SENATE BILL: Fulfilling Railway Promises Act (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senate Bill

To allow for the creation of a new passenger line between Whitefish, Montana and Thunder Bay, Ontario

Be it enacted by both houses of Congress Assembled,

Section I: Title
1: This bill shall be named the Fulfilling Railway Promises Act

Section II: Definitions
1: A train operator, or operator for short, shall be defined as a business that operates and controls the useage and exploits a passenger railway line.

Section III: Operation and ticketing
1: A new joint business between the Atlasian and Canadian governments shall be formed, with the intention of operating the rail line defined by this act.
2: This train operator shall be jointly owned by the Canadian government and the government of the region of Fremont.
3: There shall be at least one train a week operated in the entirety of the line.

Section IV: Route
1: This joint business shall operate a passenger line between the towns of Whitefish, Montana and Thunder Bay, Ontario; with passenger stops in both towns
2: On the Atlasian side of the line, the operated train shall follow this route:
a) East from Whitefish to right before Shelby, Montana on currently existing lines
b) North from Shelby to the Canadian border, also on currently existing lines
3: On the Atlasian side of the line, the operated train shall follow any route the Canadian government shall decide, as long as there is continuous operation until the mandated stop at Thunder Bay, Ontario
4: The Atlasian Congress formally recommends that on the Canadian side of the border, the operated train follows the following route:
a) From the Atlasian border to shortly past Cranbrook, Alberta; on currently existing lines
b) From Cranbrook to Calgary, Alberta; on currently existing lines
c) From Calgary to Winnipeg, Manitoba; on currently existing lines
d) From Winnipeg to Thunder Bay, Ontario; on currently existing lines
5: The train operator may operate the line past Whitefish or Thunder Bay if it deems it adequate. The Atlasian Congress formally recommends that on the Atlasian side of the border, the line is extended to Seattle; on currently existing lines.

Section V: Funding
1: Funding for the train operator shall primarily come from the sale of railway tickets. No extra funding shall be given by the government of Atlasia unless all ticketing revenue has been exhausted first.
2: If extra funding is needed, it shall be divided depending on the section of the line that needs the extra funding:
a) In the section of the line corresponding to Atlasia, funding shall be given by the government of Fremont, in such a way as it sees fit and by the federal Department of Internal Affairs.
b) In the section of the line corresponding to Canada, funding shall be given by the government of Canada in any way it deems adequate
3: 700 000$ shall be allocated from the budget of the Department of Internal Affairs for the renovation of the railway switch near Shelby, Montana.

Section VI: Negotiations
1: The Secretary of State shall be empowered to conduct any negotiations necessary for agreeing to this operation with the Canadian government

Section VII: Passage
1: This bill shall be enacted when passed by the Atlasian Congress
2: No provisions of this act shall become effective unless the Canadian government has agreed to this operation.
3: This bill shall become effective 3 weeks after the operation is authorized by the Canadian government.

People's Regional Senate
Pending
[/quote]

Sponsor: Tack50
Senate Designation: SB 9010 I think.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Senator Tack50 has 24 hours to begin advocating for this bill. Senators shall have 72 hours generally to respond to this bill and make comments, ask questions etc. Failure to do so in that 72 hours.....you'll see what happens!

YOU'll SEE WHAT HAPPENS!!!!


YOU'll SEE WHAT HAPPENS!!!!

[Former President tack50]

Thank you!

This bill was introduced in response to a promise I made to a citizen during the campaign trail, authorising a new line between Whitefish, Montana and Thunder Bay, Ontario. While I personally did not think the line as proposed by the citizen would be viable, with some modifications, it would.

The modifications include:

-Using already existing lines in the entirety of the track to minimize cost.
-Extending the line all the way to Seattle on the Atlasian side of the line
-Going through most major Canadian cities without passenger rail service

The exact routing beyond the Whitefish-Canadian border bit would be decided by either the train operator or the Canadian government. We must remember that Canada is a sovereign country and ths has the right to modify this on their side of the border. The fact that this is mostly though Canada also reduces costs for the Atlasian government.

