$700Million for CSX Relocation in doubt

[Anonymous]

Posted on Thu, May. 18, 2006



Katrina money bill doubtful
Cochran: Bush not backing it
By GEOFF PENDER
[e-mail]

JACKSON - U.S. Sen. Thad Cochran says it's looking doubtful that an additional $28.9 billion in Katrina spending approved this month by the Senate will pass, primarily because of lack of support from the White House.

The House and Senate are in negotiations on the measure, but Cochran says he's heard from House leaders "that if the president doesn't ask for it, then they're not going to approve it."

"I think President Bush feels a lot of pressure to show leadership in holding down the deficit, even though the deficit because of how well the economy is doing is about $100 billion less than had been projected," Cochran said. "But in spite of that reality, I think the White House advisers have convinced (Bush) that he's got to be shown holding down spending."

Cochran helped shepherd the passage late last year of the $29 billion Katrina relief package that was nearly double what Bush had recommended.

But Cochran said he doesn't foresee much more federal Katrina spending "for the balance of this fiscal year," which ends in September, although he predicts more can be secured next year.

"We are working hard every minute to get as much as we can justify," Cochran said.

The current Senate proposal has $700 million to move the CSX railroad tracks, a move proposed long before Katrina and seen by some as key to rebuilding a better Coast. A vacated rail line would allow construction of a new east-west highway, taking traffic off U.S. 90 and allowing it to return to a scenic beach boulevard.

But Cochran said, "We haven't received any encouragement about that from the House at this point."

[Junctionfan]

Where would the new line be if the house approved the bill?

[solzrules]

Good. Hopefully the president will grow some balls and refuse to sign it.

Spending for bells and whistles like that need to be stopped.

Relocate the rail line so they can have a scenic boulevard? How is that essential to Katrina relief?

[Anonymous]

This was started by Senator Lott. There was more to it than a highway, it was supposed to spur casinos and redevelopment in a depressed area. My understanding was that CSX didn't want it anyway - no advantage to them and they just rebuilt the current line.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by fado12c

This was started by Senator Lott. There was more to it than a highway, it was supposed to spur casinos and redevelopment in a depressed area. My understanding was that CSX didn't want it anyway - no advantage to them and they just rebuilt the current line.

Actually, that isn't quite true. CSX is sitting on the fence. Remember, they get $700 Million for the ROW. CSX just rebuilt it for about $300 MIllion with $250 Million coming from insurance. So, since the state doesn't need the track, if the deal goes through you can figure that CSX will also be able to pick up all that BRAND NEW material. So the deal probably has value of closer to $900 Million for CSX. There is very little industry on the line west of Pascagoula (where the line would end). As Mississippi folks might say, "that ain't chicken feed, neither..." Also, lets not forget that although CSX was able to rebuild this time, do you really think that the insurance companies will ever want to insure that line again after Katrina??? Not on your life...

So there are indeed advantages for CSX to accepting some sort of deal. Will it happen? Only the shadow knows...

LC

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Where would the new line be if the house approved the bill?

No. See my prior post conmcerning the Railroad to Nowhere on this site with explanatory article.

LC

[Anonymous]

I feel that this $700 Million should be used for other things and let CSX keep there line. I feel this plan is a bad idea and very stupid.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by AMTK200

I feel that this $700 Million should be used for other things and let CSX keep there line. I feel this plan is a bad idea and very stupid.

Perhaps, but the people who live and work in Mississippi want it to happen and their Congressional delegation is quite powerful. Given that they need help after Katrina and the fact that highway construction is going to produce a LOT of jobs the amount of money is not that great. Also, what do you suppose will happen the next time someone else wants a project in their state or district who votes against this one?? Sen. Cochran could probably block most earmarks in either chamber by himself as Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. With Sen. Lott's help, well lets say that I wouldn't want to need much money from the government in such a district or state...politics, its all politics...

LC

[jeaton]

Seems to me that with $700 million and the track material, CSX would be in a good position to get into a joint venture with the Norfolk Southern and/or CN and add a lot of capacity to run the trains from Mobile to New Orleans via Hattiesburg.

Not that that would be my favorite place to spend the money, but then there not going to give it to me, so what the hey...

