QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe The Montana legislature passed a law tying BNSF property taxes to the rates they charge for grain shipped out of Montana relative to what they charge neighboring states to the east. BNSF says they will sue but it appears they are offering the carrot before the stick. http://www.ble.org/pr/news/headline.asp?id=13331
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe The Montana legislature passed a law tying BNSF property taxes to the rates they charge for grain shipped out of Montana relative to what they charge neighboring states to the east. BNSF says they will sue but it appears they are offering the carrot before the stick. http://www.ble.org/pr/news/headline.asp?id=13331 Where in the article does it say that they passed this law. This law is mega unconstitutional. I can't believe they would waste the money passing it. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe BNSF Railfan, It looks like you learned your posting ethics from the BNSF's business ethics. Do you enjoy hijacking posts or are you just trying to increase your star count? I believe there are other posts concerning the unfortunate events on the UP in Iowa, perhaps you should post your thoughts on that matter where they belong. Thank you for your consideration. alan
QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe A quote from the article: "The sponsor of the rail-tax bill, Rep. Bob Bergren, D-Havre, has succeeded in shepherding the legislation through the House Agriculture Committee and through the House. The bill now awaits action by the Senate Taxation Committee." It is half way through the legislative process but that appears to be far enough to call the BNSF's bluff. The article also states it is part of the fuel surcharge adjustment not as a result of the fuel surcharge adjustment. Chad, go bait someone else, I won't take it. Alan
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 And just when I thought it was safe to start posting again....MONTANA WHEAT RATES return! I still shudder at the time I spent on that subject. I never did find any indication the BNSF was charging more, but that is not for me to decide. ed
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 Greyhound: I agree completely. I kept pulling rates from the tariffs which indicated the rates were pretty normally biased based on mileage. No one could ever pull a definative rate which gave any proof. Everything was based on yet another assumption. I dont understand the methodolgy in which rates can be proven excessive, but I would image carriers can respond to competitive pricing. I think Montana is just in a tough situation. Too far from market and no competitive manner to get their product to market. ed
QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton Montana may be closer to Portland, but have you ever tried to pull some of the grades out there on the highway there are multiple 5-6 percent grades going arcoss the state. Just to get to Washington you have to pull 3 major passes 2 in montana and 1 in Idaho. The railroads do not have it any easier.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.