 |
Re: You're missing the point
Author: Dr Zarkov
Date: 07-04-2013 - 09:20
>What a blithering clown you are. Go back and read the court's decision word for word, and you'll quickly see you have no idea what you're talking about.
Well, I've read the decision and then read the offending section 207, at least what I could find of it, and I can't figure out where the court gets the notion that Amtrak has any veto power over much of anything beyond not signing a metrics and standards contract with a host RR. This precisely the way any corporation exercises a veto: don't sign the contract.
The court's objection is this:
"Because Amtrak must 'be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation,' . . . [and] . . . 'Amtrak is encouraged to make agreements with the private sector and undertake initiatives that are consistent with good business judgment and designed to maximize its revenues and minimize Government subsidies.' . . . Yet § 207 directs Amtrak and its host carriers to incorporate the metrics and standards in their Operating Agreements. . . . So to summarize: Amtrak must negotiate contracts that will maximize its profits; those contracts generally must, by law, include certain terms; and Amtrak has the power to define those terms. . . . Nothing about the government's involvement in Amtrak's operations restrains the corporation from devising metrics and standards that inure to its own financial benefit rather than the common good."
Section 207 says that a whole group of organizations (FRA, STB, Amtrak, host RR, funding agencies, etc.) must work together to develop the metrics. It says nothing at all about what would happen if the group didn't reach an agreement or developed metrics Amtrak doesn't like.
Other than stripping Amtrak's right to refuse to sign an undesirable operating agreement, I for one don't find the regulatory connection the court does.
Well, I've read the decision and then read the offending section 207, at least what I could find of it, and I can't figure out where the court gets the notion that Amtrak has any veto power over much of anything beyond not signing a metrics and standards contract with a host RR. This precisely the way any corporation exercises a veto: don't sign the contract.
The court's objection is this:
"Because Amtrak must 'be operated and managed as a for-profit corporation,' . . . [and] . . . 'Amtrak is encouraged to make agreements with the private sector and undertake initiatives that are consistent with good business judgment and designed to maximize its revenues and minimize Government subsidies.' . . . Yet § 207 directs Amtrak and its host carriers to incorporate the metrics and standards in their Operating Agreements. . . . So to summarize: Amtrak must negotiate contracts that will maximize its profits; those contracts generally must, by law, include certain terms; and Amtrak has the power to define those terms. . . . Nothing about the government's involvement in Amtrak's operations restrains the corporation from devising metrics and standards that inure to its own financial benefit rather than the common good."
Section 207 says that a whole group of organizations (FRA, STB, Amtrak, host RR, funding agencies, etc.) must work together to develop the metrics. It says nothing at all about what would happen if the group didn't reach an agreement or developed metrics Amtrak doesn't like.
Other than stripping Amtrak's right to refuse to sign an undesirable operating agreement, I for one don't find the regulatory connection the court does.