I couldn't come up with any concrete extensions on the Canadian side of the border, but 2 ideas could be extending the line back across the border to Minneapolis (would require 300km of new lines though) or to Toronto (over existing lines)

Regarding the bill, Sections I and II do procedural stuff. Section III creates the company (to be owned by the Canadian government and the government of Fremont) and mandates at least 1 train a week. Section IV defines the route, mandating stops in both towns and the route to the Canadian border (which is also the shortest). The rest of the line is left to the Canadian government or the rail operator, but with formal recommendations.

Section V mandates that funding shall come primarily from tickets and that extra funding shall come from the government of Fremont or the federal government for the Atlasian side of the line; and from the Canadian government on the Canadian side of the line. Section VI empowers the Secretary of State to do negotiations on the issue. Section VII ensures that the bill doesn't go into effect until it's also authorized by the Canadian government.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Has the Fremont Regional Gov't been consulted with or is on board with this plan?

[Former President tack50]

Has the Fremont Regional Gov't been consulted with or is on board with this plan?

Unfortunately, I have to say I have not yet consulted the Fremont Regional Government on this plan. I will contact FM Ascott asking him for feedback on this bill.

[Devout Centrist]

I would appreciate more consultation with the regional government of Fremont, but I think that a consortium between the government of Fremont and Canada is the right approach.

How will future expansion of these rail lines be planned and approved?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I will be consulting with advisors and members of the Fremont government about this plan.

How much money will be required from the Fremont government?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also why is this railroad "promised"? Who promised it and when?

[Former President tack50]

Also why is this railroad "promised"? Who promised it and when?

I did, during the campaign (to be precise, during the week between the original election and the runoff). A citizen asked me to back this project and I promised it to him.

I decided to introduce this legislation to keep my promise with this citizen.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also why is this railroad "promised"? Who promised it and when?

I did, during the campaign (to be precise, during the week between the original election and the runoff). A citizen asked me to back this project and I promised it to him.

I decided to introduce this legislation to keep my promise with this citizen.

My first impression when I saw this was that it might be something that was promised as part of an agreement between either us and Canada or the US and Canada.

[Sirius_]

Just to let you know, although this bill does appear to be very well written the route is not really something serious. The Whitefish to Thunder Bay rail line originated as a joke within Atlas's train geek community. It wouldn't be very beneficial to Canadians and wouldn't be beneficial at all to Atlasians. For reference, this is the route:

(Also with noting is that Cranbrook, Alberta does not exist)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Atlas has a train geek community?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In the late 2000s, the South used to appropriate impossible sums of money towards building an impossibly tall statue of John Dibble. This reminds me of that.

[Sirius_]

Atlas has a train geek community?

Yeah, you ever seen anyone on Lokcord with "train chat member" as a role? Have you ever seen the train chat channel?

[Former President tack50]

I will be consulting with advisors and members of the Fremont government about this plan.

How much money will be required from the Fremont government?

Assuming the joint rail company is profitable, 0$ as it would be self-funded.

That's a very big assumption though. If it's unprofitable, the losses would have to be paid for by the Fremont and federal governments in a way they both see fit.

An estimate could be received by looking at an RL line. Amtrak's Empire Builder, on a very similar route (in fact, the exact same route up until Shelby, Montana) has a revenue of 22.9 million $ and an expense of 56 million $ a year; for a net loss of -33.1 million $ on the entire route.

https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/corporate/monthlyperformancereports/2018/Amtrak-Monthly-Performance-Report-March-2018.pdf

Assuming the proposed extension to Seattle is used, if you assume the federal government won't be paying anything and split the costs based on length (more generous to Atlasia/Fremont), the Fremont government would cover 29% of the losses, or 9.6 million $ a year (assuming no changes). If you assume a 50-50 split (more generous to Canada), that would be 16.6 million $ a year.

As it currently stands the very few construction costs would be paid by the federal government and involve very minor mainteinance. I don't know the state of the track between the Shelby, Montana and Alberta; but the rest of the line should be on acceptable tracks (cargo trains use them)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Atlas has a train geek community?

Yeah, you ever seen anyone on Lokcord with "train chat member" as a role? Have you ever seen the train chat channel?

What is this? what even is this?

[Former President tack50]

Just to let you know, although this bill does appear to be very well written the route is not really something serious. The Whitefish to Thunder Bay rail line originated as a joke within Atlas's train geek community. It wouldn't be very beneficial to Canadians and wouldn't be beneficial at all to Atlasians. For reference, this is the route:

(Also with noting is that Cranbrook, Alberta does not exist)

I'd argue the Canadian part of the line (from Calgary to Winnipeg at least) would be somewhat useful to Canadians, as there doesn't seem to be any rail service there (there is service on a more northern Edmonton-Saskatoon-Winnipeg line though).