[solzrules]

Wether it benefits the railroad or not, it is public tax dollars. Why should public tax dollars be used to re-locate a track that isn't really necessary? If CSX wants to keep the track there and they aren't willing to foot the bill to move it themselves, then why not just leave it? You don't have to spend the money just because it is there.

[spbed]

Dont worry us taxpayers will wind up footing the bill for this boondoggle since GWB Secy of the $$$$$$$$ is ex CSX CEO Snow [:(!]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

Posted on Thu, May. 18, 2006



Katrina money bill doubtful
Cochran: Bush not backing it
By GEOFF PENDER
[e-mail]

JACKSON - U.S. Sen. Thad Cochran says it's looking doubtful that an additional $28.9 billion in Katrina spending approved this month by the Senate will pass, primarily because of lack of support from the White House.

The House and Senate are in negotiations on the measure, but Cochran says he's heard from House leaders "that if the president doesn't ask for it, then they're not going to approve it."

"I think President Bush feels a lot of pressure to show leadership in holding down the deficit, even though the deficit because of how well the economy is doing is about $100 billion less than had been projected," Cochran said. "But in spite of that reality, I think the White House advisers have convinced (Bush) that he's got to be shown holding down spending."

Cochran helped shepherd the passage late last year of the $29 billion Katrina relief package that was nearly double what Bush had recommended.

But Cochran said he doesn't foresee much more federal Katrina spending "for the balance of this fiscal year," which ends in September, although he predicts more can be secured next year.

"We are working hard every minute to get as much as we can justify," Cochran said.

The current Senate proposal has $700 million to move the CSX railroad tracks, a move proposed long before Katrina and seen by some as key to rebuilding a better Coast. A vacated rail line would allow construction of a new east-west highway, taking traffic off U.S. 90 and allowing it to return to a scenic beach boulevard.

But Cochran said, "We haven't received any encouragement about that from the House at this point."

[Anonymous]

Snow won't have anything to do with the passage of this legislation or its signing in to law. That would be Congress and the President. As it has already passed the Senate, that leaves the House of Representatives and the W.

LC

[Anonymous]

Can someone tell me what route CSX traffic would actually use between NOL and FL, should this change actually come to pass? NS? NS and some other lines?

[Anonymous]

Ralph -

Here is a repost of the Mobile Register Article. I think it explains a few things.

LC

CSX rerouting proposal could cost Mobile jobs
Freight trains coming from New Orleans would be sent north to Meridian and then to Montgomery, bypassing Mobile
Saturday, April 29, 2006
By ANDREA JAMES
Business Reporter
CSX Transportation Inc. documents obtained Friday by the Press-Register reveal new details about a plan to abandon the railroad's Gulf Coast artery connecting New Orleans and Mobile -- a $765 million project that Mississippi lawmakers are pushing as part of hurricane recovery.

Freight trains that now travel due east from New Orleans would instead be routed north to Meridian, Miss., and then hook a right into Montgomery, according to documents that CSX prepared for government officials. Upgrades on existing tracks and new infrastructure would make up more than half of the project's price tag.

But the plan, which has become a target of Washington conservatives who want it eliminated from a growing emergency spending bill, could cost Mobile jobs.

IPSCO Inc. has sent a letter to Alabama lawmakers expressing concern about the plan, said Greg Maindonald, vice president of operations services for the steelmaker, which has a mini-mill in north Mobile County that employs about 370 people.

Losing the rail service would kill Mobile's chance for a pipe plant that could create 200 new jobs, he said.

"If that rail line is abandoned, that would take Mobile out of our selection criteria for expansions," he said. "It's going to really hurt us."

IPSCO said changes proposed by CSX at the urging of Mississippi's Republican senators, Trent Lott and Thad Cochran, would quadruple the distance trains have to travel to reach New Orleans from Mobile. The company ships up to 30,000 tons per month of heavy plate steel from its Mobile mill to New Orleans, where it is then routed to California or Texas, Maindonald said.

Easy rail access to the west was a key reason that Lisle, Ill.-based IPSCO built the mill in Mobile, he said.

"We're going to have to have about 100 more cars in our pool just to ship the material," Maindonald said.

The current CSX route between New Orleans and Mobile hugs the Mississippi Gulf Coast, pushing trains through tourist towns and past lucrative casinos.

