Obama Administration
endorses
|
White House 2 is a multi-partisan network of 10540 citizens imagining how the White House might work if it was run completely democratically by thousands of people over the internet. It's free and all U.S. citizens can join.
 We're setting priorities, collaborating on policy, and creating a massive database of 2867 talking points covering all sides of every important issue facing our country. Watch the video intro. Getting involved is easy and fun. Just join and start setting your priorities, like a todo list. The more people who endorse a priority, the higher it rises in the charts. The more people who join the network, the more clout we will have with the President and the media. |
The Federal Gov’t involvement in a National Rail system is necessary, just as it is in highway infrastructure. Long-haul transportation systems which cross jurisdictional boundaries will need material support to be effective and successful.
One might make the same argument for Interstate road systems then, no? Remember that passenger rail is only part of the entire rail picture. Freight makes up a vast majority todays rail use, and in order for the US to meet the inevitable pressures of greenhouse emission reductions, rail is the best long term option for long-haul freight. How this is funded, could, in fact., be tied to an overall emissions management strategy.
I do make the same argument for the interstate road system. The only thing close to authority over highways is the Congress’ power to establish post offices and post roads. I suppose any road could theoretically be used for purposes of delivering mail, but what a joke. In reality, States should be charged with keeping and establishing roads within their boundaries.
On the question of rail, passenger, freight, or otherwise, Congress, nor the President, nor the judiciary have any explicit authority to establish such a rail network. As such, and per the 10th amendment, this power would be reserved for the States or the people. The only possible way the Congress could have authority over rail would be if the President and the Senate ratified a treaty that required such action. Even then, I’m not exactly sure if Congress and the President have the authority to ratify treaties where they have no explicit authority to implement. It’s not clear to me that ratification of a treaty gives Congress the power to do what the treaty says. Even so, the US has not signed Kyoto or any such treaty to reduce emissions, so your point is not relevant in this case.