I was under the impression it was no longer debatable that seatbelts in an accident at high speeds on any mode of transportation preferable to no seatbelts.

So we are back at it again. It is a cost-benefit analysis how many people have to die or get injured before we take the next step.

So the final analysis, even if, under the best case scenario, the Government was flush with money and every private rail company were flush with money, it would take multiple billions of dollars and many years to get from where we are to…

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for having this hearing.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank the panel for the testimony it had. It is a very thoughtful and very difficult decision to make on how to prioritize.

And, again, we have the same issue on everything that we do.

I strongly suggest the concept is right. The approach needs to be significantly changed on those two issues, to provide flexibility, number one, and to maintain the States' ability to deal with it as they see fit.

And we also have to have somebody who knows what they are talking about, not necessarily the United States Congress, number one.

I like flexibility in that because, let's be honest, most Members of Congress are not technologically capable.

My friends over there, they know it. I would regulate everything.

I struggle with a cell phone. And that is life.