Pete’s tweet did not read “we are exploring all possible ways in which executive authority could be used to tighten rail industry regulation”. It read “unfortunately I am constrained by law and can’t really do anything” about something which a department spokesperson later confirmed that it is actually within their capability to do.
And to boot Mayor Pete has zero qualifications or experience relevant to the work of the Department of Transportation. Which is one of the more important federal agencies. Being a McKinsey consultant, intelligence officer, and small town mayor seems wholly irrelevant to the agency’s work.
1 Like
Especially getting Pete in there
1 Like
Regulatory capture is a major problem in all sectors, especially when lots of money is involved.
Laws need to be passed that limit back and forth influence.
He’s worse than that. He’s an empty vessel that industry lobbies dream of encountering once every couple generations, because he just sponges up whatever bullshit they feed him, thinking it’s full of well-reasoned solutions.
I’ve repeatedly described how anti-labor and anti-safety Pete’s proposed trucking industry “solutions” are, and that they come straight from the trucking lobby’s list of “things we thought of 40 years ago but kept on the back burner and haven’t haven’t dared to dream of coming to pass until we realized we finally had such a total clown in the big seat” but it just gets memory holed every time
Right? The industry lobbies have such total capture that their puppets can tweet out “can’t legally do nothin, sowwy” and we get people on this website going “that’s just Civics 101, my god are people stupid to think this puppet isn’t doing what he can. You can’t have a discussion here because everyone is divorced from reality and lacking basic education” even though the tweet was a provable lie and there’s nothing legally stopping the puppet
Because board members and top level executives are motivated by short term numbers, not long term
“Look at the costs I saved this quarter”
When it comes to maintenance and safety, everyone is now tripping over a dollar to pick up a dime
1 Like
You know what would change executives’ focus in many industries? Criminally prosecuting some executives for stuff like this train derailment. I don’t even care if they win. Every corporate decision maker in the country would take notice and start spending money on safety.
It’ll never happen of course.
1 Like
This is also why in situations like this, executive agencies should do SOMETHING which pisses the industry off, even if it won’t actually fix the problem. It serves the same purpose as warning shots or military exercises near a border, it’s a demonstration that the use of hard power is on the table. This basically never happens in the US because nobody in government considers themselves to be in an adversarial relationship with large industrial corporations.
5 Likes
so happy to see everyone here uses completely unbiased sources
Here’s a good rundown of what has been done
1 Like
This is just people doing the bare minimums of their jobs, as far as I can tell.
I think our core disagreement here is that you’re correct that what I’m unimpressed about is the lack of political response. Like the fact that Pete hasn’t jumped up and been like “this is unacceptable, I am going to use the power of the executive branch to do something like this” and maybe, you know, signed something that expands what the definition of hazardous cargo is. But you seem to see it as like prudent statesmanship, you know, Waiting For All The Facts, whereas what I see is political cowardice, just waiting for figure out what the smallest possible thing you can do is and then doing that. This is just the latest “we can’t do X because of the Senate Parliamentarian”. Like this exhortation that the Democratic Party will deliver if you just give us MORE TIME! has a very poor track record in the last decade or two in my opinion.
Like I said above about warning shots, the government reaction to an incident like this should be hostile because you need to disincentivize corporations from stepping over the line. If you are the rail corporation looking at Buttigieg right now, wouldn’t you be really pleased at how he’s handled this so far?
7 Likes
Which is a cynical ploy, and it’s disheartening that the Hamilton crowd falls for it every single time
Plenty of people could tell you all the disgusting anti-safety facts before this particular train even derailed
It doesn’t matter if Pete is pushing the big lie or falling for it. He’s irredeemably awful
1 Like
I don’t disagree more needs to be done but I think you are underestimating the difficulty and complexity in establishing new regulations in a massive continental industry.
It’s not easy knowing what to change and especially that said change isn’t going to have some significant unforeseen effect.
That’s why most regulatory changes require comment periods and rounds of review.
1 Like
I think certain things like putting better brakes should be pretty straightforward. If it’s a choo-choo it needs the more modern brakes. Maybe some exceptions for low speed commuter rails but what else—freights and higher speed passenger trains must have the better brakes yesterday.
When the natural economic incentives don’t prioritize things like safety, then it’s the role of regulation to put up some guard rails.
Wouldn’t even have to be all freight trains. A train carrying grain or ore or cars or cattle can use the old brakes. Vinyl chloride, not so much.
This is bullshit:
But there’s not much muscle behind the Federal Railroad Administration and other regulatory agencies that report to Buttigieg. As of 2013, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office, the Federal Railroad Administration’s inspectors had “the ability to annually inspect less than 1 percent of the railroad activities covered in regulation. As a result, railroads have the primary responsibility for safety of the railroad system.”
The same is true about airline safety. The airlines have the primary responsibility for the safety of the airline industry, but the FAA assertively issues airworthiness directives and notices to airmen. Surely the FRA has similar authority.