Thanks Randy for helping set the record straight (once again) > The ICC's basic mandate included adherence to and enforcement of a > National >Transportation Policy, which could and did change with each > administration. And >the ICC was hampered by having jurisdiction only > over rail, barge and motor >carriage; air and steamship were two different > agencies. I might add that Congress set an overall policy on transportation a couple of times over the years -- the Transportation Act of 1920, 1940 and 1958. Each was quite different, but outlined a framework that the Presidential adminsitrations (and their respective Justice Departments) followed, more or less. And each imposed certain legal structures and responsibilities on the ICC as well. The Motor Carrier Act of 1935 -- passed at the behest of the railroads, called for motor carrier and rail rates to be more or less equalized -- thus allowing the truckers to compete on the basis of service, not rates. And mandated that the ICC regulate it all. Which they did. Certainly, the act was a case of "Be careful what you wish for" in the case of the railroads. But thankls to all who've posted (and re-re-posted the origin of Dereco to remind everyone that "it's all the ICCs fault" is, at best incomplete, but almost completely untrue. Cheers, Jim PS Sometimes I think people read "Atlas Shrugged" in their impressionable youth and mistook it for a history book <g>. The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List http://EL-List.railfan.net/ To Unsubscribe: http://Lists.Railfan.net/erielackunsub.html ------------------------------
This HTML page is © 2000-2009 Blue Moon Online System and The Railfan Network
This page and the data contained therein may not be reproduced
for any form of commercial use without the explicit permission
of J. Henry Priebe Jr. or his duly authorized agent.