It is because you have behind that the threat of the choice.

What would be a way that you might-- not hypothetically, but just thinking back in your experience when you say enhanced competition or I would say pro-competitive evidence--and we have agreed it is sort of the same. What would be an…

It is. Suppose you find it becomes deficient.

I do not know if that is true, but I would hope that that would not be true.

I think it was you--or somebody--said 'I do not see why any industry should be treated differently.'

Well, let me just say two things.

I am one of those who tends to think that mergers kind of keep taking place until they cannot anymore.

Everything you are saying... is really affirming an answer to a question that I gave to you.

What justification can CSX or other railroads in the U.S. give for a pricing system that would be illegal in any other industry in this country?

Why should shippers in the United States in a sense be at a disadvantage to shippers in Canada with regard to bottleneck prices?

Now, obviously within the airline industry, the public would rebel.

I have been a Governor for 8 years and I have been doing this for some time.

Is that an example of the kind of thing that could be looked at in terms of prices that are not quoted on clearly and predictably to be used rail service lines?

There has to be a follow-up on all of this was my point.

Now, is that a way of saying that until we change the law, you are stuck?

And they do not have the protection, of course, that railroads do.

Trackage rights gets interestingly close to bottleneck, does it not?

The FAA would step in. The President would declare a state of--it would be totally untenable.