Staggers Act - A Revisit

Of course regarding PSR, roads are having a "quick learn" that shippers with high value traffic don't like being dictated to when there are alternatives such as another road or highway. Now so far as "Farmer's Cooperative" elevator in Postville, IA goes, well......

Post-Staggers, including any regulatory revisits and in light of PSR, measurement of railroad traffic value and where revisits are being pressed have been further distanced from the value of lading towards the value of markets.

A revisit as a result of service issues comes mainly from Covid & The Great Resignation focused more so in the lesser-lading-value grain/feed, energy, and waste markets than in higher-value products found moving in intermodal and, with exception for "non-PSR" BNSF, the automotive markets.

A revisit as a result of pricing issues is also focused upon the bulk and carload markets primarily as railroads operating under free-market and PSR principles attempt to extract greater value from these lucrative markets to subsidize the less-lucrative but higher-growth-potential intermodal market, replacing most-lucrative coal's diminishing once-highly-valuable role.

In this conversation and others, PSR generalizations have to be unpacked, considering the who, how, and where and against how railroads were already responding to increasing challenges exposing the cracks in the attempt to get to opportunities. Similarly, what constituencies and who among those constituencies are calling for a revisit also needs to be unpacked to see the "cleanliness of their hands".

Post-Staggers it's more about markets and market freedoms where railroads can now negotiate directly with those who foot the bill, differentiate price and service based upon differentiated markets, execute confidential contracts of price and service agreement, and enter/exit/"subcontract" markets. Just like any other for-profit business, they can manage different lines-of-business with differing value in reaching a total value that goes toward their success. For railroads success goes to being able to attract sufficient free-market private capital to long-term invest in their capital-intensive business against a less capital-intense competitor capable of quicker innovation and now showing significant innovative potential to advance competitive advantage most directly against the intermodal market. That's the framework in which a revisit has to be considered and to what extent and how railroads will generate value in decline vs. growth.

As I see it, at this moment in time the history of railroad regulation and Staggers deregulation tells the story of why regulators must be careful and regulation carefully applied when it comes to a revisit. That history also speaks to regulation in light of larger government transportation policy across all modes and including promotion as well, in how railroads could instead look to act responsively more as transportation companies not just tied to one technology, as was once denied and on the road leading to Staggers.

Conrail and Amtrak are run like private companies with government backing. This isn't like Europe where the railroads essentially have a blank check from the state to do whatever cool high-speed projects they want to do - they are expected to try and cut costs and make money as much as they are expected to get government financial backing, perhaps even more.

If Conrail was run like a state ran "socialist/communist" entity, they wouldn't have abandoned miles upon miles upon miles of trackage to cut costs. A lot of those lines they abandoned honestly would have been pretty useful as commuter routes or even as freight routes, had Conrail not abandoned them - I can think of a few in my local area in NJ.

A true "socialist/communist" state-owned agency would prioritize service to the public over bookkeeping. All the so-called government-owned agencies, like Amtrak, are not ran like that.

Also, in many countries where the railroads are nationalized and are 0% privatized, they do not move a fraction of the freight that the United States moves by rail. The only countries that come close are China and Russia.

JohnFromJersey wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 1:10 am Conrail and Amtrak are run like private companies with government backing. This isn't like Europe where the railroads essentially have a blank check from the state to do whatever cool high-speed projects they want to do - they are expected to try and cut costs and make money as much as they are expected to get government financial backing, perhaps even more.

I think you misunderstand the dynamics in Europe. The cool new high-speed lines are not driven by the railroad companies, but rather by the politicians. For example the regional government in Brittany (France) wants a line of high-speed railway built into their region, but SNCF studies show that the line would have a negative rate of return on the investment. The National government needing votes from the region to stay in power have directed SNCF to compromise and to force this the head of SNCF, who is a political appointee, was replaced. Italy is in much the same situation.

The situation in Germany and Switzerland is different. In Germany the only new line built in the last two decades
is the line from München (Munich) to Berlin. The purpose of this line is to tie the former East Germany more firmly to the Western portion, and increase opportunity and reduce the economic disparity between the East and West. They see that every new line they have looked at would be throwing money away. Similarly Switzerland built exactly one semi-high speed line to enable their Clock-face timetable (Taktfahrplan), and quit. The two Swiss Alps Base Tunnels
were built to reduce pollution from trucks in the Alpine valleys following the failure of Austria getting the right from the EU to set limits on the number of trucks crossing the Alps each day. In the Swiss case they simply decided to tax the trucks to pay for the tunnels and provide lower cost trains to haul the trucks through Switzerland. Surprisingly to me trucks are banned from Swiss roads on Sunday.

There’s a fact missing here.

Industry groups have lobbying firms in DC.

Lobbying firms provide $$$$$$ into Congressional coffers.

Lobbying firms can discuss with Congresscritters a need to reregulate certain segments of an industry.

Congress can enact legislation telling STB how to suck its eggs.

I believe a change to PSR will come from Congress within the next ten years.

I'm curious as to where you think Congress would have the right to dictate anything to undercut or redefine PSR. They might be able to mandate maximum train length, but they can't mandate service patterns.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk