To the CTA, I would point out that CN and CP both carry much more insurance now than this bill would force them to carry, so essentially we're giving them a break with this bill of about half of the cost of their insurance bill. And MMA, if they were to be insured under this bill, would have $125 million—$62.5 million this year and $125 million eventually. It's nowhere near what the cost of the derailment was, really. So this suggestion that we are somehow improving things seems rather vague, at best.
Is it possible to have unlimited liability? Is that something other jurisdictions have done? Why would we walk away from an unlimited liability system to a system that actually gives the big railroads a break on their costs?