SENATE BILL: Fulfilling Railway Promises Act (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So why are we building a brand new railway when there's a railway that already exists that you can use.

Someone didn't read the text:

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

Sponsor: Tack50
Senate Designation: SB 9010 I think.
[/quote]

[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.

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?

Too illustrate that if we can do this can of interaction at this expedited pace of turnaround on meme bills, we can certainly do it on real ones.

[Former President tack50]

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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

[Sirius_]

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.

Off topic, but yes it was, I have that game as well lol. It was good fun back in the day, it's very easy to modify the game files and make absurd trains.

And about this, I do not believe that such a rail service ought to be created. However, much of the rest of this bill is pretty well written and could be reworked into something useful.

[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.)

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

I'm just going to point out that if you look at your map you'll notice both Thunder Bay and Whitefish already have passenger service. All you're doing is opening a useless link between the two lines crossing the border.

[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.

Off topic, but yes it was, I have that game as well lol. It was good fun back in the day, it's very easy to modify the game files and make absurd trains.

And about this, I do not believe that such a rail service ought to be created. However, much of the rest of this bill is pretty well written and could be reworked into something useful.

My brother is addicted to this game to this day.

[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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

[Former President tack50]

Actually, Thunder Bay technically doesn't have service (the line goes further north around Sioux Lookout)

Also, as a sidenote, I'm starting to think the Seattle extension should be a mandate instead of an option, the line doesn't really make much sense without it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

My train game of choice was Railroad Tycoon II Platinum, because I have a hard on for the Industrial Revolution.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Actually, Thunder Bay technically doesn't have service (the line goes further north around Sioux Lookout)

Also, as a sidenote, I'm starting to think the Seattle extension should be a mandate instead of an option, the line doesn't really make much sense without it.

Thunder Bay's passenger service has been on and off over the years. Indeed, VIA has recently been talking about bringing back the service.

Also, there is already Amtrak service between Whitefish and Seattle

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8slW3ny7mbY

[wxtransit]

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?

I'm a member too

[AustralianSwingVoter]

And shouldn't this be handled by the Fremont regional government?

[Sirius_]

And shouldn't this be handled by the Fremont regional government?

It deals with a foreign government, so it must be handled at least partially by the federal government.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

And shouldn't this be handled by the Fremont regional government?

You will notice that I recommended consultation with the Regional Government via their Senators.

[Sirius_]

If anyone was wondering, this is what I'd actually suggest for any sort of western Atlasian/Canada rail service:

[Former President tack50]

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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

Well, for a start most passenger rail lines are unprofitable.

Looking at the Amtrak report I posted previously, not a single long distance line is profitable. Although the Empire Builder (the line this is most comparable to) is indeed the most unprofitable Amtrak line, although a couple other lines have comparable losses of around 32 million $.

I would expect traffic on the Canadian side of the border to be higher than the RL Amtrak line though, as Calgary and Winnipeg have higher populations than any population centers on the Amtrak line. Even Thunder Bay itself or Regina would be large stops compared to the RL route.

On the Atlasian side of the border I would also expect decent ridership numbers between Seattle and Spokane.

Really my only question was where to go from Thunder Bay (it's not an ideal end of the line), but I decided that was something for the Canadians to decide

[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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

Well, for a start most passenger rail lines are unprofitable.

Looking at the Amtrak report I posted previously, not a single long distance line is profitable. Although the Empire Builder (the line this is most comparable to) is indeed the most unprofitable Amtrak line, although a couple other lines have comparable losses of around 32 million $.

I would expect traffic on the Canadian side of the border to be higher than the RL Amtrak line though, as Calgary and Winnipeg have higher populations than any population centers on the Amtrak line. Even Thunder Bay itself or Regina would be large stops compared to the RL route.

On the Atlasian side of the border I would also expect decent ridership numbers between Seattle and Spokane.

Really my only question was where to go from Thunder Bay (it's not an ideal end of the line), but I decided that was something for the Canadians to decide

So you admit this line will bleed money constantly. So why are we doing it?

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Just going to point out that no one is going to like this given both Atlasia and Canada have nationalised their passenger rail networks.
So why are we going to have one single passenger line completely independent of the 2 national passenger rail operators?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

Well, for a start most passenger rail lines are unprofitable.

Looking at the Amtrak report I posted previously, not a single long distance line is profitable. Although the Empire Builder (the line this is most comparable to) is indeed the most unprofitable Amtrak line, although a couple other lines have comparable losses of around 32 million $.

I would expect traffic on the Canadian side of the border to be higher than the RL Amtrak line though, as Calgary and Winnipeg have higher populations than any population centers on the Amtrak line. Even Thunder Bay itself or Regina would be large stops compared to the RL route.

