[url]http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-justices-amtrak-role-setting-203231395.html[/url]
Transcript
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/13-1080_4f15.pdf
Amtrak’s lawyer http://www.oyez.org/advocates/g/c/curtis_e_gannon
AAR’s lawyer http://www.oyez.org/advocates/d/t/thomas_h_dupree_jr
Listen up, the hearing can be heard here:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/audio/2014/13-1080
Three of the current Justices, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, were on the Court in 1992 in the case about the B&M tracks on the route of the Montrealer. Scalia and Kennedy took Amtrak’s side, Thomas did not. The future Chief Justice John G. Roberts was then Principal Deputy Solicitor General, and Amtrak’s winning lawyer in the case:
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, et al., Petitioners,
v. BOSTON AND MAINE CORPORATION, et al.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION and United States, Petitioners v. BOSTON AND MAINE CORPORATION, et al.
Nos. 90-1419, 90-1769.
Argued Jan. 13, 1992.
Decided March 25, 1992.
Syllabus
The Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970 (RPSA) created petitioner
NY Times: Supreme Court Sides With Amtrak, With Some Distaste
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/business/supreme-court-sides-with-amtrak-with-some-distaste.html?_r=0
Excerpt from Associated Press, Apr. 29
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/appeals-court-amtrak-regulatory-role-38762666
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said Friday it is unconstitutional to give a “self-interested” company regulatory power over competitors — even if Amtrak is a public-private hybrid.
A 2008 law directed the passenger rail company to work with federal regulators to create standards that help keep trains running on time. Those standards give Amtrak priority over freight trains along common tracks. The freight railroad industry objected and filed a lawsuit challenging Amtrak’s authority.
The Supreme Court sent the case back, telling the lower court to consider that Amtrak was created by Congress with heavy government oversight and public subsidies.
After hearing the case again, the appeals court said that even if Amtrak is public, it’s still trying to maximize profits and can’t be given regulatory authority.
Reverse, remand, rinse, repeat … and now, perhaps with only eight justices to decide on the inevitable Round 2…
Page 34 of appeals court’s opinion
Train schedules are a matter of pride and of apprehension to nearly everyone. When, far up the track, the block signal snapped from red to green and the long, stabbing probe of the headlight sheered the bend and blared on the station, men looked at their watches and said, ‘On time.’ There was pride in it, and relief too. The split second has been growing more and more important to us. And as human activities become more and more intermeshed and integrated, the split tenth of a second will emerge, and then a new name must be made for the split hundredth, until one day, although I don’t believe it, we’ll say, ‘Oh, the hell with it. What’s wrong with an hour?’ . . . One thing late or early can disrupt everything around it, and the disturbance runs outward in bands like the waves from a dropped stone in a quiet pool.
JOHN STEINBECK, EAST OF EDEN 533 (Penguin Books 2002).
It may be said that PRIIA’s architects shared Steinbeck’s pride in the punctuality of train schedules. But as we’ve shown, there are limits to how far Congress may go to ensure Amtrak’s on-time performance. The Constitution’s drafters may not have foreseen the formidable prerogatives of the administrative state, but the Due Process Clause effectively guarantees the regulatory power of the federal government will be wielded by “
The appelate court keeps defining Amtrak and the Railoads as competitors. What are they competing for, track time? Was not that the price for the goverment relieving them of the obligation to operate the passenger trains in the first place? Seems like that point was not raised.
The point that railroads joined (paid in cash or equipment) Amtrak to get out of their passenger obligation is really long out of date. Remember, every railroad that didn’t join Amtrak was relieved of the obligation by the early 1980s - no more passenger trains run by Southern, DRG&W, or Rock Island. Therefore, that is the era that anyone that didn’t pay Amtrak initially would probably have been done anyway.
The issue that many people are looking at is the ability of one side of the contract having authority to set standards after the contract is written. A major concern by a number in the industry is that it would prevent any future expansion of passenger service as no railroad would ever allow that possible situation. Freight shippers in particular are worried that Amtrak would be able to order changes that would hurt the freight movements.
