Capitol Hill spars over DM&E

Midwestern members reopen fault lines over $2.3B rail loan
By Elana Schor

The final skirmish is beginning this week in a long congressional battle that has exposed rifts over fiscal conservatism, geographical bias and ethics reform, as the government nears a decision on whether to approve a $2.3 billion loan to a South Dakota railroad company.

The $2.3 billion would help the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad, or DM&E, finance a proposed track expansion to transport coal and ethanol around the biofuel-booming Plains region. But DM&E’s request has pitted Dakotan lawmakers against Minnesota members lining up behind their state’s venerable medical facility, the Mayo Clinic, which sees a safety hazard in new trains speeding potentially toxic cargo through its backyard.

The Federal Railroad Administration ruled on environmental standards for the rail expansion late last week, starting a 90-day clock for ultimate approval or rejection of the DM&E bid by the Transportation Department and sparking fresh vows by Minnesota Sens. Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klobuchar (D) to block the loan at all costs.

“The burden is on us, as the department moves forward, to try to stop something,” Coleman told reporters on a Thursday conference call. Coleman added that he has reached out to Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, but suggested that the delegation has effective tools for obstruction of the loan if the railroad does not float a mitigation deal to allay Mayo’s concerns.

“Individual senators can make it very difficult on a department, very difficult,” said Coleman, who is gearing up for a tough reelection fight in 2008. “Nominations can be left unfille

Strange bedfellows abound, it would seem.

An interesting post, thanks!

Nor around one railroad, seems to be the missing piece of shieffer’s logic?

Didn’t DM&E actually refuse to discuss mitigation once they discovered Rochester was serious about expecting some?

The way it looks to me is that this schieffer character has “worked with” all the line side communities who were easily swayed into agreement with a promise of a pig in a poke (the project means thousands of jobs, etc. and the sort).

Then he encounters one community that was intent upon extracting some nuisance mitigation in exchange for their blessing, and all at once the relations become “hostile”…

Somewhere on this forum is a thread where shieffer is described as being unwilling to continue a dialog about mitigation , now he’s trying to blame the opposition for his own recalcitrance?

funny world.

Help find that for me, will you?

I don’t remember seeing it so I wouldn’t know where to begin to look.