There is a very compelling reason money should be withdrawn from this project. In that CORP has plainly demonstrated a penchant for taking state money that gives them benefit (as well as the community - supposedly), using the improved facility for a time, and then illegally abandoning it when it no longer suits their own purposes. Similar events have happened all over the country when public money has been paid out to improve private facilities; including the Coos Bay line itself. There is fair reason to believe that will happen again - here.

As to any perceived public improvement here, such as relieving the neighborhood of a nuisance, that will happen soon enough anyway when CORP abandons, as it surely will - sooner of later.

As to the argument that the Coos Bay line will never be profitable, so no public investment should be made - entirely misses the point of public investments. And if that argument had successfully stopped public investment in other rural transportation mediums and infrastructures, such as roads and highways, then there would be no roads in rural America, no rural economy, no rural electrification. and btw, no food to eat or houses to keep us warm in urban America either.

Most of the vast expanse of America would be inaccessible by modern means. None of these roads, rural electrification, rural phones, and such, could have ever made money. Indeed, not even urban neighborhood streets could pay for themselves either, nor could neighborhood utility distribution. Since the main stream that is profitable, depends upon the unprofitable areas to be useful, cross-subsidization becomes essential to a healthy economic system. So, to "Promote the general welfare", these public investments are made - not to make a profit.

Unfortunately, over-deregulation has allowed the once unified infrastructure of common carriage to be fractured. Where once, the railroads, being a common carrier utility, cross-subsidized within their own corporate structures. But now, the big railroads are allowed to cherry pick the profitable and leave the rest of the economy to the wolfs.

Where, we were once too extreme in regulating, we are now too extreme the other way, with deregulation. If that is how we want it - fine. But no unified American economy will ever survive if we do not then directly subsidize the small feeder branches with public funds. We could choose either method of cross-subsidization, corporate, or public. But one or the other must occur, or general prosperity is gone forever.

But surely, we expect the state to give out money only for the benefit of public purposes, as mentioned above. Those purposes are not served if the improvements are only used for an interim period and then abandoned. That is why I believe that the state should obtain an equity position in return for any public investment. Then, if our private partners want to abandon, they have to find a willing buyer for there own equity. Meanwhile, the state uses its equity position to immediately subsidize and designate another operator - protecting the public's investment - and thus keeping the free flow of wealth moving - and naturally equalizing.

OPB