Sunday, January 25, 1998

Railroad Commission keeps confrontational approach

By JOSEPH BATEMAN JR. / Guest Columnist

On behalf of Union Pacific, I'd like to respond to the Jan. 4 guest column by Bob Kaufman, who is director of communications for the Texas Railroad Commission.

Kaufman attacks James Brunkenhoefer of the United Transportation Union for disagreeing with the Railroad Commission's proposal to open up the railroad's terminals to all comers. Kaufman's letter is another manifestation of the Commission's efforts to attack and silence anyone who does not agree with it.

Kaufman urges the Surface Transportation Board and Brunkenhoefer to leave their "inside the Washington beltway mentalities there" and to "come to Texas and see firsthand what has happened." In fact, Brunkenhoefer is a Texan who worked as an engineer in Texas for many years and was the lead representative for the United Transportation Union at the Legislature in Austin for several years.

However, my purpose here is not to defend Brunkenhoefer. Anybody who knows him knows he is perfectly capable of doing that himself. I want to highlight the pattern that has developed at the Texas Railroad Commission.

While the commission continually baits the Surface Transportation Board and others to come to Texas and see the rail issues firsthand, I have been to and seen the Texas Railroad Commission hearings firsthand. Frankly, the Commission has overstepped the bounds of propriety for a regulatory agency and has gone on a crusade, losing sight of its need to be objective.

The Commission takes every opportunity to criticize those who do not support their proposals and have put pressure on them to either support the Railroad Commission or remain silent. Just in the last couple of weeks, the Railroad Commission publicly stated it was sending out some 1,000 to 1,500 letters to rail customers soliciting their support for the Commission's proposals. There was nothing said about what would happen to letters from shippers to the Commission that did not agree with their proposal. Anybody who has followed this would have to assume such letters will find their way into "file 13" (that round one everybody keeps beside their desks).

At the Commission hearing on rail issues in Corpus Christi Dec. 12, the Commission publicly criticized a representative of the Port of Corpus Christi for his favorable comments about the benefits of the Union Pacific-Southern Pacific merger. The message communicated in that public forum was that anyone who does not agree with the Commission's position would incur its wrath. At the hearing in Harlingen that same day, not one rail shipper chose to speak.

That's not the first time someone was chastised at a hearing for not following the Commission's line. At the Fort Worth hearing Oct. 17, the Port of Houston was publicly chastised for supporting Union Pacific's merger and our service recovery efforts. Not long afterwards, the Port of Houston did change its position. I have little doubt that pressure from the Commission was a factor.

While the Railroad Commission's confrontational approach will continue to affect media attention, these tactics destroy the Commission's credibility as a public agency.

Joseph Bateman Jr. is assistant vice president for government affairs for Union Pacific Railroad Company in Omaha, Neb.