[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 56 (Friday, March 30, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E704]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ACT OF 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. KAY GRANGER

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 29, 2007

       Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee 
     of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the 
     consideration of the bill (H.R. 1401) to improve the security 
     of railroads, public transportation, and over-the-road buses 
     in the United States, and for other purposes:

  Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my strong 
opposition to section three of amendment No. 18 offered to H.R. 1401, 
the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007, which would 
undermine a long standing principle of Federal uniformity in the area 
of railroad safety law. The railroads have long had Federal preemption 
from a variety of State-level laws because railroads, as a national 
system, could not function effectively under a patchwork of laws from 
50 different States.
  Regulation of rail safety must be uniform nationwide. The Federal 
Rail Safety Act was not intended to create minimum standards for rail 
safety; it was intended to create uniform standards governing railroad 
safety because Congress recognized that given the interstate and 
interdependent nature of the industry, uniformity was essential to 
effective safety regulation.
  It would be counterproductive for States and localities to impose 
widely disparate safety requirements that could hinder a railroad's 
ability to operate efficiently across State and local boundaries. In 
1970, Congress found that the railroad industry: ``. . . has a truly 
interstate character calling for a uniform body of regulation and 
enforcement. . . . The integral operating parts of these companies 
cross many State lines. In addition to the obvious areas of rolling 
stock and employees, such elements as operating rules, signal systems, 
power supply systems, and communication systems of a single company 
normally cross numerous State lines. To subject a carrier to 
enforcement before a number of different State administrative and 
judicial systems in several areas of operation could well result in an 
undue burden on interstate commerce.'' (H.R. Report No. 91-1194 (1970))
  Congress' reasoning was sound then, and that reasoning remains sound 
today,
  In conclusion, I am concerned by the fact that this sweeping 
provision was labeled ``technical'' in nature. In addition, there have 
been no hearings on this topic and no analysis of its effects on the 
railroad industry and interstate commerce. Federal preemption is vital 
to fluid daily operations of the railroads which we all rely on to move 
goods efficiently across the country. In fact, we should not forget 
that, this is precisely why the founding fathers included important 
interstate commerce protections in the Constitution.

                          ____________________