Hurricane Katrina's storm surge destroyed about 100 miles of the coastal route on Aug. 29. Five months and $250 million later, CSX reopened the line.

But Lott and Cochran have added a $700 million appropriation to an emergency war spending bill that would allow CSX to abandon the rebuilt tracks in favor of shifting freight to existing rail lines further north.

Supporters of the project, including Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, say that the new route is needed so the state can improve coastal evacuation routes and expand U.S. 90 to handle more traffic.

A CSX spokesman said Friday that inland service would also be more reliable because it would avoid hurricane flood zones.

Opposition to the plan continues among fiscal conservatives, who want what has become a $106.5 billion emergency spending measure trimmed back to the $92 billion range initially proposed by the White House.

Alabama's two senators appear to be split on the issue. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, backs removing the railroad funding from the war bill, while Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, thus far has supported Cochran and Lott.

As of Friday, the railroad provision remained a part of the emergency spending bill pending Senate approval.

"Senator Shelby believes at this point it's difficult to assess the overall impact that this may have because we do not know which path will be chosen," spokeswoman Katie Boyd said. "The senator and his office are working to put CSX in touch with all impacted parties."

Sessions had concerns about the project's impact on the Port of Mobile, according to a report published in The Hill.

When the CSX line was down following last year's hurricane, trains had to travel through Birmingham to reach Mobile. That clogged rail lines and delayed shipments to the state docks.

The CSX documents reveal a diversion plan that includes no new rail routes.

An existing CSX and smaller line that connects Montgomery to Meridian would get $250 million in upgrades. The Norfolk Southern line from New Orleans to Meridian would get $125 million in upgrades, plus Norfolk would get a $200 million payment for use of the line.

Other improvements over the new route include 50 mph speed upgrades, a $25 million Meridian connector, and $90 million worth of improvements in and around Montgomery, the documents reveal.

Eighteen freight trains would be added to the alternate route, increasing freight capacity over the line, according to the documents.

CSX would not comment Friday on the specifics it generated for lawmakers, but did try to assure that Mobile would not be abandoned.

"Our commitment to Mobile and its business growth remains very strong," CSX spokesman Gary Sease said. "We have important clients at the port and other industries that certainly are critical to our growth. It's a good relationship and one that we want to continue."

Addressing concerns that CSX employees in Mobile could potentially lose their jobs, Sease said that CSX has been hiring at a rate of as many as 1,500 people per year to operate trains, and demand remains high. A switching terminal in Mobile would remain in place, he said.

Routing CSX's east-west traffic away from Mobile might benefit the port, state docks Director Jimmy Lyons said Friday. CSX represents 65 percent of the state docks' rail traffic, but the trains are routed either north or east. Eliminating the through traffic on the line could ease congestion, he said.

Lyons also said that trains might be able to travel faster over the inland routes. "A lot of this is hypothetical," Lyons said. "I don't think any modeling has been done."

[spbed]

Ah but as a Secy in GWB Cabinet he has tons of other goodies to offer our elected officals in DC which I think you have completely overlooked to obtain there favorable vote[:o)]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

Snow won't have anything to do with the passage of this legislation or its signing in to law. That would be Congress and the President. As it has already passed the Senate, that leaves the House of Representatives and the W.

LC

[zardoz]

So let me get this straight......they want to tear out the railway line that was damaged by the hurricane to build a new highway that is needed for evacuation in case of a hurricane, right? Am I missing something, or would not this new fancy highway suffer the same fate as the railroad tracks, should another hurricane hit?


Why should our government authorize another 28.9 billion to rebuild that part of OUR country? We have to rebuild Iraq first. What a great way to get the cash-flow energized--first blow it up at our expense, then rebuild it at our expense.

It's all about priorities, I guess. The question is: who's priorities are we following?

[greyhounds]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

So let me get this straight......they want to tear out the railway line that was damaged by the hurricane to build a new highway that is needed for evacuation in case of a hurricane, right? Am I missing something, or would not this new fancy highway suffer the same fate as the railroad tracks, should another hurricane hit?


Why should our government authorize another 28.9 billion to rebuild that part of OUR country? We have to rebuild Iraq first. What a great way to get the cash-flow energized--first blow it up at our expense, then rebuild it at our expense.

It's all about priorities, I guess. The question is: who's priorities are we following?