On the Atlasian side of the border I would also expect decent ridership numbers between Seattle and Spokane.

Really my only question was where to go from Thunder Bay (it's not an ideal end of the line), but I decided that was something for the Canadians to decide

So you admit this line will bleed money constantly. So why are we doing it?

Do you want to abolish Amtrak then?

[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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

Well, for a start most passenger rail lines are unprofitable.

Looking at the Amtrak report I posted previously, not a single long distance line is profitable. Although the Empire Builder (the line this is most comparable to) is indeed the most unprofitable Amtrak line, although a couple other lines have comparable losses of around 32 million $.

I would expect traffic on the Canadian side of the border to be higher than the RL Amtrak line though, as Calgary and Winnipeg have higher populations than any population centers on the Amtrak line. Even Thunder Bay itself or Regina would be large stops compared to the RL route.

On the Atlasian side of the border I would also expect decent ridership numbers between Seattle and Spokane.

Really my only question was where to go from Thunder Bay (it's not an ideal end of the line), but I decided that was something for the Canadians to decide

So you admit this line will bleed money constantly. So why are we doing it?

Do you want to abolish Amtrak then?

No, of course not.
But I do wonder what Amtrak will think about having a competitor to their already horrendously unprofitable Empire Builder line.

[Sirius_]

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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

Well, for a start most passenger rail lines are unprofitable.

Looking at the Amtrak report I posted previously, not a single long distance line is profitable. Although the Empire Builder (the line this is most comparable to) is indeed the most unprofitable Amtrak line, although a couple other lines have comparable losses of around 32 million $.

I would expect traffic on the Canadian side of the border to be higher than the RL Amtrak line though, as Calgary and Winnipeg have higher populations than any population centers on the Amtrak line. Even Thunder Bay itself or Regina would be large stops compared to the RL route.

On the Atlasian side of the border I would also expect decent ridership numbers between Seattle and Spokane.

Really my only question was where to go from Thunder Bay (it's not an ideal end of the line), but I decided that was something for the Canadians to decide

So you admit this line will bleed money constantly. So why are we doing it?

Do you want to abolish Amtrak then?

After the High Speed Rail Act passed it will likely be defunded after 2025.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

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.

This merely mandates a passenger service, it doesn't build a single km of new track (I designed the line on purpose to take as many large Canadian towns as possible while not building a single km of track). And while it was indeed a meme, with some modifications we could make it real and effective.

Plus I have to keep the all important train chat meme constituency

Why do these 2 random cities deserve an unprofitable passenger service? What is the point of launching a useless train route between two small cities just so bruhg's meme can become reality?

Well, for a start most passenger rail lines are unprofitable.

Looking at the Amtrak report I posted previously, not a single long distance line is profitable. Although the Empire Builder (the line this is most comparable to) is indeed the most unprofitable Amtrak line, although a couple other lines have comparable losses of around 32 million $.

I would expect traffic on the Canadian side of the border to be higher than the RL Amtrak line though, as Calgary and Winnipeg have higher populations than any population centers on the Amtrak line. Even Thunder Bay itself or Regina would be large stops compared to the RL route.

On the Atlasian side of the border I would also expect decent ridership numbers between Seattle and Spokane.

Really my only question was where to go from Thunder Bay (it's not an ideal end of the line), but I decided that was something for the Canadians to decide

So you admit this line will bleed money constantly. So why are we doing it?

Do you want to abolish Amtrak then?

After the High Speed Rail Act passed it will likely be defunded after 2025.

Interesting point!

[At-Large Senator LouisvilleThunder]

So, how will we make sure that Canada does its part and agrees to fund their section of it.

[Former President tack50]

Just going to point out that no one is going to like this given both Atlasia and Canada have nationalised their passenger rail networks.
So why are we going to have one single passenger line completely independent of the 2 national passenger rail operators?

To be fair, that's not an uncommon way of handling international routes. A good example might be the Eurostar between Paris and London. Which is not handled by neither SNCF nor British companies

The alternative could be a joint service between Via Rail and Amtrak or outright allowing VIA Rail to operate in Atlasia.

So you admit this line will bleed money constantly. So why are we doing it?

Well, I actually think we can kill 2 birds with one stone. As I said before, the already existing route between Chicago and Seattle (through Whitefish and much of the north) is Amtrak's most unprofitable line. So why not replace it with a better alternative through Canada?

The only issue would be with the end point as it would end in Thunder Bay, or most likely, in Toronto; as opposed to ending in Chicago.

At the end of the day I imagine such a route would be mostly touristy in nature and I don't think the intermediate sections get much passengers. I'm not sure if a route through Canada would be more scenic, but based on population numbers it should have more passengers.

So even if it bleeds money, it would bleed less money than the current comparable route through North Dakota and Montana.