Edit topic

Updated your discussion topic below.

Subject
Enter a subject for your topic. Maximum 150 characters.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
Some interesting comments by rail users at a federale hearing on current problems with the US private integrated rail system: <A href="http://www.house.gov/transportation/rail/04-26-06/martland.pdf">http://www.house.gov/transportation/rail/04-26-06/martland.pdf</A> Quote of note - "An Interstate Rail System would provide several strategic advantages over the current system. • Average freight train speeds would be doubled, from the current 20-25mph to 40-50 mph. • The system would be able to handle substantial additional volumes of coal and grain without compromising the ability to handle general merchandise traffic. • Reliable 6-8 day freight service would be available for essentially all carload freight moving within the lower 48 states and Canada. • More industrial development opportunities would be available on lines that are well-maintained, safe, and served on a more frequent basis, whether by Class I or by short line railroads." <A href="http://www.house.gov/transportation/rail/04-26-06/wallace.pdf">http://www.house.gov/transportation/rail/04-26-06/wallace.pdf</A> Quote of note - "I would ask the Committee to consider the following:  The nation’s highway system has a Highway Trust Fund to support and maintain a safe and efficient federal highway system; the nation’s airports have an Aviation Trust Fund to support, maintain and enhance airport infrastructure and provide necessary capacity. If the existence of these two transportation trust funds are deemed to be in the public interest, why not a Railroad Trust Fund, or a similar user-funded mechanism?" <A href="http://www.house.gov/transportation/rail/04-26-06/english.pdf">http://www.house.gov/transportation/rail/04-26-06/english.pdf</A> Quote of note - "Finally, Mr. Chairman, we understand that legislation may be introduced to provide a 25% investment tax credit for investments in railroad infrastructure.  We may very well support such a federal incentive, so long as it was part of a package of legislation that also addressed the concerns of rail customers that find themselves subject to railroad monopoly power, and so long as the tax credit is also available to rail customers when they make similar investments in infrastructure to improve overall rail capacity. Moreover, there should be certain conditions imposed on the investments eligible for the tax credit.  For example, the investments that qualify for this tax credit should be limited to first improving the infrastructure that currently provides insufficient service to captive or single-served rail customers.  Investments eligible for the tax credit should be focused first on infrastructure that benefits the movements of domestic products and commodities as opposed to infrastructure that benefits imported container traffic.  Finally, any infrastructure that benefits from the tax credit should be deployed in a pro-competitive manner as suggested in H.R. 2047, as opposed to further expanding the monopoly power of the railroads."
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
E-mail Subscribe
Check the box below if you want to receive e-mail notifications when replies are made to this thread.

Receive notifications