Oh, it's got nothing to do with 'rebuilding' anything. And everthing to do with Federal 'priorities'. You Bush haters MMAT.

The State of Mississippi wants this and they're using Katrina as an excuse to try to grab some Federal (read yours and mine) dollars to do it.

They've got a good opportunity down there. Casino gambling is legal in Mississippi (who'd a thunk it!) The Mississippi Gulf Coast in the only place in the continital US that has good beaches, a warm climate, and casino gambling. It's one Hell of an opportunity to develop as a tourist destination.

To do this the State of Mississippi wants to give the beach area over to casinos, move the highway inland to the railroad right-of-way and get the freight trains out of town.

Fine. If Mississippi wants to do this, then let Mississippi pay for it. There's certainly no Federal interest in developing casinos on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. I might vacation there, but my vacations are not a Federal responsibility.

It's got nothing to do with the storms. And its got nothing to do with Iraq, President Bush, or Secretary Snow. It's not, in any way, a Federal 'priority' and no Federal Government money should be spent on this project.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

Ah but as a Secy in GWB Cabinet he has tons of other goodies to offer our elected officals in DC which I think you have completely overlooked to obtain there favorable vote[:o)]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

Snow won't have anything to do with the passage of this legislation or its signing in to law. That would be Congress and the President. As it has already passed the Senate, that leaves the House of Representatives and the W.

LC

Except that Snow's boss the W has already come out against this bill as extra spending and Bush has indicated he will veto it. So, why would Snow go against his boss by offering anything to anyone? He is already rumored to be leaving the administration anyhow...

LC

[zardoz]

I don't "hate" Bush; I just question his priorities compared with the priorities of most of the citizens of the US.

And originally the $700 million was to come out of the $28.9 billion Katrina rebuilding fund--THAT makes it a Federal program. If the state want's to do it on their own, and the majority of Mississippi is for it, then I agree with you, good for them. I wi***hem well.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

So let me get this straight......they want to tear out the railway line that was damaged by the hurricane to build a new highway that is needed for evacuation in case of a hurricane, right? Am I missing something, or would not this new fancy highway suffer the same fate as the railroad tracks, should another hurricane hit?


Why should our government authorize another 28.9 billion to rebuild that part of OUR country? We have to rebuild Iraq first. What a great way to get the cash-flow energized--first blow it up at our expense, then rebuild it at our expense.

It's all about priorities, I guess. The question is: who's priorities are we following?

Oh, it's got nothing to do with 'rebuilding' anything. And everthing to do with Federal 'priorities'. You Bush haters MMAT.

The State of Mississippi wants this and they're using Katrina as an excuse to try to grab some Federal (read yours and mine) dollars to do it.

They've got a good opportunity down there. Casino gambling is legal in Mississippi (who'd a thunk it!) The Mississippi Gulf Coast in the only place in the continital US that has good beaches, a warm climate, and casino gambling. It's one Hell of an opportunity to develop as a tourist destination.

To do this the State of Mississippi wants to give the beach area over to casinos, move the highway inland to the railroad right-of-way and get the freight trains out of town.

Fine. If Mississippi wants to do this, then let Mississippi pay for it. There's certainly no Federal interest in developing casinos on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. I might vacation there, but my vacations are not a Federal responsibility.

It's got nothing to do with the storms. And its got nothing to do with Iraq, President Bush, or Secretary Snow. It's not, in any way, a Federal 'priority' and no Federal Government money should be spent on this project.

An interesting point. One of the reasons I posted these articles in the first place is to ask the simple question: What are our national transportation priorities? Should the federal government at the urging of a state (like MS) be able to simply take a railroad line through eminent domain as is proposed here? Shouldn't there be an inquiry by DOT or DOJ as to whether this is in our national interest?

As it stands now, there is no such inquiry. So long as the government wants to condemn the propertyand pays appropriate compensation there is virtually no remedy for the railroad. This is one of the major reasons CSX is not taking a position publicly on this proposal. They have nothing to gain by it and potentially quite a bit to lose depending upon what position they take.

It is interesting to see that the reasons to approve or disapprove this proposed government action seem to rest solely upon whether we can pay for it, not whether or not it is the right course to take in balancing local needs against our national interest in a cohesive and efficient national transportation system. Only the real establishment of a national transportation policy with the force of federal law will prevent many of the recent attempts by states and localities to change the way our railroads work.