At that point, just turn south and extend the line east of Winnipeg and you have a new rail line, Atlas' dream line made true.

Of course, if only the Canadian part of the line makes sense then this should be dropped.

(While the proposals were never serious, I did think with a bit of change they could be a real line).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You would have to connect to Seattle or Vancouver to achieve that probably. 

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Just to let you know, although this bill does appear to be very well written the route is not really something serious. The Whitefish to Thunder Bay rail line originated as a joke within Atlas's train geek community. It wouldn't be very beneficial to Canadians and wouldn't be beneficial at all to Atlasians. For reference, this is the route:

(Also with noting is that Cranbrook, Alberta does not exist)

I'd argue the Canadian part of the line (from Calgary to Winnipeg at least) would be somewhat useful to Canadians, as there doesn't seem to be any rail service there (there is service on a more northern Edmonton-Saskatoon-Winnipeg line though).

At that point, just turn south and extend the line east of Winnipeg and you have a new rail line, Atlas' dream line made true.

Of course, if only the Canadian part of the line makes sense then this should be dropped.

(While the proposals were never serious, I did think with a bit of change they could be a real line).

I'll just point out that both bruhg's original line, and your ideas for a reworked line already exist.


(BNSF northern transcon runs through Whitefish, then they have multiple branches connecting to both Canadian National and Canadian Pacific, both of whom have railway lines to Thunder Bay.)

[Former President tack50]

Just to let you know, although this bill does appear to be very well written the route is not really something serious. The Whitefish to Thunder Bay rail line originated as a joke within Atlas's train geek community. It wouldn't be very beneficial to Canadians and wouldn't be beneficial at all to Atlasians. For reference, this is the route:

(Also with noting is that Cranbrook, Alberta does not exist)

I'd argue the Canadian part of the line (from Calgary to Winnipeg at least) would be somewhat useful to Canadians, as there doesn't seem to be any rail service there (there is service on a more northern Edmonton-Saskatoon-Winnipeg line though).

At that point, just turn south and extend the line east of Winnipeg and you have a new rail line, Atlas' dream line made true.

Of course, if only the Canadian part of the line makes sense then this should be dropped.

(While the proposals were never serious, I did think with a bit of change they could be a real line).

I'll just point out that both bruhg's original line, and your ideas for a reworked line already exist.


(BNSF northern transcon runs through Whitefish, then they have multiple branches connecting to both Canadian National and Canadian Pacific, both of whom have railway lines to Thunder Bay.)

Thing is, those are cargo lines for the most part. Both Canada and the US have a much smaller passenger service

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yes but those are freight lines primarily.


Whitefish is in one of the base scenarios for the 2001 game Train Simulator by Microsoft, if memory serves me.

I have this game installed to this day, but it has not worked since 2010 due to file corruption I think.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

So why are we building a brand new railway when there's a railway that already exists that you can use.
Also, why are you taking a train chat meme seriously. Come on, this is stupid.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Freight rail is rather misunderstood.


Especially when it comes to debates about nationalizing railways. Passenger service in the US isn't profitable , but freight rail is very much so post-deregulation.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, why are you taking a train chat meme seriously. Come on, this is stupid.

Are you kidding, this is the closest thing to how real bills should be debated that I have seen in a long time in this place. If anything I plan to use this as a textbook example to prove that serious debate in chambers is possible in the modern era.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Freight rail is rather misunderstood.


Especially when it comes to debates about nationalizing railways. Passenger service in the US isn't profitable , but freight rail is very much so post-deregulation.

Obviously. And that's my point. Why are we trying to spend millions of dollars on running a useless passenger train between two tiny random cities all because bruhg created a stupid meme?

Also, why are you taking a train chat meme seriously. Come on, this is stupid.

Are you kidding, this is the closest thing to how real bills should be debated that I have seen in a long time in this place. If anything I plan to use this as a textbook example to prove that serious debate in chambers is possible in the modern era.

Once again, why are we trying to spend millions of dollars on running a useless passenger train between two tiny random cities all because bruhg created a stupid meme?