Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

A BILL TO AMEND THE SHERMAN ACT TO PROHIBIT A RAIL CARRIER
FROM DENYING TO SHIPPERS OF CERTAIN COMMODITIES, WITH
INTENT TO MONOPOLIZE, USE OF ITS TRACK WHICH AFFORDS THE
SOLE ACCESSS BY RAIL TO SUCH SHIPPERS TO REACH THE TRACK
OF A COMPETING RAILROAD OR THE DESTINATION OF SHIPMENT
AND TO APPLY CLAYTON ACT PENALTIES TO MONOPOLIZING BY
RAIL CARRIERS

[blocks in formation]

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

64-581 O

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1986

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, Chairman

JAMES H. SCHEUER, New York
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
TIMOTHY E. WIRTH, Colorado
PHILIP R. SHARP, Indiana
JAMES J. FLORIO, New Jersey
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
THOMAS A. LUKEN, Ohio

DOUG WALGREN, Pennsylvania
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
AL SWIFT, Washington
MICKEY LELAND, Texas
RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
CARDISS COLLINS, Illinois
MIKE SYNAR, Oklahoma

W.J. "BILLY" TAUZIN, Louisiana

RON WYDEN, Oregon
RALPH M. HALL, Texas
DENNIS E. ECKART, Ohio
WAYNE DOWDY, Mississippi

BILL RICHARDSON, New Mexico
JIM SLATTERY, Kansas

GERRY SIKORSKI, Minnesota
JOHN BRYANT, Texas

JIM BATES, California

JAMES T. BROYHILL, North Carolina
NORMAN F. LENT, New York
EDWARD R. MADIGAN, Illinois
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, California
MATTHEW J. RINALDO, New Jersey
WILLIAM E. DANNEMEYER, California
BOB WHITTAKER, Kansas
THOMAS J. TAUKE, Iowa

DON RITTER, Pennsylvania
DAN COATS, Indiana

THOMAS J. BLILEY, JR., Virginia
JACK FIELDS, Texas

MICHAEL G. OXLEY, Ohio
HOWARD C. NIELSON, Utah
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida
DAN SCHAEFER, Colorado
FRED J. ECKERT, New York

[blocks in formation]

CONTENTS

Page

[blocks in formation]

Rahall, Hon. Nick J., III, letter, dated June 2, 1986, to Chairman Florio
re concerns on H.R. 1140 as currently drafted

Committee Against Revising Staggers, statement of William D. Shaw on
behalf of this group in answer to letter of May 22, 1986, to Jan Vlcek.....
Consumer Federation of America, responses to questions from Hon.
Norman Lent in letter, dated June 6, 1986.

29

25

303

Coordinating Committee for Rail Competition, responses to questions
from Hon. Norman Lent in letter dated June 6, 1986.

286

Federal Trade Commission, letter, dated June 9, 1986, from Daniel Oliver
to Chairman Florio and Hon. Norman Lent re FTC views on H.R. 1140..

Interstate Commerce Commission:

41

[blocks in formation]

RAILROAD ANTIMONOPOLY ACT OF 1986

THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1986

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, TRANSPORTATION, AND TOURISM,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:35 a.m., in room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. James J. Florio (chairman) presiding.

Mr. FLORIO. The subcommittee will kindly come to order.

I would like to welcome all in attendance at our hearing today on H.R. 1140, the Railroad Antimonopoly Act of 1986.

This legislation was approved by the Judiciary Committee in March. Because this legislation is aimed solely at the railroad industry, which is under the jurisdiction of this committee, the bill was referred to this committee.

I am particularly concerned about this legislation resulting in two duplicative, potentially inconsistent regulatory systems for railroads-one based on the Interstate Commerce Act before the Interstate Commerce Commission and one based on the Clayton Act before a multitude of Federal courts.

In my view, the issue today is not so much whether legislative action is needed to protect captive shippers-that is an issue the subcommittee is considering and on which we have had extensive hearings. Rather, the issue is, if legislative action is necessary, what should it be?

I am hopeful the witnesses will address themselves to the appropriateness of a dual regulatory system, along with the appropriateness and merits of the remedy provided by this legislation as compared with alternative remedies. These alternatives may include improving the existing regulatory system or ensuring the treatment of railroads in a manner similar to other industries under the antitrust laws or perhaps even just legislative elimination of particular court doctrines that are currently inhibiting movement and access to the courts by shippers or individuals who feel that they have inadequate remedies under the existing regulatory system.

I am looking forward to the witnesses that we have today, a very impressive group of witnesses that we will be hearing from today. [The text of H.R. 1140 follows:]

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »