Some lazy thinking writing on that "Council on Foreign Relations" webpage.
"Today, privately owned freight rail remains competitive with other modes of transportation, carrying energy supplies and crucial industrial materials."
It's bizarre to characterize freight carriers as hauling "energy supplies" and "crucial industrial materials." What about corn, grain, imported goods, fossil fuels, etc?
"Spurred by decades of consolidation, a handful of freight companies have become increasingly efficient and profitable, but critics say these gains have come at the cost of poor labor conditions and weakened safety controls."
Do we know for a fact that mega-mergers created "efficient" rail networks? The older carriers had to operate very efficiently to stay solvent.
"Meanwhile, passenger rail has struggled. Systems in Asia and Europe outpace those in the United States by a wide margin,"
How do systems in other countries "outpace" systems in the US? The US is operating the same technology.
"After decades of disinterest from Washington, the Joe Biden administration is prioritizing infrastructure spending, with over $100 billion earmarked for investment in rail."
Oops, misuse of the word disinterest. I have noticed bad writing in legal documents lately too. Interesting how we don't value a good education like we used to.
They give us lbs/ton-mile, but don't they multiply that by ton-miles for each mode so we can see the totals. Come on.