No one will confuse New Hampshire with Kentucky or Illinois, states known for their production of commodities like coal and corn, respectively, which rely heavily on freight rail to move these goods.

But the state’s Department of Transportation notes that “freight volumes have increased over the past several years” as New Hampshire’s nine railroads carry critical goods and collectively spur commerce.

The Granite State’s rail network is a part of a 140,000-mile national network that supported 1.5 million jobs, generated $33 billion in local, state and federal taxes, and produced $274 billion in economic activity in 2014 alone.

But this role could be compromised if the Surface Transportation Board successfully reregulates freight rail, ignoring congressional direction, market realities and the need for the industry to earn revenues along the way.

The power of partial deregulation of freight rail in 1980 cannot be overstated.

“Lifting the onerous government price and regulatory controls that had kept rail carriers down changed everything,” says Steve Forbes, a one-time fixture in New Hampshire politics. “The Department of Transportation reported that railroad industry costs and prices were cut in half in the decade following deregulation. Railroad companies went from near insolvency to prosperity, and the U.S. economy benefited from their recovery.”

While still regulated in many ways – from labor negotiations to a federal obligation to carry certain goods – the government removing itself from many day-to-day business decisions has allowed freight rail to earn necessary revenues. This money directly correlates with more than $600 billion in investments since 1980, which spurs safety improvements and lowers shipper rates.

Like many American industries, however, freight railroads face major challenges as the nation shifts from manufacturing to services. The continued dip in coal production is particularly damaging to freight rail as it moves more coal than any transportation mode. Carloads of coal in the first quarter of 2016 were 20 percent lower than just the three months prior in 2015.

Today’s realities show that public policy must be forward thinking, not over reactive to past circumstances, and that our government should forgo measures that could handcuff businesses. Today’s reregulation of railroad economics fail this litmus test.

One proposed measure would reregulate certain commodities like iron and steel, while the other would cap rates that railroads charge shippers based on their overall level of revenue.

Most notably, a “forced access” rule would require railroads to open up their lines to competitors, introducing a radical approach that could force carriers to turn over their tracks to other railroads at below market-rates.

“At the most basic level, railroads would require more resources to move the same amount of freight, returning the industry to the dark days of gross inefficiencies,” writes freight expert Anthony Hatch.

Congress has always maintained a key role in overseeing railroads. The Senate Commerce Committee, of which Sen. Kelly Ayotte is a member of, continues to recognize the need for viable freight railroads. That is why the committee passed a balanced STB reauthorization bill just last year that kept in place the economic framework that has worked so well.

Congressional leadership is as important as ever today as the STB disregards its legislative charge and the cumulative impacts of numerous regulations. The rail industry will adeptly navigate today’s economy and tomorrow’schallenges, but federal regulators should serve as an effective partner in this time, not a roadblock. When freight rail succeeds, so does New Hampshire.

(Ian Jefferies is senior vice president of government affairs at the Association of American Railroads.)