[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Page 20906]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                          RAIL SERVICE ISSUES

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I would like to discuss a subject of great 
importance to our nation and its economy, that is rail transportation.
  Earlier today, a few of my colleagues expressed views alleging a 
failure by this Congress for not passing legislation to regulatorily 
address rail service and shipper problems. As Chairman of the Senate 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I want to set the 
record straight concerning the work of the Committee to address service 
and shipper problems.
  Since becoming Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, the 
Committee has held no less than six hearings during which rail service 
and shipper issues were addressed. Three were field hearings, one each 
in Montana, North Dakota, and Kansas. Three hearings were conducted 
here in the Senate at which the topic of rail service dominated the 
testimony and members' questioning. I also have publicly stated a 
willingness for the Committee to hold even more hearings.
  Further, Senator Hutchison, the Chairman of the Surface 
Transportation Subcommittee, and I requested the Surface Transportation 
Board (STB) to conduct a comprehensive analysis of rail service and 
competitive issues. The STB is the federal agency which oversees rail 
service and other matters. The Board's findings are extremely important 
and they were widely discussed during our Committee hearings last year. 
In addition, earlier this year the Board announced it would conduct a 
proceeding to change its merger guidelines in recognition of the 
drastically changed rail industry dynamic that has transformed since 
the rail deregulation movement of the late 1970's and the 1980's. The 
Board announced its new guidelines proposal earlier this week and will 
be taking comments on the proposal through November 17.
  Three very diverse bills concerning the STB's authorities have been 
introduced in the Senate and another bill was submitted in the House. 
However, to date no consensus on a legislative approach has been 
achieved. I have had the privilege to serve in Congress nearly twenty 
years and during that time I have learned that significant legislation 
is always the product of careful analysis and bipartisan compromise. 
Pending rail legislation and the STB's future will be no exception.
  My colleagues from North Dakota and West Virginia referred to a 
letter with 277 signatures seeking rail regulatory changes. I am in 
receipt of that letter. But I am also in receipt of literally hundreds 
of letters--letters from Governors, rail shippers, and others--strongly 
opposing any rail reregulatory efforts.
  To allege the Senate Commerce Committee doesn't take the issue of 
rail service seriously is a gross misstatement. The fact is, and I will 
repeat it, there is no consensus. A bill supported by only five members 
is not a solution, but it does allow those sponsors to sound high and 
mighty about their good intentions.
  In order to pass a bill and send it to the President, we clearly have 
a long way to go. But I remain optimistic, and as a deregulator, stand 
ready to support any proposal that fairly and safely balances the needs 
of shippers and carriers.

                          ____________________