I never thought I would find myself in the position of defending the Federal Railroad Administration, at least from anyone other than the Ayn Rand-Alan Greenspan-Phil Gramm-Rush Limbaugh types out there, but life is a funny thing.
After a train crash of criticism by Canada’s Transportation Safety Board and the country’s auditor-general, Transport Canada is softly moderating its three-wise-monkeys approach to railway regulation.
Unraveling the knot restricting rail network fluidity cannot be achieved through Surface Transportation Board (STB) intimidation of rail CEOs, or by the agency’s issuance of an emergency service order instructing one railroad to operate over the tracks of another, or by merging the nation’s seven major rail systems into a North American duopoly.
Back about 30 months ago I explained why I, and a number of other rail transit supporters, were critical of a plan for “urban rail” then taking shape from the official planning process here in Austin, Texas. (See Austin LRT plan criticized … by rail advocates.)
“Tawdry,” is how one Washington transportation attorney describes the self-interest assaults by powerful congressional lawmakers on federal regulatory agency officials.