LC

[Anonymous]

Recent statements by Secretary Mineta seem to indicate that at least part of our transportation policy is to reduce congestion. How does putting a new Interstate Highway (I-69?) parallel to existing I-10 along the Mississippi Coast rate in congestion relief? Is it worth the loss of a RR main line? Are these questions even being asked?

LC

5/18/2006 Congestion Relief
USDOT sets strategy for reducing bottlenecks on nation’s transportation network

U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta has unveiled a plan that addresses what he calls the single-largest threat to the economy: freight, highway and aviation congestion.

On Tuesday, he introduced a national initiative designed to reduce freight bottlenecks and prevent shipment delays, which cost the nation $200 billion annually, according to Mineta.

Under the National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) will seek urban partnership agreements with communities that can demonstrate new congestion-relief strategies and encourage states to pass legislation that promotes private investment in transportation. The USDOT also will seek widespread deployment of new operational technologies and practices that can reduce traffic tie-ups, and reduce port and border congestion, and solicit recommendations from the Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission.

“The bottom line is that every person and every business in America has a vested interest in reducing congestion,” said Mineta in a prepared statement.

From Progressive Railroading Site

[BaltACD]

QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

Dont worry us taxpayers will wind up footing the bill for this boondoggle since GWB Secy of the $$$$$$$$ is ex CSX CEO Snow [:(!]

Besides the only thing Snow really cared about with CSX was the $71 Million he got for leaving to become Secretary of the Treasury....just think what he will want to leave that position????

[Anonymous]

$700 million? That'd pay for a nice rail link between the DM&E and MRL. Add a little more and MRL can be extended west to a logical West Coast port, and abracadabra, we finally get some intramodal rail competition here in the Northern Tier, something the South already has plenty of. And frankly, that last thing this nation needs right now is more casinos. If Mississippi wants to squander investment in low life casinos, let them spend their own money for such. We up here are growing grain and wood to feed the world and provide homes. Katrina or no Katrina, we deserve that extra $700 million more than them.

What's that you say? This is *contingent* on Katrina rebuilding, not any add on building? Fine, we'll just wait for that Yellowstone bulge to blow, they we'll finally get ours!

[solzrules]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

So let me get this straight......they want to tear out the railway line that was damaged by the hurricane to build a new highway that is needed for evacuation in case of a hurricane, right? Am I missing something, or would not this new fancy highway suffer the same fate as the railroad tracks, should another hurricane hit?


Why should our government authorize another 28.9 billion to rebuild that part of OUR country? We have to rebuild Iraq first. What a great way to get the cash-flow energized--first blow it up at our expense, then rebuild it at our expense.

It's all about priorities, I guess. The question is: who's priorities are we following?

Oh, it's got nothing to do with 'rebuilding' anything. And everthing to do with Federal 'priorities'. You Bush haters MMAT.

The State of Mississippi wants this and they're using Katrina as an excuse to try to grab some Federal (read yours and mine) dollars to do it.

They've got a good opportunity down there. Casino gambling is legal in Mississippi (who'd a thunk it!) The Mississippi Gulf Coast in the only place in the continital US that has good beaches, a warm climate, and casino gambling. It's one Hell of an opportunity to develop as a tourist destination.

To do this the State of Mississippi wants to give the beach area over to casinos, move the highway inland to the railroad right-of-way and get the freight trains out of town.

Fine. If Mississippi wants to do this, then let Mississippi pay for it. There's certainly no Federal interest in developing casinos on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. I might vacation there, but my vacations are not a Federal responsibility.

It's got nothing to do with the storms. And its got nothing to do with Iraq, President Bush, or Secretary Snow. It's not, in any way, a Federal 'priority' and no Federal Government money should be spent on this project.

An interesting point. One of the reasons I posted these articles in the first place is to ask the simple question: What are our national transportation priorities? Should the federal government at the urging of a state (like MS) be able to simply take a railroad line through eminent domain as is proposed here? Shouldn't there be an inquiry by DOT or DOJ as to whether this is in our national interest?

