logo
Passenger rail bill derails on Senate floor

Passenger rail bill derails on Senate floor

Yahoo16-04-2025

A Union Pacific train transports coal. (Photo by Spenser Heaps/Utah News Dispatch)
The Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority will likely not see state funding from this session.
House Bill 848, which would have taken $2 million from the railroad car tax and directed it to the authority, failed 23-27 on second reading in the Senate. The tax brings in about $4 million annually and the money currently goes into the general fund.
'We are not deterred easily,' Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority chairman Dave Strohmaier said Wednesday after the floor vote. 'In spite of what may seem a setback, we're full steam ahead.'
The bill was carried by Rep. Denise Baum, D-Billings, who pushed for months to get movement on legislation. It found broad support from legislators in the House, as well as both the Senate and House transportation committees.
However, during its Senate transportation hearing, lobbyists representing large industry interests testified against the bill. Most of their issues were based around the railroad tax being used to fund the agency.
'I don't think any of the opponents would probably be here today if it weren't for the funding mechanism in this bill,' BNSF lobbyist Matt Jones said on April 9.
He added that new passenger rail should not interfere with existing freight rail and, 'the freight industry and freight customers should not be expected to subsidize passenger service.'
Montana Petroleum Association lobbyist Sonny Capece said it would contribute to congestion on the railway. He added it wasn't a viable option.
'Let the private industry do it. If private industry can make this profitable, let them do it,' Capece said. 'There's plenty of private railroads nationwide that exist on a profit-making model. This one is not one of them.'
Dan Bucks, former Director of Revenue for Montana and a proponent of the bill, said the legislation wouldn't have increased the tax. In fact, he said, he was familiar with the tax through his former position running the revenue department.
'It's nearly impossible for the state to even contemplate increasing the rail car tax because of a federal law called the 4R Act that sets very tight standards for how the tax is levied,' Bucks said.
Funding the authority could be a boon for everyone, he added.
'We are not focused simply on passenger rail, but also on improving the freight system for its own sake, for agricultural ship rules, mineral shippers and anybody else shipping out of Montana or using the rails for freight,' Bucks said during a hearing on April 9. 'We're interested in improving the freight service and the passenger service together so that we reduce any delay.'
Two lines in Montana have already been picked as viable routes for increased passenger rail. Both proposed passenger rail routes going through Montana would be longer than 750 miles, meaning the federal government would be primarily responsible for running the route.
It would cost billions to get passenger rail routes fully operational, but proponents of the legislation said much of the money would come from the federal government. Congress, in fact, would likely have to approve any spending on passenger rail of that magnitude.
And even then, HB 848's funding would have gone to figuring out where the major hurdles for passenger rail would be. It would also help them match and leverage federal funding to move the project forward.
'You have to have a steady or stable funding source to be able to unlock that match,' Baum said.
On the floor, the bill saw trouble immediately as Senators received a letter on their desk signed by lobbyists from the Treasure State Resource Association, the Montana Wood Products Association, the Montana Coal Council, the Montana Grain Growers Association, the Montana Agricultural Business Association, the Montana Petroleum Association, the Montana Grain Elevator Association, the Montana Mining Association, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation and the Montana Chamber of Commerce.
'Although HB 848 redirects receipts from an existing rail tax, it creates an unacceptable precedent where freight rail customers are subsidizing passenger rail initiatives,' according to the letter, which was distributed by Sen. Shelley Vance, R-Belgrade. 'Whether intentional or not, it also creates a potential expectation that freight shippers will be expected to contribute additional revenue in the future.
'Passenger rail does not benefit freight rail customers. In fact, it has the potential to interfere with the existing service we rely on.'
On the floor, the legislation saw some support, while detractors, including Majority Leader Tom McGillvary, R-Billings, essentially said passenger rail expansion was a fever dream.
'This is the most absurd bill I have seen this session,' McGillvary said. 'If you vote yes on this bill you're living in a fantasy land.'
Following the failed vote, the bill was indefinitely postponed.
There was some frustration from rail supporters about how the discussion went.
'There was a lack of understanding about what we've accomplished in the last four years,' Strohmaier said.
HB848-Letter

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Fmr. Congressman who introduced Trump's 2017 TCJA talks tax bill
Fmr. Congressman who introduced Trump's 2017 TCJA talks tax bill

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Fmr. Congressman who introduced Trump's 2017 TCJA talks tax bill

The US Senate is weighing President Trump's budget bill. Former Congressman Kevin Brady, who introduced the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act during Trump's first term, joins Catalysts with Madison Mills to discuss the bill and its impact. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Catalysts here. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Troops deployed to LA will cost $134M, Pentagon official says
Troops deployed to LA will cost $134M, Pentagon official says

Politico

time32 minutes ago

  • Politico

Troops deployed to LA will cost $134M, Pentagon official says

President Donald Trump's decision to deploy troops to Los Angeles amid mass deportation protests will likely cost $134 million, the Pentagon's budget chief told lawmakers. Acting Pentagon comptroller Bryn MacDonnell, testifying at a House budget hearing on Tuesday alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, said the estimate covers costs such as travel, housing and food. Trump has ordered 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines to Los Angeles to assist law enforcement with the protests, although California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass have said they are not needed. Hegseth sparred with Democrats during the hearing in defense of the deployment, arguing Newsom and Bass, both Democrats, mishandled the situation.

Hawley bill would raise minimum wage to $15
Hawley bill would raise minimum wage to $15

The Hill

time32 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Hawley bill would raise minimum wage to $15

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) wants to double the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, with legislation filed Tuesday to increase the rate adopted nearly two decades ago. 'For decades, working Americans have seen their wages flatline,' Hawley said in a statement to The Hill. 'One major culprit of this is the failure of the federal minimum wage to keep up with the economic reality facing hard-working Americans every day.' The increase would take effect next year, when Hawley's home state hikes its rate to the same level. Most states, like Missouri, have set minimum hourly wage levels above the $7.25 federal rate, and nearly a dozen of them will have minimum rates at or above $15 an hour after increases take effect this year. Five states — Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee — have never set their own rates, and three — Georgia, Oklahoma and Wyoming — have state minimums below $7.25 per hour. Those eight states all default to the federal rate. The Hawley legislation, cosponsored by Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), also would set automatic increases to match inflation over time to prevent future standstills like the nation has faced since the last federal hike in 2009. Minimum wage hikes have historically faced pushback from some business advocacy groups. 'This proposal would more than double the minimum wage and slash over 800,000 jobs,' Rebekah Paxton, research director at the Employment Policies Institute, said in a statement on Hawley's latest push. 'An overwhelming majority of economists agree that drastic minimum wage hikes cut employment, limit opportunities for workers and shutter businesses.' 'Hawley's proposal would take similar failed policies like California's and export them nationwide,' she added. It's unclear whether the GOP-controlled Senate and House will take up the bipartisan legislation or what the timeline could look like as lawmakers try to hash out President Trump's priority legislation. The White House declined to comment on Hawley's proposed minimum wage increase. A spokesperson told The Hill in an email that they would not 'get ahead of the President on pending legislation.' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent rejected the idea of increasing the minimum wage earlier this year. But Trump acknowledged in a 'Meet the Press' interview a month before the start of his second presidency that the current minimum wage is 'very low' but said he didn't want to raise it to a level that would ultimately force businesses to shutter. 'There is a level at which you could do it, absolutely,' the then-president elect told host Kristen Welker. 'I would consider it.' Trump added that the debate is 'very complicated' because the cost of living varies among states. 'It would be nice to have just a minimum wage for the whole country, but it wouldn't work because you have places where it's very inexpensive to live,' he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store