COMMON CARRIERS. The Pernambuco Tramway doesn't work any better just because the Pernambuco Transit Authority, rather than the Patagonian Public Service Commission, is enforcing the obligation to serve. Live from the Third Rail has picked up coverage of a court order mandating service improvements to an underserved and transit-dependent population in New Orleans. The post correctly observes,

Does local transit have an obligation to provide service to those who need it, or should they instead operate as a 'free market' enterprise that can serve only areas that are profitable? In the U.S., at least, transit went from free market to full-service in the 50s and 60s when state and local agencies purchased failing private transit providers. While it's harder to force private operators to service all areas (although in some cases, this has been done), its very easy to force the government to provide service coverage, because they're under an obligation to serve their constituents. This, then, creates an endless argument between governments that refuse to fund transit because it isn't profitable but will not allow service to be cut in unprofitable areas because of service obligations (hence, some WMATA funding issues and many of Amtrak's current problems).

The short form is that regulators used to force private operators to provide coverage. One of these days I may have to revisit the passenger train discontinuance cases of the late 1960s, and the weak carrier-strong carrier pairing of airlines by the Civil Aeronautics Board.