As it stands now, there is no such inquiry. So long as the government wants to condemn the propertyand pays appropriate compensation there is virtually no remedy for the railroad. This is one of the major reasons CSX is not taking a position publicly on this proposal. They have nothing to gain by it and potentially quite a bit to lose depending upon what position they take.

It is interesting to see that the reasons to approve or disapprove this proposed government action seem to rest solely upon whether we can pay for it, not whether or not it is the right course to take in balancing local needs against our national interest in a cohesive and efficient national transportation system. Only the real establishment of a national transportation policy with the force of federal law will prevent many of the recent attempts by states and localities to change the way our railroads work.

LC

In which case we might as well federalize the railroads. This proposal is a bunch of garbage. I agree 10000000% with an earlier post. IF Mississippi wants it, let 'em pay for it. The feds have no business getting involved with this, especially if the whole reason is to build more casinos. That has to be the stupidest reason I have ever heard.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

$700 million? That'd pay for a nice rail link between the DM&E and MRL. Add a little more and MRL can be extended west to a logical West Coast port,

And how much is a little more to get from Spokane to tidewater? At any rate, if DM&E is having plenty of trouble in getting $2.5 billion loaned to them to get to the Powder River Basin, what makes you think that connecting with MRL would be any cheaper or easier, let alone build a West Coast extension from Spokane?

[spbed]

Nah easy solution is just let the casino's pay if they want the land so badly. Surely they have more money then us poor taxpayers[:o)]

QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

So let me get this straight......they want to tear out the railway line that was damaged by the hurricane to build a new highway that is needed for evacuation in case of a hurricane, right? Am I missing something, or would not this new fancy highway suffer the same fate as the railroad tracks, should another hurricane hit?


Why should our government authorize another 28.9 billion to rebuild that part of OUR country? We have to rebuild Iraq first. What a great way to get the cash-flow energized--first blow it up at our expense, then rebuild it at our expense.

It's all about priorities, I guess. The question is: who's priorities are we following?

Oh, it's got nothing to do with 'rebuilding' anything. And everthing to do with Federal 'priorities'. You Bush haters MMAT.

The State of Mississippi wants this and they're using Katrina as an excuse to try to grab some Federal (read yours and mine) dollars to do it.

They've got a good opportunity down there. Casino gambling is legal in Mississippi (who'd a thunk it!) The Mississippi Gulf Coast in the only place in the continital US that has good beaches, a warm climate, and casino gambling. It's one Hell of an opportunity to develop as a tourist destination.

To do this the State of Mississippi wants to give the beach area over to casinos, move the highway inland to the railroad right-of-way and get the freight trains out of town.

Fine. If Mississippi wants to do this, then let Mississippi pay for it. There's certainly no Federal interest in developing casinos on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. I might vacation there, but my vacations are not a Federal responsibility.

It's got nothing to do with the storms. And its got nothing to do with Iraq, President Bush, or Secretary Snow. It's not, in any way, a Federal 'priority' and no Federal Government money should be spent on this project.

An interesting point. One of the reasons I posted these articles in the first place is to ask the simple question: What are our national transportation priorities? Should the federal government at the urging of a state (like MS) be able to simply take a railroad line through eminent domain as is proposed here? Shouldn't there be an inquiry by DOT or DOJ as to whether this is in our national interest?

As it stands now, there is no such inquiry. So long as the government wants to condemn the propertyand pays appropriate compensation there is virtually no remedy for the railroad. This is one of the major reasons CSX is not taking a position publicly on this proposal. They have nothing to gain by it and potentially quite a bit to lose depending upon what position they take.

It is interesting to see that the reasons to approve or disapprove this proposed government action seem to rest solely upon whether we can pay for it, not whether or not it is the right course to take in balancing local needs against our national interest in a cohesive and efficient national transportation system. Only the real establishment of a national transportation policy with the force of federal law will prevent many of the recent attempts by states and localities to change the way our railroads work.

LC

In which case we might as well federalize the railroads. This proposal is a bunch of garbage. I agree 10000000% with an earlier post. IF Mississippi wants it, let 'em pay for it. The feds have no business getting involved with this, especially if the whole reason is to build more casinos. That has to be the stupidest reason I have ever heard.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

Nah easy solution is just let the casino's pay if they want the land so badly. Surely they have more money then us poor taxpayers[:o)]

QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules

QUOTE: Originally posted by Limitedclear

QUOTE: Originally posted by greyhounds

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

So let me get this straight......they want to tear out the railway line that was damaged by the hurricane to build a new highway that is needed for evacuation in case of a hurricane, right? Am I missing something, or would not this new fancy highway suffer the same fate as the railroad tracks, should another hurricane hit?


