amtrak, there would be no pasenger trains unless demand was sufficient. Railroads are a private enterprise, and they can run the business how they see fit. If they chosse not to run passenger trains because they are not profitable, then what can anyone do except have the government take over again?

[jchnhtfd]

Hmm... fools walk in, so I'll walk in at least a little ways! Dave M. is exactly right: the legal framework which existed which appeared to require railroads to run passenger trains involved the US Mail. If a train does not, or did not, carry mail, there is no current law or regulation which requires any private enterprise -- including Amtrak -- to provide passenger rail service. If a public entity (any level) wants to provide passenger rail service, they are welcome to do so. If a private enterprise wants provide passenger rail service, and can show its owners that it pays, they can -- and will (I don't think they can...!).

Eminent Domain is an interesting power, and the Amtrak/CV/Guilford case was an extremely unusual one. First, eminent domain does not save money: it simply allows entity A (in the above case, Amtrak) to request a Court to find that it is necessary, in the public interest, for Entity B (in the above case, Guilford) to be required to sell -- at fair market -- certain property to Entity A. In the Amtrak/CV/Guilford case, Amtrak prevailed, but only because it was able to show that Guilford had no intention of upgrading the track (and in fairness to Guilford, had no NEED to upgrade the track) and that there was an overriding public interest (ironically, the Montrealer no longer exists -- not enough ridership). I am not a lawyer in this area -- but I would be quite surprised if the power of eminent domain, which involves property rights only, could be invoked to 'whip railroads into doing what [Amtrak] want[s]', at least in most instances where the property is well-maintained and well-run, which is the case for most railroads today.

I quite agree on point 9 -- railroads should not be taxed on rights of way and equipment -- except that I would take it a lot farther and say that that should apply to all railroad rights of way, not just those used by Amtrak. But that's another fight entirely!

[Junctionfan]

I would hope negotiating would be a better first step. I would say to one of the responders though that although the private railroads own their property, their property exists because the United States so really the railroads operate on U.S owned soil (unless the railroads have become a new country and plan to join the U.N). Federal governments in all of the world's countries, have the last word over all other juristictions and only federal and I mean federal courts (in the U.S case it is the Supreme Court) has the final say over even the federal government. States are not as powerful as people would like to believe. Federal government controls almost everything in the long run with direct control over the F.B.I and the U.S Forces. The president is called the "commander-in-cheif" for a reason.

[jchnhtfd]

Junctionfan -- negotiation is always better! Assuming that one can do it. And, in most cases, one can; I doubt either of us could cite too many examples where negotiation hasn't worked to everyone's benefit in the railroad game. As I noted, that Guilford case really was an exception, and had many many odd factors to it -- some of them going back over a century.

My own feeling is that, with very rare exceptions, passenger rail is in the public interest -- but the first stop is not eminent domain or legal action or compulsion of some sort, but a recognition on the part of the politicos that, since it is in the public interest, there should be some public support. Which seems to be sadly lacking...

The taxation issue is also exceedingly complex; I was sounding off in a simplistic way. Which I should never do... a history and discussion of the use of taxation of real property (which is what's at issue here) as a means of support of government is way too complex, I think, for here; suffice it to say that, in my humble opinion, though it made sense when it was introduced (most likely in what was then termed England, in the late 1100s AD -- King Stephen vs. Empress Maud) it really doesn't any more except for a very small selection of civic services (such as fire protection).

[Anonymous]

Real Estate Property Tax of railroads made sence when railroads carried 90% of the nations goods particauly farm goods. It was a indirect way of taxing the nations GNP or gross national product. Now that we are in he the age of Intermodalism were railroads carry 33.3% of the nations goods and trucks and Boats the other 66% its outdated. There were Populest Outcries in the Farm Belt for regilation and taxation of railroads but now that seems to have subsided with the Decline of the Family Farm.