The other issue is having one party of a contract having the power to randomly change the contract based upon their wishes. For example, what would happen if the same process was used in a rental apartment agreement? After the apartment is rented, the renter (Amtrak) would be able to come back and demand a larger living room, reduced noise from the neighbor, a better pool, faster wireless, etc. Since they were also the cops, they could force it on the apartment owner even if the contract didn’t include these items.
Several of the court rulings have looked at this issue. They have also stated that if the railroads aren’t complying the contract with Amtrak, then there is the normal ability for Amtrak to go to the STB or any court to have the contract enforced.
Problem is that no one other then Amtrak can get a operating agreement to start a private or new commuter railroad on so called private railroads tracks without being charged a confiscatory rate. This is in spite of railroad corperations having goverment powers that no other “private” corperations have like police powers and right of emenate domain and having benifited from land grants.
Bartman-tn:
You are correct!
Come hell or highwater the investor owned railroads were going to get out of the passenger business, for the most part, one way or the other.
Had Amtrak not come along the investor owned railroads would have been successful in discontinuing their money losing passenger trains through train-off petitions.
Amtrak was a political response to America’s declining use of passenger trains. It was designed to win political points with the public, even though most Americans had deserted the passenger train in favor of cars and airplanes.
In retrospect Amtrak was a mistake. If intercity passenger trains were deemed vital to America, a better outcome would have been for the federal government to subsidize those passenger trains deemed too important to discontinue and operated by the investor owned railroads that were
Instead the politicians created another federal bureacracy that has sucked more than $40 billion, when adjusted for inflation, out of the U.S. tax payers.
$40B in 45 years is cheap in the way US government works.
How the U.S. government works, i.e deficits and debt, has nothing to do with the efficacy of Amtrak.
The focus should be on Amtrak’s performance, including its financial performance. As a commercial business it has failed to meet its financial objectives.
Whether Amtrak is the best outcome for running passenger trains deemed to be vital to America’s commercial passenger transport system is a legitimate debate.
As a essential goverment service it is quite sucessful with 31 million passengers a year who spend billions of dollers a year in buisness and tourist dollers in the small towns and big citys that they travel to.
Only our govt. would continue an entity that loses roughly $2.7m-plus, A DAY, for some 46 years.
No truly private corporation would have lasted a tenth that long at that rate. Makes no difference who is in the WH. Congress continues to fiddle while the country falls apart. So easy to fix, too.
Amtrak stopped running to so many major cities across the country it isn’t funny. Phx AZ exploded in population in the late 90s, which is when your govt decided that would be an excellent time to pull out. Train now runs through Marana, 40 minutes out of the city, and Tucson, incredibly smaller. There isn’t a single brain in the entire Amtrak administration. Not one.
-
We need a national passenger rail service, at least where it can be competitive.
-
Given Amtrak’s mediocre record (no service to Phoenix? never to Columbus, OH?) of service and equipment orders (new baggage cars?), perhaps Amtrak is not the agency for the job.
I believe Union Pacific or whoever was the host railroad at the time either downgraded the line or forced Amtrak to reroute the train away from Phoenix. I can’t believe Amtrak would be that stupid.
I also remember a case when Congress interfered with Amtrak. The Cardinal was one of Amtrak’s worst performing lines and Amtrak canceled it. But Sen. Byrd, who was Senate majority leader at the time, demanded it be restarted and later on the Broadway Limited/Three Rivers was canceled because Byrd wouldn’t allow Amtrak to cancel the Cardinal. So in this case, I don’t think it was Amtrak being idiots but Congress.
I’m not saying the Amtrak administration aren’t stupid but they are handicapped by Congress and the host railroads.
Back when the National Limited was running, it was scheduled to go through the capital city of Ohio. The one time I rode it across Ohio, I woke up west of Columbus, so I cannot be absolutely certain that it did stop in Columbus. Incidentally, the trip up along the Susquehanna the day before provided some excellent scenery.