Why should our government authorize another 28.9 billion to rebuild that part of OUR country? We have to rebuild Iraq first. What a great way to get the cash-flow energized--first blow it up at our expense, then rebuild it at our expense.

It's all about priorities, I guess. The question is: who's priorities are we following?

Oh, it's got nothing to do with 'rebuilding' anything. And everthing to do with Federal 'priorities'. You Bush haters MMAT.

The State of Mississippi wants this and they're using Katrina as an excuse to try to grab some Federal (read yours and mine) dollars to do it.

They've got a good opportunity down there. Casino gambling is legal in Mississippi (who'd a thunk it!) The Mississippi Gulf Coast in the only place in the continital US that has good beaches, a warm climate, and casino gambling. It's one Hell of an opportunity to develop as a tourist destination.

To do this the State of Mississippi wants to give the beach area over to casinos, move the highway inland to the railroad right-of-way and get the freight trains out of town.

Fine. If Mississippi wants to do this, then let Mississippi pay for it. There's certainly no Federal interest in developing casinos on the Mississippi Gulf Coast. I might vacation there, but my vacations are not a Federal responsibility.

It's got nothing to do with the storms. And its got nothing to do with Iraq, President Bush, or Secretary Snow. It's not, in any way, a Federal 'priority' and no Federal Government money should be spent on this project.

An interesting point. One of the reasons I posted these articles in the first place is to ask the simple question: What are our national transportation priorities? Should the federal government at the urging of a state (like MS) be able to simply take a railroad line through eminent domain as is proposed here? Shouldn't there be an inquiry by DOT or DOJ as to whether this is in our national interest?

As it stands now, there is no such inquiry. So long as the government wants to condemn the propertyand pays appropriate compensation there is virtually no remedy for the railroad. This is one of the major reasons CSX is not taking a position publicly on this proposal. They have nothing to gain by it and potentially quite a bit to lose depending upon what position they take.

It is interesting to see that the reasons to approve or disapprove this proposed government action seem to rest solely upon whether we can pay for it, not whether or not it is the right course to take in balancing local needs against our national interest in a cohesive and efficient national transportation system. Only the real establishment of a national transportation policy with the force of federal law will prevent many of the recent attempts by states and localities to change the way our railroads work.

LC

In which case we might as well federalize the railroads. This proposal is a bunch of garbage. I agree 10000000% with an earlier post. IF Mississippi wants it, let 'em pay for it. The feds have no business getting involved with this, especially if the whole reason is to build more casinos. That has to be the stupidest reason I have ever heard.

Because Casino owners are like Football teams, why spend your own money when you can get someone else (Feds, State, City) to pay for your new shiny stadium, or casino.

This is the worst kind of pork barreling I've seen in decades, $700M in OUR money going to the eventual benifit of casino owner's who'll take even more money from the stupid schlep's that go there and will like evey other casino in this country give back the absolute minimum (if anything) back to the states that were stupid enough to allow them to build there in the first place.

I agree, if the casino's are so good for Mississippi shouldnt they already be rollling in dough? Let them pay for it, afterall they got all that casino tax revinue coming in, dont they?

[CB_Fan]

Several of you who posted on this thread did not provide contact information. If you would like to learn more about the proposed CSX relocation, send me a note and I'll forward a copy of our newsletter, The Hummingbird, which is dedicated to making sure folks give this a lot of thought before they tear up the tracks along the Gulf Coast. We think it would be bad news for our part of the country (except, perhaps, for the casinos and condos on the Mississippi Gulf Coast -- even then, just think what modern high speed passenger rail transportation could do for that area).

[Anonymous]

HSR would provide a lot for the and hopefully a start for a Future HSR Network in America.

[wallyworld]

Which credit card are we using today? Bank of Japan? Bank of China? National debt ceiling aka our card limit recently raised. Is this the fourth or fifth time we had to do this?
Ah..never mind-sure, lets throw in some high speed trains too.