National Transport Policy Impacts Investment Alternatives

Rail and air transportation plays a central role in our nation’s economy. The government’s fiscal decisions, monetary policies, and administrative agency rulings influence the outcomes and the economics of transportation investment opportunities. The Surface Transportation Board’s unanimous ruling that the Canadian National hasn’t demonstrated its use of a voting trust would be consistent with the “public interest” follows the President’s recent Executive Order to “address overconcentration, monopolization, and unfair competition in the American economy.”  

Government action and the rules and regulations implemented by its many Administrative Agencies¹ have attempted to address both economic and social goals. Traditional ‘economic’ regulation focused on markets and economic variables and dates back to 1887 when Congress created the Interstate Commerce Commission to address the concerns of dissatisfied shippers. Railroads were then required by law to charge rates that were ‘reasonable and just,’ (the ICC was disbanded in 1995 and replaced with the Surface Transportation Board). In 1938 Congress created the Civil Aeronautics Board and directed the Board to place ‘public interest’ ahead of profits.

Regulatory reform (‘deregulation’) began in the 1980s, notably in the air and railroad industries.  

Rail was significantly deregulated with the 1980 Staggers Act. That Act reduced federal regulatory controls over the roads who then went on to abandon unproductive routes, reduce labor cost, and increase efficiency by offering freight discounts to ‘bulk’ unit trains (e.g., grain and coal). By 1988 the competition released by deregulation had produced lower prices in most commodity classifications (while not increasing prices in others). The D.C. Circuit has recognized that the statutory language of 49 U.S.C. Section 10101 ² mandates deregulation of the entire railroad industry to the maximum extent possible in conformity with national rail transportation policy.³  Similarly, the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (supported by both Democrats and Republicans during the Carter Administration) specified the Civil Aeronautics Board (“CAB”) would be dismantled (eventually completed in January 1985).  

After the CAB no longer had the power to price and set routes, competition forced air travel prices to fall, and U.S. airline passenger volumes increased dramatically. Deregulation gave railroads the freedom to negotiate contract rates and make operational improvements. The roads improved the efficiency of their networks, tailored rates to shippers’ traffic, abandoned low-density lines, and (as a result of merger activity) eliminated the duplicate track. Precision Scheduled Railroading is an example of operational freedom that the Roads are implementing today in an attempt to provide faster, more reliable service.   

Tension exists between the business of pursuing ‘economic’ goals and the politics of pursuing ‘social’ goals. Governments may set ‘policy’, but business investment is driven by economics.  Politicians do not face the same ‘market’ discipline. Other than elections, accountability mechanisms for political decisions are not in place. Markets may not always function perfectly, but unintended consequences often follow government attempts to produce desired ‘social’ results.  

Identifying effective investment strategies in this environment requires an ability to integrate today’s politics into your investment thinking. Call RESIDCO.

1  In a 2015 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) noted: “The Federal Register indicates there are over 430 departments, agencies, and sub-agencies in the federal government.” 

2  Title 49 – Transportation – Interstate Commerce – “National Transportation Policy.”

3  Brae Corp. v. United States, 740 F.2d 1023, at 1043 (D.C. Cir. 1984); also Ass’n of Am. R.Rs. v. Surface Transp. Bd., 237 F.3d 676, (D.C. Cir. 2001).