Montana Gov. Schweitzer argues for rail competition

[Joby]

How about Railroads focus on the real competition--trucks.

[Murphy Siding]

What parts of the Staggers Act would pertain to this situation? Not a trick question-I know very little about it, and am curious. Thanks

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

QUOTE: Originally posted by arbfbe

How about allowing the UP to solicit business along the BNSF mainline and then have the BNSF move it under a haulage agreement to the nearest interchange point? Railroads seem to be able to work under such an arrangement when it suits their needs. Why should the State of MT be required to build another unnecessary railroad mainline that parallels one currently in service?

You mean using all that excess capacity that Dave seems to think BNSF has in this area? If there's no new rail line or expansion of capacity on existing lines, it doesn't matter who solicits the business, the capacity needs to be there before there will be any benefit for the shippers.

As far as "unnecessary" we need to go back to capacity of the line as it stands now in comparison to the current traffic.

No one has suggested that there is a capacity problem on these lines. Least of all BNSF.

It has not only not been alleged, but aside from standard maintenance programs and upgrades, there is no program in place to increase capacity on Montana's BNSF lines.

Apparently this is the usual made-up dead fi***hat has nothing to do with the matter discussed by the Governor, which is not a capacity issue, but a pricing issue.

This is shown by the simple expedient of noting that the proposal made by the Governor relates to existing traffic already there, and not some new traffic which the poster, who claims to be an "independant" "thinker," confuses with the issue at hand.

Best regards, Michael Sol

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JOdom

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

If they want competition so bad why don't they buy or build some of there own track?

AMEN!!!! How much out of his own pocket is the governor willing to donate to the kitty to increase competition? That would be a good indicator of how interested he REALLY is.

He's a wheat farmer. He's been paying his 30% tithe out of his own pocket for over 20 years.

Best regards, Michael Sol

[MichaelSol]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH

If the sovereign state of Montana is willing to file an antitrust suit in this matter, than I will say that the governor is willing to put the state's money where his mouth is. If that isn't the case, he's obviously pandering to the voters. Talk is cheap.

The sovereign state of Montana did precisely that for 17 years as a party to the McCarty Farms case. He is obviously taking a different route than the one that, despite ICC findings supporting Montana's contentions, ultimately led to the defeat of the case on technical grounds.

It wasn't cheap.

Best regards, Michael Sol

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl
And granting trackage rights to another railroad on an already clogged rail line? I fail to see how that will help, either.

Again, the article isn't clear on which lines if any would be subject to joint use by another rail service provider. But MRL still has available capacity, as well as most of the entire I-15 rail corridor comprised of BNSF, MRL, MW, and UP (some of which is in place but out of service), and the former NP line east of Billings hosts a coal train or two max.

Oh, there's viable capacity available should it be drafted into service. No problem here.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
two things:
1. He's a Democrat like you.
2. No, it's not an election year.

1. Worse than that, I'm an independant thinker. It takes little or no intellegence to pull the same party lever year after year.

2. Funny, it's an election year in PA. Already getting calls from the State Rep.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

And I notice the Governor doesn't say HOW the STB isn't "behind allowing rail competition “to the maximum extent possible” as current law requires." Not sure how he's "focusing" on the lack of competition.

Perhaps he DID say but it didn't get printed. Perhaps the writer of the story thought such details would be too boring for it's readers.

Whether or not this governor knows the details or is just pandering is not clear from the article.

QUOTE:
Or where the investment is coming from for this "competition."

Who say't it requires "investment"? Maybe just enforcing the written caveats will be all it takes, huh Tom?

A lot of "perhapsing" and "maybeing" there. Too bad we don't hear any facts.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

And I notice the Governor doesn't say HOW the STB isn't "behind allowing rail competition “to the maximum extent possible” as current law requires." Not sure how he's "focusing" on the lack of competition.

Perhaps he DID say but it didn't get printed. Perhaps the writer of the story thought such details would be too boring for it's readers.

Whether or not this governor knows the details or is just pandering is not clear from the article.

QUOTE:
Or where the investment is coming from for this "competition."

Who say't it requires "investment"? Maybe just enforcing the written caveats will be all it takes, huh Tom?

QUOTE:
And granting trackage rights to another railroad on an already clogged rail line? I fail to see how that will help, either.

Again, the article isn't clear on which lines if any would be subject to joint use by another rail service provider. But MRL still has available capacity, as well as most of the entire I-15 rail corridor comprised of BNSF, MRL, MW, and UP (some of which is in place but out of service), and the former NP line east of Billings hosts a coal train or two max.

Oh, there's viable capacity available should it be drafted into service. No problem here.

QUOTE:
Have to agree with Paul on the "pandering to voters" statement. (Gee, this wouldn't be an election year for Governor in Montana, would it?)

I won't disagree that he indeed might be pandering, but you should know two things:
1. He's a Democrat like you.
2. No, it's not an election year.